View Poll Results: Do you like the current disc playstyle ?

Voters
146. This poll is closed
  • I love it !

    68 46.58%
  • I hate it ! I want my shield back ;'(

    56 38.36%
  • No , I want a Support / Buffer Spec !

    22 15.07%
Page 4 of 14 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
... LastLast
  1. #61
    Warchief Supliftz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Hating myself
    Posts
    2,175
    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post

    That being said, after thinking about your argument it does raise the question to the "value" of disc heals, and whether they are life saving like druids/shamans' heals or simply just raw healing on targets who happen to have atonement at the time. But given that disc has so much raw throughput now, I think it might not even be a big concern.
    Resto druids have life saving healing spells?

  2. #62
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post
    targets who happen to have atonement at the time
    You can always toss a shield/plea to remove the happening issue, and even radiance, being smart, makes the "happening" quite not so accidental.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Supliftz View Post
    Resto druids have life saving healing spells?
    Traditionally, big spot heals or full smart multitarget heals are considered life saving. It's a bit of a stretch, but with the relative healing-to-health pools this expansion and nature of incoming damage I would say auto-stabilisers are life saving too.

    By that I mean heals that work harder the more danger the target is in, shamans' heals obviously fall into this category but with cultivation/deep rooted and the nature of resto druid mastery and smart nature of wild growth (and so dreamwalker), their heals automatically (although not as significantly) bootstrap themselves as the target gets lower with little input from the healer.

    Whereas very roughly speaking, when a target has atonement, the healing they will receive is the simultaneously the minimum and maximum and equal across all atonement targets resulting from the damage done by the disc priest regardless of the actual state of any specific target. (I do recognize ToF exists, but it is more of a general self-buff with a statistical uptime rather than focusing on any specific individuals healing intake according to their state)

    However, from my experience with disc I know that preemptively healing scripted (and often dangerous) damage simply bypasses many concerns and the most recent changes really help reacting quickly to new situations. But I am also aware of the limitations of disc and reliance on other healers to heal totally unexpected or heavy focused damage.

    So some healing must have more value than others in an environment where overhealing exists - so called "life saving" heals. If there was a general consensus on what kind of healing... we would already have healing meters for it, but I hope my answer is satisfactory in why I think resto druids heals are more valuable point for point than disc. The same reasoning why I think resto shamans' heals are the most valuable of any healer point for point.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Saphiramoon View Post
    You can always toss a shield/plea to remove the happening issue, and even radiance, being smart, makes the "happening" quite not so accidental.
    Yes, I do understand where you coming from, and I totally agree (esp with the recent changes). But I was talking about non-specific target and general ex post healing where healer input is recorded and you are waiting for the results. I thought this way because of the proactive nature of disc, but yes you are completely right in that I can reactively put atonement up with plea/pw:s.

  4. #64
    Can you give an example of such a scenario, where there is unexpected damage, or where st healing with shield+smend is, i dont know 0 effect?

    I cant think of unexpected damage, unless its something like letting infernals spawn in goroth, but that does not matter, its a wipe either way.

    also about tof, one endangered target, benefits everyone. i dont understand why that has less value. I feel your definition is more about the mechanical aspect of the spell, and how obviously it shouts "i could save a life!", than with the actual end result which takes into account the whole healing values+so called life saving modifiers.

    the only life saving instance i would recognise is any situation where fast bursty healing kept me alive, when otherwise i would be dead within seconds. I still dont understand how a druids healing is life saving though. can you illustrate using specific spells, timing and so on?
    Last edited by Popokolara; 2017-07-22 at 01:58 PM.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post
    That being said, after thinking about your argument it does raise the question to the "value" of disc heals, and whether they are life saving like druids/shamans' heals or simply just raw healing on targets who happen to have atonement at the time. But given that disc has so much raw throughput now, I think it might not even be a big concern.
    I dunno, me being able to heal off every Embrace of the Eclipse on Mythic Sisters sure seems to be really nice and life saving.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by anon5123 View Post
    yes, just go ahead and strawman anyone who disagrees with your views
    When did I strawman anyone? I said it's a flawed system, but I haven't heard of a better one. If you know of such a method of atonement that is NOT mindless, please explain it.

  7. #67
    Warchief Supliftz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Hating myself
    Posts
    2,175
    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post
    Traditionally, big spot heals or full smart multitarget heals are considered life saving. It's a bit of a stretch, but with the relative healing-to-health pools this expansion and nature of incoming damage I would say auto-stabilisers are life saving too.
    The problem with this claim being "A bit of a stretch" is the idea that all hps isn't lifesaving. All effective HPS done by a healer has influence in saving peoples' lives, otherwise you would tick to death within a few seconds.

    I think what most people conflate this idea of "life-saving healing" is the ability to reactively top people to full hp within few gcds. Resto Druid is pretty limited in this regard, because Swiftmend's power level without stacked hots is low. In this regard, Rdruid and Disc Priest are fairly even in power level. A naked Swiftmend on a target without hots is about as effective as you applying PW:S to that target and doing nothing else.

    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post
    By that I mean heals that work harder the more danger the target is in, shamans' heals obviously fall into this category but with cultivation/deep rooted and the nature of resto druid mastery and smart nature of wild growth (and so dreamwalker), their heals automatically (although not as significantly) bootstrap themselves as the target gets lower with little input from the healer.

