Log in

View Full Version : Spellhaste and Paladins


Palados
03-09-2007, 11:39 AM
Right. I have tried to calculate (roughly) how good is spellhaste for us compared to other stats, like healing/mp5/crit/int. And from the very first look it was obvious, that it depends really a lot on encounter/playing style. In fact, haste gives almost nothing for flash: faster cast of a single spell, yes, but it doesn't lower GCD that is equal to flash cast time. So your healing output with flash spam will not be changed.

From the TBC start it was obvious that we are pushed gently to move away from spamming flash tactics. Extra 6% crit for holy light and 0.5 sec reduced HL cast, libram from Lurker, 4-piece T5 set bonus and finally a lot of haste in T6 content. I checked my personal statistics from the last 10 raids or so and I usually cast FoL/HL in about 2:1 - 3.5:1 ratio. So haste would really benefit my healing output only to 20-30% of it's potential. In fact, it means that flash spamming tactics will just waste good part if iPoints in Hyjal/BT items.

Anyway, I have a question for paladins who actually raid T6 content - how often do you use HL compared to FoL and how good is the haste for paladins in your opinion. I would like to reduce HL light to 1.5 to basicly replace FoL, but is it really worth it? Or better stick to old heal/crit/mp5 balance with added haste to it and not rush for as much haste as possible (new items are not always good, you may see many paladins favoring some Kara items over T4 set items for example and even some items from T5 content)?

Quite interesting that T5 bonus is equal to about 280 haste rating for HL assuming 2.0sec cast time is taken as base time when talented buff is up.

Arthran
03-09-2007, 11:45 AM
GCD is 1sec not 1.5, so as long as you reduce the cast of FoL to 1sec your fine for spam.
I know a fair few pala's who downrank and spam HL, and i guess with the talent and enough spellhaste you could get it down to a reasonable cast time, only issue for me is the mana intensiveness compaired to FoL

Faylin
03-09-2007, 11:48 AM
GCD = 1,5s

Palados
03-09-2007, 11:53 AM
Well, found this one - http://elitistjerks.com/f31/t15513-paladin_healing_efficiency/

Pretty interesting discussion

Palados
03-09-2007, 11:54 AM
i checked it first when i started to think about haste - GCD is 1.5sec for our spells.

Arthran
03-09-2007, 11:56 AM
ok wowwiki agree's with you beatus, screwed up as when my trinkey procs (280 spell haste) i can effectively spam FoL without gcd getting in the way

Palados
03-09-2007, 11:56 AM
Arthran, I have seen quite a few wipes due to people who favored FoL over HL due to "HL is much less mana efficient" argument (it was mostly 2healing in prince fight with a paladin who started raiding just a few weeks before though). Mana issues are more or less solved by oil/flask/chainpotting.

Faylin
03-09-2007, 12:00 PM
ok wowwiki agree's with you beatus, screwed up as when my trinkey procs (280 spell haste) i can effectively spam FoL without gcd getting in the way

Might be due to lag that you didn't notice it.

I surely notice it when I have heroism up and can't immediately cast another spell when I'm done casting MindBlast (1,5 sec cast).

I think haste lowering the GCD would be a good idea but meh.

Arthran
03-09-2007, 12:01 PM
oh i agree pick your heals wisely dependant on the situation, there have been times where max rank HL spamming was needed. In general i just favour FoL. (The fact that its extremely rare to see me healing an i normally have a mana pool under 8k has nothing to do with this :P)

Arthran
03-09-2007, 12:01 PM
Might be due to lag that you didn't notice it.

I surely notice it when I have heroism up and can't immediately cast another spell when I'm done casting MindBlast (1,5 sec cast).

I think haste lowering the GCD would be a good idea but meh.

agreed

Palados
03-09-2007, 12:05 PM
Isn't heroism the only haste effect lowering GCD btw? At least many sources claim it.

