Get the Desktop App for Battle.net Now
- All your games in 1 place
- Log in once
- Automatic game updates
70 Undead Death Knight
Shilling for Glyph of Divine Protection, it's probably the best of any of the major glyphs. 40% magic damage reduction on a very short cooldown means that doubled with Divine Shield and Protector of the Innocent, Holy Paladins are the single most durable PvE healer in the game. As a healer, you won't be taking physical damage unless something incredibly bad happens (and that's what Hand of Protection/Divine Shield is for) so glyphing it for double effectiveness is very helpful. In the Cata environment, lots of fights utilize AoE pulse damage and room-wide damage bombs so having an ability to push every 40 seconds to reduce that damage by nearly half is incredible. Try it out and I promise you will love it.
Lay on Hands is a great ability, but even glyphed you're only ever going to be using it once per fight. Even in Cata on beta, boss fights aren't long enough to use Lay on Hands twice when glyphed unless you blow it as the first spell cast in the fight. Divinity is definitely worth consideration though.
We don't exactly need to be durable :P Generally speaking, not standing in fire is enough to take care of that problem. Sometimes the unavoidable damage is physical, so removing that from Divine Protection isn't necessarily a good thing. Though, if swapping glyphs in Cata is as easy as swapping glyphs in WotLK, it might be worth it on a boss to boss basis (not sure how much the vanishing powder equivalent is going to cost.)
I like LoH as an emergency cooldown. 15 minutes isn't always enough for 1/fight. However, I'm not saying I might be wrong, and that there is a better glyph. I just don't feel that Divine Protection is the answer.
Regarding the changes to LoD.
My preliminary theorycrafting seems to suggest that LoD usage is actually quite simple and basically what Faelyne said.
- 2 or more targets need heals
- Tank needs the equivalent of DL and 5+ targets in range
- Single target
- Especially if single target is below 35
The talent tree probably should be changed to 3/3 Crusade, and either 2/2 EG or 2/3 Divinity. I'm not convinced that EG is quite worth dumping yet, because while the 4% bonus from divinity is nice, it doesn't necessarily beat the mana savings from EG yet. 4% is really only helping HL, HS and less than 3 HP LoD and WoG. Not sure how much effective healing that's worth yet.
I'm hesitant to update the main post with findings until I have the opportunity to play test. I'll post what I find as soon as I get the chance.
Play tested the new LoD in HM ICC10. Unfortunately, it wasn't a good raid in terms of progression, but that was more execution issues and an unstable raid group than the whole LoD vs. WoG.
So if you feel that our lack of progress invalidates this analysis, that's your prerogative.
From a practical stand point of view, LoD vs. WoG really can be simplified to
Single Target - use WoG
Multiple Targets - use Light of Dawn
The "exceptions" to this are:
- If a target is below 35% and is in danger of dieing, while another nearby target could use a heal, but is NOT in danger of dieing, you still want to use WoG to save the low life target.
- If you need to heal the beaconed target, and you have 5 targets in front of you, use Light of Dawn. Beacon transfers each individual heal.
The first exception is pretty rare, and healers by now should understand every rule has exceptions. So this is the case of someone about to die and is more common sense than anything.
The second exception is actually very powerful, but I honestly wouldn't stress it very much. In 25 man, this is really powerful. But in 10 man situations, you can't guarantee that the raid is positioned to support this at the exact same moment the tank needs a heal. So do it if you can, but otherwise use WoG or FoL.
The changes to LoD do change the spec slightly. Last Word is less valuable now, but at the same time, we have to get it anyways while progressing down the tree :P The other options are DPS talents.
The spec and glyphs I recommend are:
I still need to update my own character. Though to be honest, unless I end up pulling HM LK (which might not happen due to unstable raid groups) in the last week before Cataclysm, I might not bother :P
Crusade is basically mandatory now.
Anyways, the spec and glyphs are what I would personally choose. There are options available to you:
- 3/3 PotI + 1/2 Last Word vs. 2/3 PotI + 2/2 Last Word
- 1/2 Enlightened Judgements and 2/2 Paragon of Virtue can go anywhere if you don't like these talents
- 2/3 Divinity vs. 2/3 Eternal Glory. If you still use WoG a bunch, take EG.
