Holy Paladin nerfs in PTR patch 5.3

[Xs]

You are talking about something that currently accounts for up to 40% of a paladins healing. If you dont want absorps you need to give us something that increases our overall healing by up to 40%. Increased healing by holy power spells would have to be arround 200% or increase beacon healing by 1000%. Yea no its not going to happen.

Maybe a little too much, but I get what you're trying to say

Ultimately I'll refer you again to my previous comment, on any fight a Paladin is healing where they're on the bleeding edge of their own ability, Mastery should be ~30%, with it dropping as low as 25% in some cases, this is from Paladins with almost 40% mastery

[Freia]

Maybe a little too much, but I get what you're trying to say

Ultimately I'll refer you again to my previous comment, on any fight a Paladin is healing where they're on the bleeding edge of their own ability, Mastery should be ~30%, with it dropping as low as 25% in some cases, this is from Paladins with almost 40% mastery

35%-45% is a more accurate number with it getting higher in "farm" content.

And if you are gearing for mastery, you should be nearing 40% mastery buffed without even full gemming for it like Kmy does.

[monikasun88]

It seems like a lot of the arguing in this thread is actually between people who agree that holy paladin mastery should be nerfed and that the 4-set was indeed more powerful than it should be. It would be interesting to see more ideas about how the T15 could be better than it currently is.

[Freia]

It seems like a lot of the arguing in this thread is actually between people who agree that holy paladin mastery should be nerfed and that the 4-set was indeed more powerful than it should be. It would be interesting to see more ideas about how the T15 could be better than it currently is.

Scrap it and start from scratch imo. Right now they are intent on keeping it the way it is. Until more paladins are using it they won't see a need to change it.

[Fhi]

Just a reminder to keep it friendly, folks. Discussing other classes is fine, but please try not to veer off-topic into who is more OP.

~Fhi

[Astraios]

I was going to quote multiple people, but it got too long. So I'm only quoting this once then responding to people in the order I see it in the thread.

What smart heals? (protip we only have one and its worse than EF) and what single target heal bombs?


Your very first statement showed that you have no clue about holy paladins and like the first one you are wrong about this one.

Insanely strong tank healers? By that I sure hope you are talking about beacon of light, which first of all doesnt make us good tank healers it makes us good healers to put on the raid so we also heal the tank at the same time. Looking at yesterdays logs a flash heal (priest) did on avg 65k healing (non crit) and a flash of light (paladin) did on average 50k, add in the mastery and the healing is litterally the same. A shamans Healing Surge hits for 80k and this translates to all single target heals, if you want to stick someone on a tank you are better off using someone else than a paladin.

Smart heals? Oh I don't know, this little thing called light of dawn.

Single target heal bombs? This thing called eternal flame. It even comes with a bubble and a HoT to make damn sure your target stays alive afterwards.

Your lack of any backup behind your statement except saying I know nothing, is nothing short of an ad hominem attack, in other words, you're just saying I'm winning here.

Insanely strong tank healing I mean a paladin in the raid = other healers can ignore tanks and no one really needs to worry about them. As well, eternal flame is comparable (or probably better) than flash of light, is instant, then there is holy shock...I mean you're really grasping at straws if you're trying to say paladins aren't the strongest tank healers. Druids are good at stabilizing with lifebloom/rejuv, but paladins are good at stabilizing (raid healing transferring through beacon) and bombing heals with divine light/holy shock/eternal flame.

I also never said that holy paladins were far out healing me, I said that they were doing similar throughput over a burst scenario like rampages with proper CD management, and I play one of the stronger burst classes in a MW. I said that the combination of their utility and throughput being equivalent to one of the highest HPS and lowest utility healers puts them far above them in worth as a healer. Please don't make straw man attacks, they're not helpful to any discussion whatsoever.

Paladin mastery absorbs increase effective health, giving extra cushion to raids to help them survive burst damage. Not as strong as disc priests, but it's utility, which is what reglitch stated. It is extremely relevant to the discussion of how powerful a healer is.

In response to the one who said my statement was meant to incite a flamewar (@dubalicious), I will redirect you to the numerous paladins in this thread and around here citing the "fact that paladin's aren't dominating world of logs" as proof that paladins aren't overpowered, and that they need to be buffed to compensate for this nerf (which is who my post targeted)...except the entire point of the nerf is that you're too powerful and they want you to be less powerful. I also stated that it's hard to tell whether the nerfs went too far or not, except that I don't expect the t14->t15 transition to be horrendous with the large increase in stats. I never stated they needed further nerfs as some people are somehow insinuating (even though I specifically stated that it'd be hard to tell whether the current nerfs were enough or too much). If you aren't going to read my entire post and be reasonable about it, then please refer to the quote you so kindly ripped out of context.

