PvE HPally Theorycrafting Pt.2

Post Limit:
1 2 3 10 Next
Sticky thread has reached post limit. I updated the section on specs.
This in response to the TOR discussion in the stickied thread: (I should post this here, right?)

I feel like you guys who are arguing against TOR are missing a major point. Single target heals are not efficient raid heals. In 25m raiding (this is the perspective I'm coming from here, not really talking about 10m raiding) currently there are many more situations where 6-person group heals are more efficient than single target heal bombing people. DL/FoL heal bombing the raid is theoretically good on paper, but in a raid situation it is essentially sniping heals. Most raid damage in this tier is either massive, raid-wide aoe or location specific 5-ish (or more) person aoe. When you use single target heals to cover that, you are creating an unevenness in the health pools of the people who took damage. This causes the actual aoe heals to overheal.

My question is, why use single target heals to cover aoe damage when you could use aoe heals? Unless its to save a particularly low raid member from death, that is. All this theorycrafting is for naught unless you can accurately model a real-time raid situation. Every time you use single target heals on the raid you pay the price of forcing another healer to support heal a/the tank. By healing the beacon target with TOR instead of healing the raid and letting it transfer to the beacon, you allow that support healer to use their higher HPS raid heals.

I feel like the trade-offs of TOR vs. "assorted alternative points" are being looked at in a vacuum, as though the holy pally is the only one healing, and there's no overhealing either. When we heal the raid and let the healing transfer to the beacon, it multiplies our single target healing roughly x1.5, but forces another healer to help out on the tank(s) and lowers their healing. When we heal the beacon, said healer doesn't have to help out nearly as much and their healing should generally increase; we also generate significantly more holy power to be used for LoDs which are much more effectively matched to the type of raid damage we see nowadays and provide us with more mana longevity. The real measure of whether TOR is worth it is if the increase in healing we get from single target healing the raid is worth the overall decrease in the other healers' healing that comes from this playstyle.

Now this all said, I don't think there's a one playstyle to rule them all for holy pallys. Rather, I think we should adapt our playstyles to the encounter and to our raids' healing assignments. I'm not going to say that TOR is worth it in all situations, nor will I say it's never worth it. For me personally, I have found there are enough times I've been thankful to have TOR that it's worth keeping talent points in it. Taking points out of it locks you into one healing style, and it's impractical for me to carry two pve healing specs or respec between bosses.
Beacon can on occasion be significantly overhealing to the point where you would be better off placing it on your direct healing target and benefiting from TOR. I don't think I can spec out of TOR as this will almost certainly happen more than once per tier.
Or you can overheal your beacon target and get 1 Holy Power compared to healing one tank and the beacon overhealing. Don't get the argument here, sorry.

I keep TOR because sometimes i might heal my beacon target but i'm slowly wanting to take it out and put it back into Blessed Life.
Let me try to clarify things.

Healing the beacon is always suboptimal, even with ToR. The math is very clear on this. However, in practical application, strictly following this rule is very hard to do. It is very inflexible.

ToR sucks, but more to the point, the other alternatives suck harder. For me at least. You're going to get 2/2 BL. BL is very very fight dependent, and the 2nd point, due to the ICD is much worse than the first. You're going to get a bit more judge range. I don't need more judge range. I'm probably in melee anyways.

But the fact of the matter is healing the beacon is always suboptimal. If you have a playstyle that can avoid healing the beacon, great. Your spec should reflect that. However, I don't believe most people can practically pull that off. If you can, and can do so successfully, that's what the other specs are for.

So again, your mileage may vary.
What kind of overheal does your math show would beacon need to be hitting for it to become more beneficial to simply have the beacon on your main heal target instead?

That's literally the only scenario I think TOR would be necessary in, and as I said I strongly suspect we will see at least one fight like that or close to that every tier.

I'm discussing the viability of taking points out of TOR not the viability of always healing the beacon target - just so you all don't get hostile (it tends to happen when people don't understand where I am coming from).
Beacon overheal has nothing to do with ToR. If the beacon is overhealing, then ToR doesn't help. Direct ToR healing is still wasted. The only way to deal with beacon overheal is to move the beacon.

My only concern with the removal of ToR is that the alternatives are even more piss poor and it reduces some of our healing flexibility.


But I also need to to be frank. I'm not really raiding anymore. My guild has put a stop to raiding over a month ago. If I raid, it's in a PuG and not at the level where I can talk seriously about holy paladin healing with real authority.

So come next content patch, my sticky should be removed and a new one put up.