Word of Glory
Pick 2. Seal of Insight is mandatory
Light of Dawn
Lay on Hands
Cleansing if fight requires it a LOT
Kings, Might, Insight
(EDIT: Forum ate one of my posts! Ugh...this is where my commentary began. Second post after this should maybe be the first...arg... <_< /ENDEDIT)
The indication here is that the DL one is better at raw health per mana, and actually edges out on health per time, interestingly enough.
...but, this is probably overstating DL's effectiveness somewhat. My numbers for HL, HS, FoL, and WoG and LoD are all probably a bit lower than they should be. On the other hand, DL should scale better with SP due to the cast time coefficient, so that would be a possible factor too.
The addition of haste also makes things buggery - FoL can be lowered with SOME sense of ease to a 1 sec cast. DL will probably be stuck around 2 seconds (probably somewhere in the 1.8 to 1.9 region, reasonably.) But DL and HL will scale better. However, WoG/LoD is the same in either case, the only difference being the extra LoD healing (from an extra 1HP or 2HP LoD) can make a considerable amount of healing done, which even if not as useful for a Holy Paladin (if tank healing) is still turns out to be useful in the Beacon effect.
Eh, needs a lot more testing. I'm not sure how haste will alter things (though I know it WILL), and the numbers being rough estimates (as long as they aren't too far deviated) probably won't change the scaling much by 85 overall. SP will probably lean towards helping the DL side (again, LoD cases being a possible exception.) The mana costs are also going to be wonky considering the scaling between now and 85 of base mana. Likewise with SP (who knows how much SP we'll be walking around with come Tier 11... o.O)
But...just a thought. I'm curious if there are cases where a variation of FoL rotation would be preferable in HPM to DL rotations. I don't think WoG will make up enough, but LoD might with enough targets. (In which case, it should be possible to come up with how many that needs to be before making the switch.)
That the mana costs only differ by the cost of a HS or HL should make figuring out the rotations fairly simply. It should ALSO be noted that due to the cast times, the FoL/HL rotation could be exchanged for a FoL/DL rotation to really beef up the healing in that time span, though chucking mana equality out the window.
It should also generally be noted that a Holy Paladin could be casting HL or HS when battles dull enough to permit it. And HS can be thrown out on others and still generate HP while ALSO adding 50% of its heal to the Beacon (though, realistically, it's not a big heal. But over the course of a long fight, adds up), where a solid FoL or DL (or even HL) rotation must be focused on the Beacon to generate HP.
All in all, lots of different rotations. However, unless you NEED to maximize the amount of health in a given time span. it's kind of iffy. If you only need 40k healing, then FoLx3, WoG is actually MORE mana efficient than DLx3, WoG.
So there are multiple things going on at play here. If the difference in healing would be wasted (e.g. overhealing), then FoL actually has slightly greater mana efficiency. Also note that 3x FoL will heal for equal to or greater than 2x DL, meaning the difference of healing between the "rotations" is roughly 1x DL's worth. (The reality is this will be less since I'm overly undercutting FoL's healing to give DL something of a fighting chance.)
This may warrant further investigation...I've been thinking DL is more or less worthless, though now I see it having -A- use...but at the same time, far less of one than I thought it would have (I just assumed my DL undervaluing was based on it being slow and not healing for THAT much more than FoL. This leads me to believe I may be right from two different angles, but neither of them the one I initially held [namely, the time to generate more HP and the increase healing that using a LoD powered by that HP may bring.])
Anyway, I've just been trying to figure out when to switch to DL. Currently, it seems to me that mana isn't a reason (since 3x FoL costs less), but rather simply a matter of the healing needed.
Edited by Arthinas on 11/30/2010 11:54 PM PST
That is, if you need to heal for 40-45k, FoLx3, WoG/LoD is a BETTER option (both in terms of speed and mana) than 3x DL, WoG/LoD would be. Likewise, needing to cast on more people is better served with FoL, since you have time to toss the "free" HS (in the FoLx3, LoD, HS, LoD rotation), get off another LoD, and STILL be using less mana than the 3x DL, WoG/LoD rotation.