    Whereas very roughly speaking, when a target has atonement, the healing they will receive is the simultaneously the minimum and maximum and equal across all atonement targets resulting from the damage done by the disc priest regardless of the actual state of any specific target. (I do recognize ToF exists, but it is more of a general self-buff with a statistical uptime rather than focusing on any specific individuals healing intake according to their state)
    Obviously, Rdruid excels in sustaining few targets taking sustained damage, because of the strength of Germination, low mana cost and gcd maintenence on rejuvenation, and the power of efflo with t20 4pc currently. This is where I think this idea of rdruid's "life-saving hps" comes from. I want to stress that this is the literal best part about resto druid's hps currently. The ability to stack hots on a specific target with high amounts of mastery and with default talent choices of germination and cernarion ward, and abusing WG's smart healing and high burst element to increase their reactive hps. When you're comparing across specs you need to keep in mind if you are comparing the best part of their kit, to the average part of another class' kit. This isimilar to arguments made by discipline priests in other forums, suggesting Discipline Priest blows other specs out of the water in regards to AoE Burst HPS, and drawing overall conclusions about other specs. Well...yeah obviously discipline priest is going to smoke other healer's burst healing. Just something to keep in mind when you talk about comparing between classes.

    That said, I think it is pretty clear that you are seriously underestimating just how powerful the raw hps of Disc Priest is currently, and just how powerful increasing your hps by 20% really is. I also believe you can't really make the claim that the smart healing element of Wild Growth is apart of Resto Druid's strength, whilst also undermining Power Word: Radiance itself. The abilities have the same ability of true smart healing. With that in mind, i'll give you an example using my own character to illustrate one of the biggest strengths of Disc Priest. With t20 2pc, and just 4/4 Penance, and 5/5 PW:R (What my characters traits are currently), Penance will do ~560% sp with base mastery to an atonement, and PW:R does 361% sp per target, which gives me a total of 921% sp total sp% after the combo of Power Word: Radiance > Penance. After Twist of Fate, this increases to 1105% sp, or to put it in other words, the Total SP of Swiftmend without any hots. The key difference here is Power Word: Radiance applies 5 atonements, so the disc priest in effect casting 5 swiftmends in 2 gcds, with 100% smart healing. From this point, the disc priest will continue to spam smite, have Purge the Wicked ticking, and the damage the target takes will be reduced throughout the duration of Power Word: Radiance's atonements, further increasing the total hps done by PW:R.

    This example should give you the idea of what the juxtaposition between Resto Druid and Disc Priest's strengths are. While both have the core idea of applying a buff and doing stuff with that buff, both have different strengths that both are second to none in. To further re-enforce this point, I will show you a mythic Fallen Avatar Log of mine. In this log, i'm highlighting the healing done to targets with Tainted Essence (the mythic mechanic in p1). This mechanic means the targets take 50-80% (depending on stacks) reduced healing for over 60 seconds. The important thing here is multiple targets have this debuff, typically 5-6 at a time.

    https://gyazo.com/a479e88c67230d2eb5db86a64e46f96e

    As you can see, I, as the Disc Priest, am clearly destroying the resto druids in total hps done to these targets. While they are doing mechanics which prevent them from fully healing every gcd, the total hps done by my 5/5 Atonement DR relics is not being properly shown throughout these logs.

    This is a very extreme example I am aware. But the core-idea is the same for similar boss mechanics such as Mark of Frost, Armageddon, Eyes of Gul'dan to name a few. Now, I am not suggesting that Resto Druid are bad at sustaining multiple targets like a Disc Priest, quite the opposite actually. The main thing I am trying to counter-argue is this idea that Discipline Priest does not have the ability of "life-saving" hps. This is indeed false. It is, however, pretty obvious what the short coming of disc priest is. The spec is somewhat average are dealing with very few targets taking sustained damage, without massively draining their mana bar through talents such as Schism, or legendaries such as smite belt. That said, there's a reason why raids don't play 4 holy paladins, because you need a variety of healers, and more importantly, a variety of healing styles which excel in different areas to cover the weakness of your healing team.

    (I am also aware this was an extremely long-winded way of saying "Resto Druids are good at dealing with few targets, Disc Priests are good at dealing with many targets, and both have equal ability to provide "life-saving hps").

    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post
    However, from my experience with disc I know that preemptively healing scripted (and often dangerous) damage simply bypasses many concerns and the most recent changes really help reacting quickly to new situations. But I am also aware of the limitations of disc and reliance on other healers to heal totally unexpected or heavy focused damage.
    I really have to ask what type of Heavy-Focused damage? Mark of Frost is "heavy-focused damage", but that's pretty different to Carrion Swarm from tichondrius. The key here is number of targets, and as number of targets increases, disc priest naturally becomes more equipped dealing with.

    I also believe this idea that total dependency on your co-healers is a relic from when Disc Priest literally went afk between burst phases. In that world, yes, Disc Priest "required" your co-healers to completely cover your short comings because it was a massive hps increase for the Discipline Priest to go afk. However, we live in the world of 7.2.5, where disc priests are consistently spamming spells every gcd, and have access to things such as Aegis of Wrath, low mana costs which grants the ability to spend mana on Shadow Mend without punishment on total hps, Twist of Fate, and Defensive Penance with t20 2pc. All of these tools close the gap between the best healers at dealing with reactive high damage, and Discipline Priest. This, again, isn't to say disc is this amazing god tier healer or anything. I'm merely saying that total dependency on your co-healers is a myth.