Faylin
03-09-2007, 12:10 PM
Isn't heroism the only haste effect lowering GCD btw? At least many sources claim it.
I have no source to back it up, but my impression is it doesn't.


As for palli spell choice:

Our WWS says that in most fights pallies still favour Flash of Light, depending on player and fight FoL is usually between 60% and 80% of the total healing done.
yesterday on Gurtogg Bloodboil however Holy Light was between 55% and 65% of the healing done by our pallies, but that is because insane HPS is needed at point in the fight. (being on the people getting Fel Rage)

Oggo
03-09-2007, 12:10 PM
When I healed, I usually went for chain casting HL, and then cancelling by move/jump if target was topped. The goal was to time it, so that HL hit right after the mob hit the tank.

Robinvi
03-09-2007, 12:27 PM
HL vs Flash really depends on the fight. Also gear is another thing. For downranking of HL to be viable, it requires that you have some gear like Tier 5 or tier 6. A high crit rate is more needed when spamming HL i would say. However in most fights, constant Flash spam just means you are cheap :P

The ide of downranking HL depends if you have gear like say Libram of souls Redeemed, the spell hast rating gear and BoL buffed on raid (unless you are only healing MT). All the spell haste rating gear drops well into BT (and the trash ring), so tbh the HL downranking might not be that good for most paladins, as they don't have the gear for it.

The fact that downranking with a high crit, high spell haste rating and the right combo of tier gear bonuses is a very good way to heal i don't doubt though. However in general i think changing between HL / Flash is the most viable thing to do for most paladins.

Psonica
03-09-2007, 12:56 PM
I think haste lowering the GCD would be a good idea but meh.
I bet the programmers at Blizzard disagrees :)

Kinshara
03-09-2007, 01:08 PM
Someone used the Lua API a while ago to find out the GCD time remaining after a cast, with and without heroism/bloodlust... basically, there's no change. I might be able to dig it up if people are really bothered.

Rogues and kitty droods are the only ones with a GCD less than 1.5sec afaik.

Faylin
03-09-2007, 01:21 PM
Yes, 1,0s for them according to Ej at least.

kris
03-09-2007, 01:43 PM
I've never cast a single flash past the point I got 4 piece T5 bonus. No idea why anyone would prefer a 1.5 sec FoL7 over a 1.75 sec HL4.

Valoran
03-09-2007, 01:46 PM
Someone used the Lua API a while ago to find out the GCD time remaining after a cast, with and without heroism/bloodlust... basically, there's no change. I might be able to dig it up if people are really bothered.

Rogues and kitty droods are the only ones with a GCD less than 1.5sec afaik.
False. Heroism lowers the gcd, haste effects do not.

Faylin
03-09-2007, 02:00 PM
WTB proof for that.

This fella surely doesn't agree: http://ropetown.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2582&sid=7868c724593381457f13c3768c341391
or this fella: http://www.radikalnoise.com/2007/08/heroism-urban-myth.html

Valoran
03-09-2007, 02:07 PM
The difference between a group of mages spamming arcane explosion with and without heroism during the weapons on the kael'thas encounter is quite significant - when we started doing this, you could almost see the 30% increased damage output. The quartz castbar would agree with this also, since it has a gcd counter that doesn't get to fully complete before the next spell is cast.

Valoran
03-09-2007, 02:17 PM
Also, from reading your links beatus, there's stuff further down from the ropetown link which argues otherwise.

The conclusion for me, though, is that (as usual) both sides are correct and heroism does not lower the gcd for all spells, but only instant casts. Hence arcane explosion in the example I gave being correct and the healing wave example in the ropetown link also being correct.

So, heroism and spellhaste are rubbish for paladins using FoL. In reference to the OP.

Edit: meh, now I find server logs which support both theories.

Kinshara
03-09-2007, 03:26 PM
wtb [Clarification from Devs] :(

Robinvi
03-09-2007, 04:04 PM
I've never cast a single flash past the point I got 4 piece T5 bonus. No idea why anyone would prefer a 1.5 sec FoL7 over a 1.75 sec HL4.