The only time DL comes out on top is when the extra healing wouldn't be wasted. That is, when you NEED to be healing a tank for around 60k every 8 seconds. Though if it becomes great enough that mana isn't an issue (which is going to likely be the case when a tank is taking this kind of damage), then FoL is STILL faster, though now you will be using significantly more mana.
So, use DL rotation when you need to heal approximately the 60k, but where it's not frantic enough that mana isn't an issue. If mana isn't an issue, you could still squeeze out more healing by going FoLx3, WoG/LoD, DL, WoG/LoD, which would heal for slightly more (and if things ARE hectic enough that mana isn't an issue, then healing slightly more is probably a quite valued trait.)
Note to self: Need a #HP WoG shorthand. #WoG (with # defaulting to 3 if not otherwise mentioned) does sound like a workable solution.
Ack! The forums ate my first post! Give it back forums! Give it back!
In a nutshell, I was trying to compare "packets" of FoLx3, WoG/LoD to DLx3, WoG/LoD. Comparing both time and mana efficiency. Then determining when would be better to use one over the other...in cases where we can just stand still and chain cast on a Beaconed target. ^_^
Basically, using base cast times (1.5 sec, 2.5 sec, and 1 sec GCD for instants) and mana costs, it can be shown that FoLx3, WoG/LoD, HL (or HS), WoG/LoD has the same mana cost as DLx3, WoG/LoD.
The former heals for about 50k HP, the latter about 60k. The former is also faster.
Further, these numbers assume my rough estimates for healing amounts and using WoG (LoD will increase the numbers, and it won't be equaled since DL gets 3 HP, FoL gets 4.) And LoD could increase the total healing done in cases where it heals multiple targets (and in conjunction with the "bouncing" of those heals to the Beacon.)
More testing is needed.
But yeah, the long and short of it is, there's a narrow window where DL is the more useful. It's when mana is still an issue, but not a MAJOR one, AND you need about 25-35% more healing than the FoL rotation allows. Presumably, if you need MORE healing than that, then mana ceases to be your main concern. And alternatively, if you need less healing than that, FoL is more efficient up until you need even LESS healing and/or mana becomes an even greater concern, in which case you would switch down to a HL rotation.
This oddly places FoL in a position to be useful on EITHER side of DL (both mana efficiency and emergency healing), with DL having a window of greater usefulness in the middle.
...which doesn't really help me all that much, lol. Oh well, it gives me a starting point to play with. ^_^
EDIT: Though the thought occurs, I could just use your numbers from early on in this thread...though I was thinking we've had some changes that might make some of those numbers...off.
Edited by Arthinas on 12/1/2010 12:00 AM PST
Glad your posting this here. I thought one of three of you would post eventually but was starting to get worried.
No hate at all.
Pure <3 for all the holy guide writers. You guys are awesome for taking the time to do this!
Sorry, those last few posts were really confusing. What was your question? or what were you trying to show? I assume you're trying to compare DL usage to FoL usage?
The numbers should be accurate as of 4.0.3a. Next Tuesday they're doing to be useless, but for now they're good.
DL's always been useful for me. It's my default tank heal spell. If you're okay with stop casting, it's great. FoL is always going to beat DL in terms of HPS unless you have 60%+ total haste. DL will always been FoL in terms of HPM, unless you're considering overheal, in which case FoL may beat DL. Though if you're considering overheal, that's more an issue of spell selection.
Which situations are you trying to compare? A ToR rotation or straight spam? The best I can tell, you're trying to compare FoLX3->WoG/HL to DLX3->WoG/HL? That's not exactly a fair comparison since one is going to take rought 4 seconds, and the other will take roughly 6.
EDIT: In an ultra small nutshell, I'm trying to determine the use of DL. That is, is it really distinct enough from FoL (advantage-wise) to make up for the extra 1s cast time? IF not, I can take it off my bar. If so, where does the advantage begin to make a difference so I know when I SHOULD start casting DL. I'm doing the number play now because Cata isn't out yet. When it DOES come out...well, I'll probably pick it up by running 5 mans. ^_^ But I'm ansy, so I wanna play with numbers while I'm waiting.
...does that make me weird? ^_^; :ENDEDIT
Yeah, sorry. I think it'd make way more sense if my first post hadn't gotten eaten. <_<
Standing around (no moving), spam healing a tank or otherwise Beaconed target.