    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post
    So some healing must have more value than others in an environment where overhealing exists - so called "life saving" heals. If there was a general consensus on what kind of healing... we would already have healing meters for it, but I hope my answer is satisfactory in why I think resto druids heals are more valuable point for point than disc. The same reasoning why I think resto shamans' heals are the most valuable of any healer point for point.
    Again I think if you put "more valuable healing" onto this idea that only healing that matters is life or death burst healing, then wouldn't all mythic raids play 4 holy paladins? I mean, why not? Holy paladins have no equal in the ability to quickly save people's lifes, with just how powerful holy shock is with relics. Clearly there's a reason why raids decide to not recruit 4 holy paladins. There must be a very specific reason why Paladins aren't stacked...right?
    Last edited by Supliftz; 2017-07-23 at 05:46 AM.

  8. #68
    I did say it was a bit of a stretch. even if I like resto Druid healing point for point. Disc has more raw throughput than Resto. You can most clearly see the shortcoming of disc compared to a robust spec with the absence of other healers. Say for example on high m+. Of course in a raid everyone needs to pitch in.
    We have seen in the past guilds bringing double pally. More than that and they start to cannabalise each other's beacon healing. And paladins overall raid throughout is low.

    Just remember that when discs througput was low before 7.2.5 they weren't brought over druids. But paladins and shmans are brought even if their througput is lower so there is something there. I could also flip the statement over and say if all effective healing is the same why not bring 4 disc priest this patch.

    Also I want to expand my thoughts on valuation of healing to explain myself a bit more. This idea only holds in an environment where overhearing exists. If there is no overheal, then effective hps is king.

    The question is: how can there be 40% overhealing but people are still dying? This has to do with the timing and application of healing. If we can match each point of damage to each point of healing then no one can die outside of 1-shots. So if we think about heals that have constant healing regardless of state and heals that heal more the more dangerous the state, the latter tries to match damage for healing. This is one of the primary reasons velens is so strong on every healer.

    Ok so after looking at your examples. I have to admit that disc is pretty good at targeted sustained healing. However it is over more targets (which represents less risk usually) and it doesn't automatically adjust like druids so other external healing is required if there is a deficit sometimes. I mean I haven't healed mythic fallen titan and will not any time soon, but I have to question whether there is a big personal skill difference to take into consideration as well. Furthermore, the priorities of the healers in question (druids often like tank healing lately).

    You have a strong point, and I'm not saying disc doesn't have life saving healing - high hps by itself can be life saving. I'm just saying before this patch, they were average at best. Whereas some healers are simply mechanically strong that with even with low throughput they are progression material. The key point of my argument is comparing healing "point for point", which is to say that maybe if disc had low hps they would be mediocre. This same argument can't hold for, say shaman who even if they had the lowest throughput will always be exceptional for progression. And in that way, I'm trying to say druids healing "point for point" is more valuable than disc: i.e. disc needs to have a higher throughput to have an equivalent potency as druid. There is nothing wrong with this, because from the druids perspective: it needs to have a higher throughput than shaman to have the same potency and from the shamans perspective, it needs to have a higher throughput than hpaladin to be desired. You play MW, so you should know that even with mediocre mechanics, simply having high hps can make MW be more desired for progression. And this is the dilemma Hpriests and MW are stuck in.

    And while I do admit 7.2.5 did progressed disc massively into responsive healing from afk mode. Lets not kid ourselves, it's still quite far behind the other healers in terms of reactive healing, I mean it used to be so proactive druids started to call themselves reactive healers...

    @Popokolara if you are talking about reactive target healing. Every healer can do it and you've missed the point. And to address your point, I never said it has 0 value, just less value.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by MendUS View Post
    I dunno, me being able to heal off every Embrace of the Eclipse on Mythic Sisters sure seems to be really nice and life saving.
    This is a case where raw througput wins because absorbs remove the restrictions on maximum health. This is a unique case where people can be at full hp and still at high risk of dying (so all auto-stabilizing mechanism have been bypassed). So I have to concede this special point but you have to admit it's not the norm.

    Guys, I realize that you could attack my argument in many different ways and most of the specific examples you are giving is indefensible. But you are disregarding the general idea that I'm giving which still holds in many situations. All I'm giving is my opinion on why I think druids hps is more valued than disc( however slight) and that there is value in heals that automatically work harder the more danger there is. (Something druids still have more of than disc)
    Last edited by worcester; 2017-07-23 at 03:11 PM.

  9. #69
    Can you kill the boss without all the kinds of healing? No.

    Maybe some are more suited to covering mistakes, maybe you want to cover for natural mistakes in the learnign process. But you are (if i am not missing the point again) putting so much weight on the spot heal dying target situation, and i dont think mythic is really so much about those. The value of working your healers around the standard mechanics, is a lot more valuable than that. One is a circumstance, (and i wonder how much is this slight advantage as you say is really making a difference, what with the massive amount of damage in mythic), while the other is a constant quota.