I think it will be a different healing style than the one you use currently, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will be worse. MW monks and disc priests both got nerfed from previous patches and they're both still powerful, albeit with different play styles than before.

As for the QQ about MW burst healing...that's great that we healed 12-15 (actually it goes up to 18, I've had it hit 20 once...the second one is rare though), how about our complete inability to heal any of the other targets that don't have ReM up? It's true that other healers can bring those targets up, but the insane throughput is compensated by a complete lack of ability to control who that healing goes on. Then there is the problem that even though our raw throughput is insane, it's only needed in a few cases (Kaz'rajin, Megaera Rampages, Iron Qon fist smashes, Twin Consorts Day Phase) and in the rest of those fight's our healing really isn't very effective. The majority of our healing comes from those phases, which is ridiculous on both the concept of our throughput being so high, and the concept that we lack the tools to effectively heal the rest of the phases. But this thread isn't about MW and their design flaws (both pro and con.)

The reason many people target paladin mastery healing as a problem is because it's absorbs, and it's a large portion of their healing. Every healer that isn't a disc priest or holy paladin hates absorbs. Holy paladins can smart heal or choose single target heals for their raid healing (LoD vs. EF), most others either blanket (sham/MW/rdruid) or group target (holy priest). That's why it receives hate. Also, if mastery were 33.333% of your healing, and you had 0% over heal, that would mean your mastery rating was 50%. I don't believe it's that high, however your mastery% healing is that high. That basically says that mastery is an extremely effective heal for the amount of rating it requires (due to low over healing on the added healing it provides) which might be another reason why others dislike it.

I was of the opinion that holy paladins would be too strong considering their total package before 5.2 dropped. The fact that many top guilds are/were actively looking to expand their holy paladin roster lends credence to that, as does their position on logs. They are not topping them, no. But topping logs means little. Where the healing comes, how the healing comes, and when is all very important. I'll reiterate, whether the nerfs were TOO FAR or NOT is to be seen, and honestly is where this thread should turn, and it should do so either with testing from the PTR or with math modeling what the difference in HPS will be switching from t14->t15 tier. My paladin does not have t15 tier, so I won't be doing that anytime soon.

@Kyuushei: Mastery is not baked into MW heals, it routinely contributes around 5-12% of our healing depending completely on RNG (do people move through spheres?), and thats with the base of approximately 6000 (or is it 7000?) mastery since we avoid it like the plague. Perhaps some of the MW are jealous that our mastery sucks while yours is amazing. But regardless, I think HPal mastery is pretty strong, not really overpowered after nerf.

@Terlig: Holy Paladins are not behind, they are basically some of the strongest healers at the moment, esp. after including their utility. [This statement is based on pre-nerf holy paladins.]

Seems Blizzard wants holy paladins to tank heal, at least the reduced amount of holy power from holy shock and increased amount of beacon heals will likely lead to increased tank healing (from either DL'ing tank for HP [its either that or HR, either might be used depending on situation] or from the buff to beacon.) I'm interested in how increased amount of HR + stronger daybreak from t15 bonus' will workout.

[Dubalicious]

It must be hard having a mastery work 100% of the time from 100% of the heals you use. If only MWs had such luxuries.

Another really good point that shows your thorough understanding of the mechanics behind paladin healing.

If you don't want to have a meaningful discussion, create your own thread to bitch and whine in - we really don't need it here.

---------- Post added 2013-04-25 at 09:36 AM ----------

Smart heals? Oh I don't know, this little thing called light of dawn.

One smart heal that is limited by HoPo generation, and cannot be cast if HoPo is spent on EF.

Single target heal bombs? This thing called eternal flame. It even comes with a bubble and a HoT to make damn sure your target stays alive afterwards.

I'm not sure what definition of "single target bomb" would make it so EF fits into that classification. EF, like LoD, is limited by HoPo generation, but it also FAR from being as powerful as the other "single target bombs" possessed by other healers (and personally I think paladins have better 'single target bomb' healing spells, but I don't wanna do your work for ya!)

Insanely strong tank healing I mean a paladin in the raid = other healers can ignore tanks and no one really needs to worry about them. As well, eternal flame is comparable (or probably better) than flash of light, is instant, then there is holy shock...I mean you're really grasping at straws if you're trying to say paladins aren't the strongest tank healers.

Sure we're strong tank healers, was somebody actually challenging that point? We're still not the "default tank healer" that we have been in the past, and other classes are also strong tank healers.

I said that the combination of their utility and throughput being equivalent to one of the highest HPS and lowest utility healers puts them far above them in worth as a healer

MWs still completely demolish holy paladins in an "extended raid damage" scenario, like, it's not even close.