I figured I'd need to clarify this. I don't think of healing as a "rotation", but rather using whatever heal seems best for the situation. BUT, for the sake of considering raw numbers, it was comparing FoL prominent spam to DL. The rotations I was looking at were:
(These WILL be different based on the number of targets in the case LoD is used, and even the LoD will be different depending on if the Beacon is one of the targets or not.)
FoL, FoL, FoL, WoG/LoD = 5.5s
DL, DL, DL, WoG/LoD = 8.5s
FoL, FoL, FoL, WoG/LoD, HS, WoG/LoD = 7.5s
FoL, FoL, FoL, WoG/LoD, HL, WoG/LoD = 9s
(One could also consider FoL, FoL, FoL, WoG/LoD, DL, WoG/LoD, as it has the same time to cast as the HL one, but then you're comparing HPS to HPM. The above three cases have the same mana costs...more or less. HS is about 50 mana cheaper, FoLx3, WoG is about 400 mana cheaper. HL is, on my 80, EXACTLY 1 mana cheaper than DLx3. o.O Total cast times listed in seconds.)
Looking at these four, and only considering the WoG cases (as a start), I was trying to determine several things:
-Mana efficiency ranges (as stated, the DL rotation is actually the most many COSTLY.)
-Total healing done over the same (approximate) time span.
What I found with my REALLY rough numbers is that, if 3x DL is overhealing, then you're better off with the other rotations as they're actually CHEAPER in mana cost, and yet still doing the job. That is, if you need to heal the tank for 50k mana over 8 seconds, the FoL rotation is both faster AND cheaper.
The DL rotation wins out once you get to around 60k healing needed.
So my "rule of thumb" seems to be, if you need to heal for 40-55k, FoL is the better way to go (3xFoL, WoG heals for about 40k all together. Probably closer to 45k.) When you get to the 55-70 range, DL will win out. If the damage is higher than that...somewhat surprisingly, FoL begins to win out again. The reason for this (in my mind) is that THEN mana is less of an issue.
To form a general rule:
If DL is overhealing, FoL variants are more mana efficient AND time efficient.
If DL is not overhealing, DL is more mana efficient AND time efficient (interestingly enough), to a point.
PAST that point, FoL is more time efficient (because now you're using tight 3xFoL packets and ignoring HL/HS), and since the tank will be dying otherwise, mana efficiency is out the window.
So...using my numbers (I left off the rotations, but it's simple summation using the numbers below), for 45-55k damage, use a FoL variant; for 60k-70,75k damage, use a DL rotation; for >75k damage, use a tight FoL/3WoG rotation. This places DL in a "window" of greatest usefulness, with FoL variants on the lower side (greater mana efficiency) and "tight" FoL rotation (3xFoL, 3WoG) rotation on the higher side when mana is less an issue than bulk healing to keep the tank alive. (Note: "damage" here is "damage per 8 seconds", since I'm using 8 seconds as my "catch all" "rotation cast time". As listed above, the rotations are between 7.5 and 9s, not including the tight FoL 5.5s.)
(I think I basically said the same thing three times there... o.O)
Edited by Arthinas on 12/1/2010 2:38 AM PST
The Assumptions: (numbers!)
Using my character and trying to just guestimate base heals and work from there, I came to roughly these numbers:
name / mana cost / healing / cast time
HL / 395 / 5800 / 2.5s
FoL / 1183 /10k / 1.5s
DL / 1318 / 16k / 2.5s
HS / 350 / 3500 / 1s (GCD)
3WoG / 0 / 10k / 1s (GCD) [1HP = 3333 healing, 2HP = 6666, 3HP = 10k]
Beacon assumed 100% uptime, no mana cost (didn't factor it in cause either way you'd use it equally in all cases, time only changing a GCD now and again every 5 mins.)
These are ESTIMATES. (Except the mana costs, I took them from my in game tooltips.)
I figured I'm just doing some VERY rough math, and exact numbers are going to be A) harder to get and B) useless at 85. However, the scaling should be roughly the same, in which case a rough estimate should work.