    For example did you weigh the ability of disc to save cooldowns for other healers in regards to "life saving"? Did you calculate every litle detail to reach a conclusion? Or like sups said you just compared one fingernail from both in a complete void?

    Also regarding the sisters not being the norm, is your definition of life saving a norm? Can you illustrate with specific examples with boss mechanics where adjusted healing did something noticable and is a common occurence(i ask a second time for specific examples) so i can understand better. I can think of shattering star, squall/saw, frigid blows, the list goes on, the norm is the disc burst doing wonders efficiency wise and saving cooldowns of other healers, where otherwise they would have used them, so they end up with more resources. Is this wrong?

    Maybe i am a complete noob but the whole sentence about overhealing and people still dying, feels like one generalisation which ignores some fundamentals and ends astray by miles. You can never precisely match healing for damage, you always will do a bit more. And you can do a lot more, the design is such that you will be. If you check any logs, we all do a lot more, and its not the adjusting form of some spells which makes the difference, and ensures success, but the healing logisticks for the entire encounter as i said earlier. You are ignoring the entirey of the healing infrastructure and focusing on one corner.


    Finally if i miss the point please be patient and explain the precise difference with my interpretation - no mocking, i honestly would like to know. I think now you meant that druid hps, sometimes is more concetrated on a lower health target, therefore they are "life saving".
    Last edited by Popokolara; 2017-07-23 at 12:29 PM.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Popokolara View Post
    Can you kill the boss without all the kinds of healing? No.
    So you do think there are different kinds of healing. So it's not far off to think they might have different value as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Popokolara View Post
    Maybe some are more suited to covering mistakes, maybe you want to cover for natural mistakes in the learnign process. But you are (if i am not missing the point again) putting so much weight on the spot heal dying target situation, and i dont think mythic is really so much about those. The value of working your healers around the standard mechanics, is a lot more valuable than that. One is a circumstance, (and i wonder how much is this slight advantage as you say is really making a difference, what with the massive amount of damage in mythic), while the other is a constant quota.

    For example did you weigh the ability of disc to save cooldowns for other healers in regards to "life saving"? Did you calculate every litle detail to reach a conclusion? Or like sups said you just compared one fingernail from both in a complete void?
    I don't think it's unfair to put more weight on spot healing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Popokolara View Post
    Also regarding the sisters not being the norm, is your definition of life saving a norm? Can you illustrate with specific examples with boss mechanics where adjusted healing did something noticable and is a common occurence(i ask a second time for specific examples) so i can understand better. I can think of shattering star, squall/saw, frigid blows, the list goes on, the norm is the disc burst doing wonders efficiency wise and saving cooldowns of other healers, where otherwise they would have used them, so they end up with more resources. Is this wrong?
    I think the norm is when you die because your health progressively reaches 0, in other words your health is an actual buffer. So the life saving effect of a heal is dependent on the time length which the damage is taken against your health. The narrower the window, the more life saving the heal up to the point of 1-shot which is unhealable. Some heals act even before the healer can normally respond (auto-stabilisers) so its not unreasonable to think they might have some value beyond their hps. As for why are there so many exceptions to the norm? Probably because devs want to shake it up a bit and allows certain specs to have their spotlight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Popokolara View Post
    Maybe i am a complete noob but the whole sentence about overhealing and people still dying, feels like one generalisation which ignores some fundamentals and ends astray by miles. You can never precisely match healing for damage, you always will do a bit more. And you can do a lot more, the design is such that you will be. If you check any logs, we all do a lot more, and its not the adjusting form of some spells which makes the difference, and ensures success, but the healing logisticks for the entire encounter as i said earlier. You are ignoring the entirey of the healing infrastructure and focusing on one corner.
    It is because of the fact that healing cannot be matched one-to-one with damage overhealing exists. So if overhealing didn't exist: A) everyone eventually will die; or B) healing can be matched to damage - neither is the case. So, you can have more effective healing simply by having more total healing (raw throughput) or by shifting your overhealing into effective healing. The latter is auto-stabilising heals which are inherit in shaman mastery, or as a result of artifact passives and talents which some classes have access to.

    So disc having high effective throughput by simply having more total throughput is a valid balancing strategy. Like if monks had revival on a 1 second cd, then it matters very little how the healing is distributed or how much overhealing there is. (as an exaggerated example)

    I'm really not focusing on one corner either. Healing is about keeping people alive after all. Even if, then it is certainly the most important corner to discuss.

    Quote Originally Posted by Popokolara View Post
    Finally if i miss the point please be patient and explain the precise difference with my interpretation - no mocking, i honestly would like to know. I think now you meant that druid hps, sometimes is more concetrated on a lower health target, therefore they are "life saving".
    You were talking about using pw:s and shadowmend as a reactive tool. Every healer can reactively heal: riptide->surge, holy shock->flash, serenity etc. I already said that big ST heals are part of life saving heals (as with full smart heals).
    But then went further to discuss automatic stabilisers which are preemptive (proactive heals) actions you can take (ex ante) to heal dangerous (which is a combination of unexpected and large) damage which I argued can be life saving. And reasoned why I thought druids hots system was more effective than atonement at this task. Of course, Sups shows counter-examples of where he as disc performs superior than his peer resto druids at the specific tasks I was arguing. With differences on number of targets/depth of risk/specific mechanics.