You have some valid points, but when you make it sound like we can just sit back and spam LoD and EF all day, your argument starts to lose a little validity because it shows you haven't actually healed on a paladin, nor do you understand where some of these numbers are being generated.

How exactly did I take you calling paladins insane for simply choosing to heal on a paladin out of context? If you have to throw insults around to form an argument than maybe your actual points need some work.

[Kyuuseishu]

Smart heals? Oh I don't know, this little thing called light of dawn.

Single target heal bombs? This thing called eternal flame. It even comes with a bubble and a HoT to make damn sure your target stays alive afterwards.

@Kyuushei: Mastery is not baked into MW heals, it routinely contributes around 5-12% of our healing depending completely on RNG (do people move through spheres?), and thats with the base of approximately 6000 (or is it 7000?) mastery since we avoid it like the plague. Perhaps some of the MW are jealous that our mastery sucks while yours is amazing. But regardless, I think HPal mastery is pretty strong, not really overpowered after nerf.

Seems Blizzard wants holy paladins to tank heal, at least the reduced amount of holy power from holy shock and increased amount of beacon heals will likely lead to increased tank healing (from either DL'ing tank for HP [its either that or HR, either might be used depending on situation] or from the buff to beacon.) I'm interested in how increased amount of HR + stronger daybreak from t15 bonus' will workout.

Just to answer a few

1) I did edit my post after I was discussing this thread with one of my friends, since he informed me that it does indeed show up as a separate spell. Avoiding mastery like the plague though, that was paladin's most of the way through cata until they reworked mana, increased it's scaling and allowed it to stack. We were once in a MW position so its not exactly alien territory to us.

2) LoD is quite a weak spell, even being a smart heal, the only reason it will see use is as a holy power dump during AoE healing phases

3) I will admit that the single target initial heal of EF is quite strong, but its still nearly the same as WoG except a bit more powerful. The only thing that sets it apart is the HoT mechanic, which ticks for roughly 10k every 2-3 seconds? which realistically isn't going to "make sure they stay alive".

4) We have never really stopped tank healing and the T15 4 set will just make BoL's overheal % larger than it is currently. People will still use HR as a generator over divine light though, considering your tank needs to be taking pretty big hits to make it worth casting on them, otherwise its just a waste of mana and a massive overheal. (unless people start using the beacon glyph and play around with beacon swapping but that's just tedious in my opinion)

5) The daybreak change is an odd one that Im not entirely sure about since 1 stack its a nerf, you'll be getting less healing for the same mana currently. The on 2 stacks, you are still getting less healing for the mana spent compared to 2 day breaks in its current state. It just allows it to heal more in one global, and with it not healing the initial target as well as not transferring to beacon its kind of worse.

[Freia]

Paladin mastery absorbs increase effective health, giving extra cushion to raids to help them survive burst damage. Not as strong as disc priests, but it's utility, which is what reglitch stated. It is extremely relevant to the discussion of how powerful a healer is.

Reglitch's point about effective health had no relevance as a response to the point I made that Devotion Aura was useless against physical raid damage.


As for the rest of your long winded, pointless post.

Telling monks who come into this thread to cry about paladins that monks are fine is not "qqing about monks". Your whole post shows you really have no clue about how paladins work and are overestimating the impact of many of their abilities(6 second holy shock provides too much HP? really?) and that you obviously aren't very good on your monk if you think paladins are so far ahead of them.

[mcbubble]

This made me giggle:

that's great that we healed 12-15 (actually it goes up to 18, I've had it hit 20 once...the second one is rare though), how about our complete inability to heal any of the other targets that don't have ReM up?

Sooo sorry that you can't heal the entire raid 4 times with uplift...you're limited to 20. Must feel horrible...

Please monks, leave this thread. You're not adding anything constructive by comparing our two classes.

[Deleted]

Literally no monk itt has atomically compared monks to holy paladins past responding to retorts assuming they were.

[Dubalicious]

Literally no monk itt has atomically compared monks to holy paladins past responding to retorts assuming they were.

Seriously? Remember this from the early pages:

Paladins already intrude on the gameplay of HoT healers such as Mistweavers and Restoration Druids.

Or maybe this, where you literally challenged everyone posting in the thread to explain why Mistweavers shouldn't be beating paladins, under a nearly insignificant pretense (regen stat vs. throughput stat)

you're totally welcome to explain the reason I shouldn't be ahead of a holy paladin who purely stacks a regen stat and has a raidwide mitigation cooldown, instead of barely being able to keep up despite running with 5.7k spirit with everything else into an output stat, and having an output based raid cooldown.

or this:

ability to steal heals from restoration druids and mistweavers

Please don't act like this whole turn of discussion towards Mistweavers wasn't 100% generated by YOUR posts.