Any FoL rotation has the ability to throw in an extra HS or HL within the same rough time scale (HL will make the rotation 0.5s longer than the DL rotation) for the same mana cost (slightly less, actually, either by 46 mana or 1 mana, respectively), or to throw in a DL (for an increase of about 950 mana, but only 0.5s longer cast time, the same as the FoL/HL rotation.) The HS variant actually has a 1s lower cast time AND ~50 mana cheaper cost.
Due to this, the FoL variants will produce 1 more HP in the same unit time. This means a 1HP WoG or LoD every 7.5-9 sec, or an extra 3HP WoG or LoD every third "rotation" (three units of rotation/packet time.)
HOWEVER, DL (and HL) gains more from SP scaling as SP levels increase due to the longer cast time coefficient. Also, DL (and HL) benefit from haste beyond the soft cap, whereas FoL does not (the FoL/HL variant does, but not by nearly as much.)
...SO, this means that the "raw numbers (guestimates)" situation will have to be adjusted to scale with SP and haste to factor in how we'll scale with gear at 85. Further, talents become an issue, because with the FoL/HS situation, talents that boost HS are more valuable. (Though, in reality, ALL rotations, except the tight FoL, will be using HS whenever they can...though a "tight DL" rotation at the upper boundary of the DL window will not either...) This being an overly simplified model, I didn't do that, but that's surely going to make a difference at 85 as we gear up.
3xFoL, 3WoG ~= 2xDL, 3WoG
...it's a rough approximation, but works in a pinch.
I can reproduce the healing per rotation cycle numbers for you too, if you like. Since HP scales linearly to WoG (and I'd guess LoD), this should be valid regardless of if we're tossing 1WoGs or an extra 3WoG every 3 FoL rotation cycles. But since these numbers are estimates...
EDIT2: Although, waiting for every 3rd rotation would save you 2s in GCDs. and I can reproduce the "healing per rotation" for each of the four rotations by just taking the numbers above and summing them in line with the rotations (e.g. 3xFoL, WoG = 40k healing, 30k from the FoLs, 10k from the WoG.)
Also, in my numbers, I think I unfairly underestimated FoL and WoG more than I should have. They should probably be around 12k if DL is 16k...
Note: It tried to eat my post AGAIN! This time I copied the whole thing instead of just cutting the part that I didn't think would fit. ^_^ Lucky you, huh? :p
...I know, wall of text. But at least it's not too hard to read, right? I learned a long time ago I'm too verbose and can't seem to trim my text, so I instead decided to train myself to at least make it semi-enjoyable/easy to read. At least to other nerds/geeks. ^_^;
EDIT: Just adding a little bit about the shortcomings of this less-than-even-napkin math. Haste and SP WILL be an issue. Though the extra 1s of "rest" time for the FoL/HS variant will be as well (allows for mana regen, which will scale with Spr to make even MORE complication! ^_^;
Edited by Arthinas on 12/1/2010 1:25 AM PST
Oh, and yes, it's an issue of spell selection. I'm trying to figure out when is a good time to use one over the other. ^_^ Trying to be a good healer. In Wrath, I used all my spells. I used SS and FoL because chain casting HL isn't ALWAYS better (at least, not in 5 mans or Vault.) When I leveled a Priest way back, I also used a wide selection of my spells.
What makes a good healer, and this has always been true, was using the right spell for the right situation. In Wrath, this was pretty dumbed down for Paladins, but that was because of the boss/encounter model, not Healadin tools, per se. So the difference between an amazing healer, using the precise tool for the job and a HL spammer who just stacked mass Int was small.
Now that that difference is going to be more pronounced again, I want to give it my best.
Currently, I tend to...
HL spam tank (HL cost is nothin' on my regen, so I can keep this up indefinitely.)
WoG/LoD at 3HP, depending on which is needed.
As things heat up, I'll occasionally swap out a FoL for a HL or throw in a HS to "catch up" on the damage as it begins to outdo HL's ability to keep up.
If I get into a "pinch" situation, I start using HS more liberally. If the situation gets more dire, I start using FoL. DL could be useful somewhere, except the cast time makes it far less useful for dire situations than FoL for 5 man content.