    With regard to heavy damage, so far I have ignored tank healing as a fair game (because of the existence of holy paladins), but this is one area that resto druid beats disc without a doubt. Although this doesn't work in favor of my argument as tanks risks of death are different from non-tanks, so auto-stabilisers are less important than raw output. Furthermore, tanks have their own auto-stabilising mechanisms which are already far superior to what healers can provide.
    Last edited by worcester; 2017-07-23 at 02:33 PM.

  11. #71
    Warchief Supliftz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Hating myself
    Posts
    2,175
    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post
    I did say it was a bit of a stretch. even if I like resto Druid healing point for point. Disc has more raw throughput than Resto. You can most clearly see the shortcoming of disc compared to a robust spec with the absence of other healers. Say for example on high m+. Of course in a raid everyone needs to pitch in.
    We have seen in the past guilds bringing double pally. More than that and they start to cannabalise each other's beacon healing. And paladins overall raid throughout is low.
    It is easily explainable why Disc Priest is a worse spec than Resto Druid and Holy Paladin. That content focused on burst group damage and high ST damage. Both Holy Paladin and Resto Druids excel at this.

    To give an example, Holy Paladin beacon transfers are so high, that it is quite possible to heal 5 people to full from 30% with 1 gcd (following an LoD cast). Of course Disc Priest isn't going to match too well against that.

    Btw the point about "why not just play 4 holy paladins" seems to be lost on you. The point is if, indeed, "life saving hps" is the only important factor to healers, why not just play the best healer for dealing with that? 4 Holy Paladins might snipe each others beacons, but that doesn't change the power level of holy shock and flash of light with infusion. It just means their total hps is lower.

    There has to be something to healing more than just saving someone's life...right?

    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post
    Just remember that when discs througput was low before 7.2.5 they weren't brought over druids. But paladins and shmans are brought even if their througput is lower so there is something there. I could also flip the statement over and say if all effective healing is the same why not bring 4 disc priest this patch.
    Wow, my point really flew over your head. All I said is "all effective hps has influence in saving people's lives". Obviously you putting efflo down in Hammers and Wrath of the Creator on Maiden isn't the same thing as healing up the damage during Hammers and Wrath of the Creator. But it is important to keeping people alive. People need to be sitting at 100% hp for the hammer so they are the most likely to live the ability. If it wasn't important, you would just cast a DPS spell. My point was "life-saving hps" isn't a good term to use because it is incredibly vague. It could really mean anything tbh.

    You countering my argument with "why not 4 disc priests" further shows the misunderstanding of my argument. I'm not actually arguing that you should play multiple disc priests. I'm arguing against the idea that life or death healing is the most important part about healing. I'm also not saying it isn't important.

    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post
    The question is: how can there be 40% overhealing but people are still dying? This has to do with the timing and application of healing. If we can match each point of damage to each point of healing then no one can die outside of 1-shots. So if we think about heals that have constant healing regardless of state and heals that heal more the more dangerous the state, the latter tries to match damage for healing. This is one of the primary reasons velens is so strong on every healer.
    See now you're talking about the correct thing. The things that matter is the healing done through specific damage patterns, as well as what is required in that specific scenario. The most important part of Mistress is making sure no one dies to Hydra Shots. If you look at healing comparisons like this, you quickly realize there's no point talking about specific advantages and disadvantages of each healers, because more than 1 style of healing is required to defeat the encounter.

    I do think the latter part of your system is trying to call back to your argument that Disc Priest output does not scale in relation to damage taken. But because things like Cooldowns, Mana and Twist of fate existing, this argument does not make sense in the content of disc priest.

    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post
    Ok so after looking at your examples. I have to admit that disc is pretty good at targeted sustained healing. However it is over more targets (which represents less risk usually) and it doesn't automatically adjust like druids so other external healing is required if there is a deficit sometimes. I mean I haven't healed mythic fallen titan and will not any time soon, but I have to question whether there is a big personal skill difference to take into consideration as well. Furthermore, the priorities of the healers in question (druids often like tank healing lately).
    This shows criminal misunderstanding of how bosses work. How can you make the suggestion that more targets = less threat, when these 5-6+ targets are literally always in danger of dying? This isn't even specific to Fallen Avatar. On Spellblade and Gul'dan, these bosses have mechanics like Eyes of Gul'dan and Mark of Frost which require heavy sustained healing across multiple targets. Just because there is more targets to heal doesn't mean it is suddenly more easy to heal, (the opposite thing should happen actually).

    Quote Originally Posted by worcester View Post
    All I'm giving is my opinion on why I think druids hps is more valued than disc( however slight) and that there is value in heals that automatically work harder the more danger there is. (Something druids still have more of than disc)
    I'm still honestly questioning how anyone can come to this conclusion. Every healer in the game has higher healing done to targets as they dip low because they spend more mana, and use cooldowns to deal with this damage lol.

    There is nothing automatic about resto druid output on targets taking sustained damage. Resto Druids do not have a raid wide area that applies rejuvs for 0 mana and 0 gcds.