[Deleted]

Just an FYI:

For MWs to get Renewing Mists on 18 people you need to use Renewing Mists, at 3 stacks, on a Mage who has just used Time Warp. This means those situations are incredibly rare. For Renewing Mists to heal 20 people you need to first use Renewing Mists, at 3 stacks, on a Mage who has just used Time Warp and have the travel (thus 2 stacks) travel to another Mage who has just used Renewing Mists.

If you think this happens often be my guest, but I can guarantee you it does not.

[Deleted]

"atomically" "past responding to retorts"

This whole "turn of discussion to mistweavers" purely stems from a few individuals being unable to look past the link in my signature.

[Dubalicious]

This whole "turn of discussion to mistweavers" purely stems from a few individuals being unable to look past the link in my signature.

Go back and look at the thread. There was *ZERO* mention/comparison to MW's until you *challenged posters to explain why a Mistweaver is losing to a Paladin*. Your signature has nothing to do with it, your post had everything to do with it.

Stop acting like you had nothing to do with it, when you clearly had nearly everything to do with it (and still do to this very post)

ps. - What definition of "atomically" are you using here, I don't quite understand your statement.

[Kyuuseishu]

"atomically" "past responding to retorts"

This whole "turn of discussion to mistweavers" purely stems from a few individuals being unable to look past the link in my signature.

Quite literally if you hadn't came into this thread hands up in the air proclaiming the OP'ness of holy paladin's mastery along with EF then we'd all still be discussing the impact it has had on our healing rather than responding to people like you.

[Malthanis]

Okay, that's enough. The thread is about discussion on Holy Paladin 5.3 nerfs. Let's keep it to the topic, and let's keep the bickering out of it.

[Deleted]

It's a 5-6% throughput nerf (the Mastery change).

The change to the tier bonus is long overdue, generating 33% more HP is beyond stupid. Besides, in t15/t16 gear you'll be able to generate more HP through HR use anyway (higher spirit). The change, really, is negligible. The tier 16 bonuses will most likely be stupidly insane anyway: they always are. A 5-6% throughput nerf is not damaging at all, and it's good Blizzard is going to tackle a definite problem before it manifests itself too much: it's nice to see them being proactive for once, rather than reactive.

[Kyuuseishu]

It's a 5-6% throughput nerf (the Mastery change).

The change to the tier bonus is long overdue, generating 33% more HP is beyond stupid. Besides, in t15/t16 gear you'll be able to generate more HP through HR use anyway (higher spirit). The change, really, is negligible. The tier 16 bonuses will most likely be stupidly insane anyway: they always are. A 5-6% throughput nerf is not damaging at all, and it's good Blizzard is going to tackle a definite problem before it manifests itself too much: it's nice to see them being proactive for once, rather than reactive.

If I remember correctly depending on where your mastery popped up in your heal %, its roughly a 17% nerf to the mastery in terms of its scaling so assuming an average of 35% of overall healing on a fight that is total healing drop of about 6% total throughput decrease. Just have to wait and see with the 4piece nerf on how its turns out in total since its a significantly smaller number of HP spells going out over the course of the fight. So with a rough estimate I'd say about an 8-10% throughput decrease overall (This part isn't backed by maths, it's just an estimate). I guess we'll see its true impact in due time, I heal mostly with the 2 set now anyway, readjusting since I'll have to at some point, better sooner than later.

[Dubalicious]

I The change, really, is negligible.

Looking more closely at the numbers, I tend to agree with this statement. The loss of T14 bonus will make a much more significant difference than the reduced mastery shields. It's hard to argue that a 5% hit to our highest healing mechanic isn't a "sky is falling" situation, but I definitely don't think it is. I'm not even sure it's a 5-6% loss, I'm thinking it's probably closer to 2-4% - let's look at some numbers real quick.

Old base = 12%
Old additional = 16.5%
Old total = 28.5%

New base = 10%
New additional = 13.7%
New total = 23.7%

28.5%-23.7%=4.8%
.048/.285= 16.8% hit to mastery

So I think we can generally say that's about a 15% hit to mastery, which generally comprises about 35% of our healing.

0.35*0.85=.2975

35%-29.75% = 6.25% reduction to overall output

This was using another posters information that the rating required for 1% is being increased from 400 mastery to 480 mastery, hopefully that is correct (it appears to be) - [E] - I don't think I've worded this very well, but I still believe the numbers to generally be accurate)

Anybody see any issues/flaws with those numbers?

*I totally skipped a very important step (derp) - The suggestion of a ~5-6% reduction does seem pretty accurate.