Because it's a longer cast, costs more mana and does less healing (or equal with BoL buffed on raid)?

Unless you have BoL buffed on raid Flash is better. With BoL you will do equal healing, but it is a longer cast time and costs 10 more mana, however the 5% crit bonus makes it just as viable as a Flash. If you got Libram of souls Redeemed and BoL buffed on raid all the time (which is unlikely as that normaly means you would have 4 paladins in raid) I can see why you would favor HL4 over Flash.

Faylin
03-09-2007, 04:24 PM
wtb [Clarification from Devs] :(

Yeh, tried finding a blue post but nothing. Seems to me there's not much confidential about this.

For now I'll assume Val's bit-of-both explanation as closest to the truth.
(although it contradicts with common sense :P)

Valoran
03-09-2007, 04:32 PM
This has called doubt to my mind on the whole thing, since the only actual testing I've done has been a bit of "lets try this" with heroism + 1.5 second casts and performance actually improving, this could be conincidental and very much a placebo. :(

Kinshara
03-09-2007, 04:49 PM
The post I mentioned earlier:

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html;jsessionid=D328CC808950C4CC3B246C924FF 402B9?topicId=965509274&sid=1

I'm not sure about the test -- I don't know whether the api call would return an adjusted timing, or whether it just looks up the base value and ignores you having heroism. Latency is also a factor in testing that may throw results off for different trials.

Valoran
03-09-2007, 04:53 PM
Haste and Heroism do not reduce the GCD, but still will give you a DPS gain on 1.5 second cast spells because of the way it interacts with lag.
Is the conclusion to that post. Maybe explains why there's so much confusion.

Arjen
03-09-2007, 11:17 PM
I've never cast a single flash past the point I got 4 piece T5 bonus. No idea why anyone would prefer a 1.5 sec FoL7 over a 1.75 sec HL4.

:o Have I missed something? Isn't HL4 a worse heal than FoL7?

edit: nm just read Robinvi's post.

kris
05-09-2007, 08:55 AM
HL4 heals an average 150 hp more than FoL7, no idea where you gather the "worse or equal" info from. Also, it has 6% more crit chance than FoL which completely negates the 10 more mana cost. Also, the MT always has BoL on him and in a raid scenario assigning a paladin to heal anyone else but a tank is pointless.

Palados
05-09-2007, 09:05 AM
Well, it depend on raid setup, quite often we have 4-6 paladins (from 3 healing 1 tankadin till 4 healing, 1 retri and 1 tankadin). So BoL is on raid all the time usually. I agree that with 4 T5 HL4 is better than FoL7, especially with libram.

Robinvi
05-09-2007, 09:48 AM
HL4 heals an average 150 hp more than FoL7, no idea where you gather the "worse or equal" info from. Also, it has 6% more crit chance than FoL which completely negates the 10 more mana cost. Also, the MT always has BoL on him and in a raid scenario assigning a paladin to heal anyone else but a tank is pointless.

With use of + healing libram for HL and Flash I tested it.

HL4 does an average of about 50-60 more healing (with BoL buffed) than Flash.
It got 6% more crit and a 0.25 longer cast time, and costs 10 more mana (which indeed doesn't matter).

Saying that paladins are useless is just stupid. We are very effective raid healers and can compete with shaman and tree druids (and do better than them often), apart from a few fights (like Teron).
Paladins are however great tank healers, maybe the best atm.

My point still remains. Unless the target is buffed with BoL, HL4 is useless compared to Flash. However with BoL buffed, it is a better choise if you got the Tier 5, 4 piece bonus.

kris
05-09-2007, 02:28 PM
What's more, on most fights it's easy to spam HL5, boosting your HPS output significantly, while there is no way to boost FoL beyond rank 7. I don't agree on paladins being good raid healers though, shamans do a vastly better job at it, even priests are much better.