    I don't think it's unfair to put more weight on spot healing.
    You really can't have it both ways here. You can't say multiple holy paladins have diminishing returns, and also put more weight on spot healing. This logic doesn't make sense. If there's more weight on Spot healing compared to other healing styles, why does holy paladin reduce in power level?

    How do even define this increased weight anyway? How much better is spot healing compared to other healer in a percentage? 10? 25? 100? 1000000% better?. What math, log, video, etc are you using to justify this claim? I can claim there's so
    Last edited by Supliftz; 2017-07-23 at 03:05 PM.

  12. #72
    How did I say life saving healing is the only important factor. I admitted that specs bring different effective/total healing and that is a balancing point for healers. Sure, the idea of life saving heals is very vague and contextual, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or the importance of it.
    Also, it's not like holy paladins are the only class that can spot heal. Even if I can't give an exact number on how much more valuable spot heals are, the fact that spot heals are less efficient than aoe heals and that we still use them means there is some difference in value, otherwise why not just exclusively use the most efficient heals all the time.

    On the point about debuffs and number of targets. If say the frost mark, or guldans eye, affected the entire raid vs 1 person then from a design perspective the damage must be less as the number of targets affected increases otherwise it makes it impossible to heal. If a debuff requires 1m hps over 10s on 1 target, totally healable. But on 20 targets, it's unhealable. The encounters should be made to be more or less actually doable.

    On the point on valuation of healing. Every healer does have higher healing to targets that dip low, but some have more than others. Also, people can still die even when you are using a cooldown, cooldowns don't make your raid invulnerable - it is used for scripted damage or as a catch-up mechanism where specific use is not required, and for non-mythic can even be used to fix big boo-boos.

    Resto druids output can increase on targets taking sustained damage because of cultivation being applied and how their mastery works, and also the trait deep rooted is a thing. You can use the resto druid analyser to see how effective deep rooted was.
    https://druid-legendary-analyser.her...zhMpJ&fight=17
    This is a public log I pulled. The first druid has 11.28% effective healing on cultivation (without the mastery bonus for extra hot) and 5.68% healing from deep rooted (rejuv+wg+dreamwalker). The second druid took spring blossom over germination but still had 7.3% from cultivation and 4.4% from deep rooted.
    How can you say it's a ridiculous conclusion when resto shaman mastery exists, and is highly valued in progression. I think it is a totally fair conclusion simply given the existence of deep healing.

    Also with automatic-stabiliser... I meant it to be that the heal adjusts itself automatically depending on the targets health not that the heal automatically applies itself. You still have to apply the heal.

    I know you are a well respected and vocal member of the healing community, but sometimes you can be so stuck in one way of thinking you fail to see the merits of other ideas. It was the same with the final boss section, just because you are able to do something doesn't mean everyone can. There are alot of people worse than you, but in that same notion there could be people that are better than you and have a superior understanding of the game than either of us.
    Even if I'm wrong doesn't mean you get to be derisive. Or ask rhetorical questions that you know I can't answer. Or try contradict my own statements.
    I mean I can also do it. For example:
    Quote Originally Posted by Supliftz View Post
    It is easily explainable why Disc Priest is a worse spec than Resto Druid and Holy Paladin. That content focused on burst group damage and high ST damage. Both Holy Paladin and Resto Druids excel at this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Supliftz View Post
    Well...yeah obviously discipline priest is going to smoke other healer's burst healing. Just something to keep in mind when you talk about comparing between classes.
    I'm trying to be understanding as possible but you are just... difficult. I've left out quotes in my reply to show you I've read and internalised your arguments for my response but your responses are simply chopping and picking on my arguments piecewise like your my english teacher.
    At the start I did say it was a bit of stretch, but I think I overthought this and at the end it doesn't even matter because not like I can change anything. Or the fact that broken healers will stay perpetually busted.
    Last edited by worcester; 2017-07-24 at 12:43 AM.

  13. #73
    Warchief Supliftz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Hating myself
    Posts
    2,175
    How did I say life saving healing is the only important factor. I admitted that specs bring different effective/total healing and that is a balancing point for healers. Sure, the idea of life saving heals is very vague and contextual, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or the importance of it.
    Also, it's not like holy paladins are the only class that can spot heal. Even if I can't give an exact number on how much more valuable spot heals are, the fact that spot heals are less efficient than aoe heals and that we still use them means there is some difference in value, otherwise why not just exclusively use the most efficient heals all the time.
    You've also placed more weight onto spot healing. There's no reason why there's more weight onto this style of damage in the context of most mythic encounters. You've also accurately pointed out the majority of specs can spot heal, so if the majority of specs can spot heal anyway, there's no real reason to place more weight onto it. I'll again repeat what my point was. If we've placed increased weighting on Spot Healing, why do we not just run of the best spot healers because of the importance of spot healing? Clearly there's a reason against this, and you've finally pointed out, there are other styles of effective healing worthwhile to bringing, and theses things are equally as important.

    Anyway, classes like Disc Priests, Holy Paladins, Resto Druids and even shamans all spend mana on spot healing spells because they are efficient. When spot heals for disc priests were not efficient, the spec did not spend mana on them. Now that they are efficient, disc decides to actively spend time casting these spells.