Now...this is me doing 5 mans. I haven't been doing any 10 mans or raids since 4.0.x, so maybe it's the raid where DL comes into play? But even so, it seems to me that FoL+HS/HL will produce similar results for slightly less mana (FoL/HS gets an extra HS in every 7th rotation, mana wise, though.)
So that may be what's making the difference for you? And I could see the incoming damage being on par with the difference between those rotations.
But what I'm wondering is if, by the math, there's an argument to be made where FoL variant rotations are better than DL. Considering they are faster AND more mana efficient (in the sense of less costly for effective healing in the case DL would overheal.) And at what point that you should start trading your FoL's for DLs. After all, there could be the composite cases of:
FoL, FoL, DL, WoG, HS
FoL, DL, DL, WoG
...separating the two rotations I listed above.
And, naturally, for movement intensive fights, more HS and FoLs...though this would, again, lean towards using FoL and away from DL.
But then again, I've never raid healed as a Priest, and I tend to choose spells so I don't overheal. So stopcasting is a concept I'm quite aware of, but not that adept at using yet. Which is slightly odd since I have a Druid and a Priest I've healed on. ^_^ (And, oddly, on them I have no trouble stopcasting. /shrug)
You don't have to estimate anything. In game tooltips are accurate. If you have concerns about raid buffed Spell Power, buy a fish feast and find a mage to give you AI. If you have any concerns with haste, find a shaman or a warlock? (can't remember the other class with 5% spell haste).
Your rotations are funny, they should be:
At GCD Cap:
HS -> FoL -> FoL -> FoL -> FoL -> FoL (end rotation) -> HS
That's 6 seconds centered around HS. You can replace any FoL with WoG/LoD
HS -> DL -> DL -> DL (end rotation) -> HS
That's a 6.001 second rotation centered around HS. Replacing DL with WoG/LoD creates a small 0.6 second gap in the rotation. You can either do nothing until HS is available again, or extend the rotation by about 1/2 a GCD to judge, beacon refresh, or something else.
At 0 Haste Rating:
You have a passive 27% haste raid buffed. That brings cast times to:
GCD/FoL: 1.18 sec
HL/DL: 1.97 sec
HS -> FoLx4 (5.9 second cycle)
HS -> FoLx5 (7.08 second cycle)
HS -> DLx2 (5.12 second cycle)
HS -> DLx3 (7.09 second cycle)
I'm not seeing what the problem is. With mana being a concern you will:
1) HS roughly on CD
2) If HL has sufficient HPS, use HL.
3) If HL has insufficient HPS, DL has sufficient HPS and DL does not have excessive overheal, use DL.
4) If you need balls the wall heals, use FoL.
Mix in LoD and WoG whenever possible. You don't need to use them at 3 HP if 2 or even 1 HP is enough.
I haven't had to the time to really math out your work. This is based on a single read through and first impressions. It seems like you have a slight error with the GCD. The GCD base time is 1.5 seconds, which reduces to a minimum of 1.0 seconds with haste.
Edited by Lylthe on 12/1/2010 8:58 AM PST
Well, the haste thing is what I haven't figured enough out about. It always works contrary in my head to what it should be, and I just haven't figured out the best way to math it (that is, it increases the number of casts you could make in a given time by x%, rather than speeding individual spells by x%.) It's kinda like the way you figure probabilities by instead taking the probability of the event NOT happening. ^_^
The haste factor is what's bugging me in thinking, mostly.
But what I'm really trying to get at is this: For the amount of mana healed, FoL is MORE efficient in both time and mana than DL.
That is, if you need EXACTLY the amount of healing your FoL provides and no more, than FoL gets off quicker and costs less mana than one DL would. So were you to cast DL instead, you'd be "wasting" mana (at level 80, about 130 mana), as well as taking longer to cast. Which also precludes the non-casting mana regen (small unit of time though it is) of casting the FoL than "standing there" whereas in the other case you'd still be completing the (longer) cast of DL.
In which case the "spam" rotation comes to:
-HS on CD UNLESS damage is REALLY high (where HPS is more important)
1) HL if damage is low
2) FoL if damage is higher
3) DL if damage is HIGHER still (so it isn't overhealing)
4) FoL spam if damage REALLY high and fast
Due to the HS nerf, there are cases where HS, being an HPS loss to everything except HL (this is right, isn't it?) could actually get people killed. Namely situation 4 where you would be burning a GCD that needs to be filled with a FoL instead.