That said, 4.1 hasn't really changed holy paladin healing. What would be helpful however, are some logs of progression healing. I don't believe mastery has fundamentally changed, but it may surpass crit at this point. I don't see it changing the rule of:

1) Spirit to comfort
2) Haste to comfort
3) Stat dump

I do believe it may have changed out stat dump. So what we need to do is reparse mastery. From logs we should be looking for 2 numbers to determine mastery deprecation:

1) % of Healing Eligible for mastery
2) % of shield usage

What we need are
1) Full combat log parse
2) Stats of the healing paladin at the time. That means any food buffs for mastery should be considered. Ideally, the healer in the log should have no mastery procs. Otherwise things get complicated.

So here's what I did before and we need to do again with 4.1
1) Take total healing. INCLUDE OVERHEAL.
2) Subtract out Beacon, PotI, and Holy Radiance Healing. The remainder is Mastery eligible healing. INCLUDE OVERHEAL.
3) Take Eligible healing and divide by total healing. This is our first deprecation factor.
4) Take Eligible healing and multiply by expected mastery %.
5) Get total healing done by mastery from logs. Divide by expected mastery healing. This is the shield usage factor.
6) Multiply the 2 deprecation factors and compare to returns on haste and crit.

This again assumes that shields have a binary nature, either completely used, or completely wasted. Otherwise we'd have to consider how much base shielding is done compared to additional shielding from gear.
I reforged and even ignored Holy Radiance plateaus to see how high I could get Illuminated Healing with my current gear. I was able to attain just short of 25% shielding, which let me tell you, feels mighty powerful (compared to my previous 15-17%).

It was hard to get a feel for whether I was performing poorly due to the lacking HR plateau and the shortness of Haste, and the short Crit, or if it was just the new ZG is quite a bit different. It seemed like the damage was very bursty - surprising considering what I am essentially doing with so much Mastery is trying to reduce that burst potential. We struggled a bit learning the instance (which while understandable should not have been so significant with a group with a collective average of at least 358 ilvl).

Highest theoretical Illuminated Healing shield for me with this setup is around 14k.

The biggest change is the 15 second duration. I seriously doubt Mastery is about to win any contests - but I still stand by it as a decent stat that should not be ignored. I'm planning on running the numbers again Lylthe so if someone doesn't beat me to it I'll get that on here before long. :D
04/27/2011 12:24 AMPosted by Dubalicious
4.1 - Glyph of Divinity still gives 20% mana


They fixed it to give 10% back in 4.0.6. How did they rebreak it?
Just wondering how many of you practice beacon of light switching during raids?

For reference, my paladin isn't my main. Last week was the first time I got my healer geared enough to run with our 25m alt run.

We only had time for BoT so I didn't get to try out BWD, but on chogall I noticed heavy inc. damage ping-ponging between the chogall tank and the add tank. My first instinct was to switch beacons around to whichever tank I wasn't directly healing.

I guess since we're all glyphed for it, the only thing switching beacons is costing is a global (which is sometimes reason enough not to use it).

Thoughts from some of the mains with more experience? Thanks.
I Glyph Beacon of Light specifically because I do tend to swap it around a lot depending on the fight. I play in a pretty standard fashion: Beacon the target that will be taking the most damage, heal other targets, then directly heal my Beacon target when more healing is needed and pick up additionally HoPo in the process (from ToR) to help out with mana efficiency.

The actual number of fights I do much Beacon swapping is low, but when I have to swap I tend to do it often, like vs Cho'gall.
04/27/2011 12:23 PMPosted by Lockslyn
The actual number of fights I do much Beacon swapping is low, but when I have to swap I tend to do it often, like vs Cho'gall.
Same here. I imagine it is almost necessary on Heroic Halfus too.. Eh.
04/27/2011 12:48 PMPosted by Rabel
The actual number of fights I do much Beacon swapping is low, but when I have to swap I tend to do it often, like vs Cho'gall.
Same here. I imagine it is almost necessary on Heroic Halfus too.. Eh.

I actually have not found the need to switch beacons on heroic halfus. While there are three tanks switching between bosses / mobs, i find that the most useful strategy for my own healing style has been to beacon the halfus tank, and of course they will require heavy heals in the beginning (which as we know is less efficient than healing non beavoned target, but for short periods of time i find the extra holy power I get is a benefit) and then when the halfus tank rotates, I switch to mainly healing the non beaconed tanks.

now switching beacons on other fights is another story. on fights like heroic chimaeron it's basically required if you want to live.
Thank you so much for making this guide.
It has helped me, too much. (:
Thanks again
I would really like for a paladin that uses glyph of beacon of light to post some logs of their raids. I find it really hard to imagine situations where beacon is swapped enough to make it a useful glyph.

Lets see some datas!

Join the Conversation