    On the point about debuffs and number of targets. If say the frost mark, or guldans eye, affected the entire raid vs 1 person then from a design perspective the damage must be less as the number of targets affected increases otherwise it makes it impossible to heal. If a debuff requires 1m hps over 10s on 1 target, totally healable. But on 20 targets, it's unhealable. The encounters should be made to be more or less actually doable.
    This doesn't make sense and i'll explain why. How exactly do you make a single target debuff challenging in the same way mark of frost was challenging for 4-5 healers? The solution would be the target has to be taking almost their entire hp bar every 1-2 seconds, and require spamming from 4-5 healers to keep them alive throughout the entire duration.

    You can why your example doesn't work on a boss like mythic Gul'dan. Because the targets soaking well of souls have nothing else targetting them, all they require is a beacon swap and random hots from the healers to keep them alive. Compare this to eyes of gul'dan + flames of sargeras. These things line up and the flames of sargeras can target people with the eye of gul'dan debuff.

    Either way, it should be pretty obvious why it's harder to deal with multiple people taking high damage compared to fewer targets taking high damage. There's more room for error in both parties. It is increasingly more likely that people will slip through the cracks and die, when less people take high damage, it is easier to keep them fully hotted and healthy in case they take lethal damage.

    Resto druids output can increase on targets taking sustained damage because of cultivation being applied and how their mastery works, and also the trait deep rooted is a thing. You can use the resto druid analyser to see how effective deep rooted was.
    >claims resto druid output increases with damage taken
    >dismisses twist of fate for disc priest

    both effects are the same thing : )

    How can you say it's a ridiculous conclusion when resto shaman mastery exists, and is highly valued in progression. I think it is a totally fair conclusion simply given the existence of deep healing.
    ? I said you can't come to this conclusion because when people dip low as any healer, you use cooldowns, more mana, or spam every gcd to deal with this increased damage. Just because some healers have effects that proc at low hp, doesn't automatically mean they're more suited for the damage. Your Resto shaman might gain 150% more healing to riptide (if he's stupid enough to even have 150% mastery) when you need to reactively spot heal someone, but when the holy paladin has wings up, the holy paladin is still going to massively out heal the resto shaman in this regard.

    In the case of Discipline Priest, you spend mana on penance rather than smite, and penance is a significant hps increase over smite. You might use Mindbender, evangelism, velens or even light's wrath. You will have twist of fate proccing. All these things massively increase your output to low targets.

    Even if I'm wrong doesn't mean you get to be derisive. Or ask rhetorical questions that you know I can't answer. Or try contradict my own statements.
    ...what? Just because you're wrong doesn't mean I can't call your logic into question...?

    I mean I understand at this point you want to believe this and going around in circles means nothing when all you're doing is presenting arguments based on opinions, and i'm giving you real world examples and accepting your conclusions on top of expanding on them.

  14. #74
    Herald of the Titans Ynna's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,819
    Wow, things have been getting heated here. I don't have any real power here, but it would be nice if you focused on how things actually work and how you'd like them to work, rather than discussing the relative merits of each individual in the discussion.

    Full disclosure: I haven't played a lot of Discipline in Legion because I didn't quite enjoy the playstyle. Even so, I think we should be able to find some common ground.

    • Atonement healing requires more setup relative to other healers.
    • Discpline Priests are different from other healers due to being more predictive, rather than reactive.
    • Discipline Priests are different from other healers due to having to cast non-healing spells in order to heal.
    • The theoretical HPS and overal healing of Discipline Priests is fine.

    I don't think these are particularly controversial. The first three are also what defines the current Discipline playstyle.

    The controversial aspects are:

    • Due to the predictive nature of the Discipline playstyle, there's a higher chance the healing will come too late. E.g. Other healers will have healed up the damage, before your own healing does its thing.
    • The above may or may not be a problem, depending on the specifics of your raid group.
    • The higher relative setup time and predictive nature of the playstyle makes Discipline Priests work harder for similar throughput, relative to other healers.
    • The setup time may or may not be an enjoyable aspect of the playstyle.

    I mean, at this point we're not discussing whether or not bringing a Discipline Priest to a raid is a bad idea or not. I think that a dedicated and coordinated raid group can work with pretty much all healers and as far as I can tell we're not at a point that Priests need to debate on whether or not they should change specs in order to not burden their raid group. (Which has definitely happened in the past.)

    The way I see it, the breakdown is this:

    Do Discipline Priests need to work harder than other healers for similar throughput? If yes, is this extra effort enjoyable in terms of playstyle? If it's not enjoyable, how do we fix this?

    My two cents is that Discipline Priests do have to work a bit harder and that this isn't enjoyable for me personally. As I said earlier in this thread, I'm unsure how to fix this.

    (As a side note, I don't think discussions like these can only be about the highest level of content. Most players don't do that type of content and still want their favorite spec to be a good option. If Discipline is difficult enough to do well on for the average player this is a problem, even if the highest tier of raiders can push Discipline to its limits.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Memento1 View Post
    have yet to see a suggestion for dps-to-heal that isn't "the game selects targets for me so I can mindlessly dps".
    Yes, this is a problem. I think the Atonement playstyle is a better option for the game than the shield/mitigation playstyle, so it's something that needs to be fixed. Having most of Discipline's arsenal be smart healing isn't a good idea. This is what Atonement is trying to prevent, but a lot of people report not enjoying the playstyle. One option might be to shift Discipline back to a tank-healing focus, with Atonement being a Beacon of Light type buff and damage-based healing transferring mostly to a single (or two) targets. I'm not a huge fan of this, as it risks making Discipline Priests "Paladins Light," but it could be one option.