Note that 3WoG/3LoD should always be a HPS increase (3WoG heals for a bit more than FoL and with a shorter "cast time"...until haste softcap, in which case they have the same cast time but 3WoG is still free, so more mana efficient. 3LoD instead if you have > 2 targets.)
I mean, I may just be stupid, but since FoL costs less mana than DL, yet still heals for more than HL, it seems there are times when FoL would be preferential.
...unless you want to counterpoint that with combining HL with an occasional DL to "punctuate" your heals and "catch-up." Though if DL is overhealing, then...I dunno, I guess you'd be tossing 3WoGs there instead. Is that what the assumption is? You shouldn't need the FoL because if the damage is at that level, you should be able to heal it well enough just using HL/HS and 3WoG?
I could see that.
Final Cast Time = Initial Cast Time / Total Haste
Total Haste @ level 80 = 1.05 * 1.09 * 1.03 * (1 + haste rating/3279)
1.05 is 5% raid buff
1.09 is 9% from judgements of the pure
1.03 is 3% from Speed of Light
32.79 Haste Rating = 1% haste
The same formula applies for the 1.5 sec GCD. This only applies to spell casts, so don't use this for GCD's consumed by melee specials (only applies for Crusader Strike to generate HP).
But what I'm really trying to get at is this: For the amount of mana healed, FoL is MORE efficient in both time and mana than DL.
This is false. FoL heals for more over time, but less for over mana. This is why DL should be preferred over FoL unless you need the healing.
If however, DL will overheal, and FoL fills that gap precisely, use FoL. This can be difficult to judge. Again, this gets into what situation you're trying to theory. If you're talking about real situations, then you use the heal that fills the gap as precisely as possible. Otherwise, follow the HPM table:
HPM - (Highest->Lowest)
And yes, if someone's going to die, don't use HS. But by default, the mana savings of WoG and LoD are too good, so you want to generate as much HP as possible.
I've never advocated sticking to strict ToR rotations. Those are purely ideal situations and to make my theorycrafting easier. I've always advocated using some common sense. :P
Ohmygawd, I've never seen a holy guide before, even on the old forum. Which I always thought was a shame (but apparently I just missed it.) Holy is an offspec I've done literally nothing with, but I planned on building it up in Cata. Good to know there's a guide here. :)
Well, that's what I meant by efficient. If you're overhealing with a spell that costs more versus healing the right amount with a spell that costs less, the cheaper spell is going to be the more efficient one.
For the HS/WoG thing, yeah, that's what bugs me too. WoG is SO good due to its potency, speed, and cost of zero that it should always be used, but you have to use HS (or heal the Beacon) to generate it. HS is fairly low priority in a pinch. Hence an iffy situation. :)
So while WoG/LoD are great and awesome for mana efficiency, they will likely fall aside when we're having to throw FoLs around to keep people alive, then we'll switch back to HLing the Beacon and using WoG/LoD to let our mana regen before the next damage spike hits.
...and HS, of course (it costs less than HL too.)
I guess what I'm getting at with all this is - IF you'd be overhealing otherwise, efficiency is different than if you wouldn't be.
HL is our most efficient spell. However, if it would be overhealing, we should use HS instead (slightly cheaper mana cost.) Likewise, DL is more efficient than FoL, but if IT would be overhealing, we'd use FoL (cheaper mana cost.) And same relation between HL and FoL.
Since my mana bar is the new boss enrage timer, I intend to eak (sp?) every last ounce of it I can. :D
Also, thanks for the haste description. Now I have more numbers to play with instead of using non-haste bases. ^_^
Final Cast Time = Initial Cast Time / Total Haste
Are you sure about that formula Lylthe?
I'm pretty sure you meant
totatal haste = 1 + haste rating/3279 + .05 + .09 + .03
The formula you posted if you had 0 haste rating, and only raid buffs/talents, then that would put you at
1.05*1.09*1.03*(1+0) = 1.179 or ~18% haste, where really the buffs are only giving you 17%.
Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.
Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.
Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.