    Similarly, you could make a playstyle where Atonement can be applied easily to a single target, so that spothealing with it is just a matter of shifting the (long-lasting) buff from target to target, but make group healing more dependent on direct heals and have a few (limited options) to apply Atonement to multiple people. This would mostly involve smoothing over the current playstyle. If we want to keep the current playstyle, it needs to be easy to switch from dealing damage to applying a ton of healing. A cooldown that temporarily increases your damage and makes all damage dealt into smart healing (regardless of Atonement) doesn't dumb down the spec as much as it gives Discipline a powerful reactive tool. I think that might be a direction to look into.
    Resurrected Holy Priest

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Ynna View Post
    My two cents is that Discipline Priests do have to work a bit harder and that this isn't enjoyable for me personally. As I said earlier in this thread, I'm unsure how to fix this.
    I genuinely don't see a problem with some people not enjoying some of the specs, because they are more complicated or needs more how-to or simply not for them. Especially because there is another healing spec priests can use, which is more traditional and reactive like every other healer.

    (With 7.2.5, playing disc at a reasonable level got a lot easier and smoother by the way, might want to give it another shot)

  16. #76
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Ynna View Post
    This is what Atonement is trying to prevent, but a lot of people report not enjoying the playstyle.
    Not every spec needs to be equally popular. If certain specs have their own little niche of players that enjoy this spec and don't enjoy the playstyles of other specs (as much), why take it away from them just because they aren't the majority? You can just play holy if you are a priest that doesn't like the new disc (and sadly this is how our priest handles it). This discussion comes up with quite a few specs with low popularity (feral especially comes to mind) and the community of those specs would be destroyed if you changed the spec in a way to become popular.

    If the design of a spec works and there is a reasonably large amount of players enjoying it, why do away with the idea, just because there are alternative styles (already realized in other specs) that are more popular?

  17. #77
    Herald of the Titans Ynna's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,819
    Fair points.

    I don't think I need to enjoy Discipline and I've always been very happy just playing Holy. I do think Discipline has aspects that can be made smoother without taking away what is interesting about the current design. It's okay for a spec to have its niche and having a minority of players that enjoy that niche. It's even a good thing for specs like that to exist, but there's no need to keep a needlessly annoying aspect of those specs just to keep them niche.
    Resurrected Holy Priest

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by Supliftz View Post
    This doesn't make sense and i'll explain why. How exactly do you make a single target debuff challenging in the same way mark of frost was challenging for 4-5 healers? The solution would be the target has to be taking almost their entire hp bar every 1-2 seconds, and require spamming from 4-5 healers to keep them alive throughout the entire duration.
    Looks like you can't. Also seeing fallen avatar streams and kj, it looks like bring as much immunity as possible and just don't deal with healing the debuffs up. It does reduce the healing requirement so you have to question the design choices. I mean its the problem we've had since forever of blizz promising slow triage healing model which never comes.

    I've been trying to avoid ToF because it usually has an incredibly high uptime so it almost feels as if its part of regular healing, but I guess theres no going around it. It definitely is an auto-stabilising mechanism.

    Holy paladins have crazy healing during wings but like you said, you have to spend mana. In my defense, heals that power up themselves rarely require additional mana expenditure and they just work by virtue of targets being low. For example, disc using penance without ToF, and with ToF. Either case requires the same usage of mana and cooldowns. So my point here is that you can spend more mana as always, but then these things just make your mana->healing so much more better.

    Sure, there are a few holes and inconsistencies, but surely the overall point still holds more or less. Saying I have a criminal misunderstanding when there are some things that can't be shown due to lacking the tools and techniques to record them. The whole scientific thing is form an opinion -> check if holds in reality -> modify the opinion to match what we observe etc,. It is going in circles, but each step adds new information which better it.

  19. #79
    You dont check if it holds in reality. You checked if it holds in a void in a very limited spectrum and then say its pretty much right, denying some very obvious arguments. The base healing values of spells matter. the overall mechanics matter. Wether its worth using mana in that way matters. The whole picture matters.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ynna View Post
    Fair points.

    I don't think I need to enjoy Discipline and I've always been very happy just playing Holy. I do think Discipline has aspects that can be made smoother without taking away what is interesting about the current design. It's okay for a spec to have its niche and having a minority of players that enjoy that niche. It's even a good thing for specs like that to exist, but there's no need to keep a needlessly annoying aspect of those specs just to keep them niche.
    Some people find it annoying, some love it. Its always subjective. There are always harder and easier classes/factions/character and so on. Any game needs this variety to satisfy the different parts of the player base. Since disc is one of 5 specs, and people (like me) are absolutely in love with it, while others have 4 whole choices, there is no reason to fix/ruin anything.
    Last edited by Popokolara; 2017-07-24 at 10:33 AM.

  20. #80
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Popokolara View Post
    Since disc is one of 5 specs, and people (like me) are absolutely in love with it, while others have 4 whole choices, there is no reason to fix/ruin anything.
    Have Mistweavers been removed?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •