[GUIDE] Mistweavers of Draenor: PvE Healing in [6.2]

[Supliftz]

monks will be really strong on gorefiend even if ptr doesn't show it

surging mist doesnt heal the mobs inside his stmoach (bugged obv) but we're gonna be sick, so much raid damage and movement (lol). and rjw + uplift spam during the unleashed souls is super awesome

4pc going to own inside! 2-4pc huge increase to EnM healing.

[Volibear]

4pc going to own inside! 2-4pc huge increase to EnM healing.

Fresh ReM casts on both tanks, EnvM into someone taking a single-player mechanic, green double-bacon sandwich (beacon)?

[Supliftz]

Fresh ReM casts on both tanks, EnvM into someone taking a single-player mechanic, green double-bacon sandwich (beacon)?

I mean sure, I thought the mechanic was 1 ghost taking a bunch of damage and you need to heal it up. Extend life would greatly increase EnM's St healing on a health sponge.

I wish raid testing wasn't at fucking 6am so I could actually see what's going on.

[Volibear]

I mean sure, I thought the mechanic was 1 ghost taking a bunch of damage and you need to heal it up. Extend life would greatly increase EnM's St healing on a health sponge.

I wish raid testing wasn't at fucking 6am so I could actually see what's going on.

I don't know specific mechanics in HFC, was just creating a scenario.

I agree on the times though, I was sitting in traffic during raid testing.

[Buildapanda]

I don't know specific mechanics in HFC, was just creating a scenario.

I agree on the times though, I was sitting in traffic during raid testing.

You were in traffic for 2 1/2 hours?

[Volibear]

Yep, peak hour traffic is horrible. But I also travel ~50km each way for work, which doesn't help.

[Floopa]

I mean sure, I thought the mechanic was 1 ghost taking a bunch of damage and you need to heal it up. Extend life would greatly increase EnM's St healing on a health sponge.

I wish raid testing wasn't at fucking 6am so I could actually see what's going on.

with 14 people the mob was at 100k life and you had to heal it to 500k. that's all you do, just heal it to full before it reaches the centre of the room (where it becomes empowered, ends up outside and rapes the raid)

presumably it's gonna scale, but surging mist/ReM wasn't working (only soothe + envelop) so it was, naturally hard, to heal them up. idk if we can heal people outside while inside: i definitely didn't see my ReM tick on people outside while i was inside the stomach though.

[Supliftz]

that mechanic just sounds like a hpal/resto shamans/monks wet dream.

This whole fight works really well with the monk kit.

btw pretty sure that spirit w/ on use crit trinket is bis.

[Deleted]

Are the trinket values final or are the numbers not done? Because as it is some of the mythic trinkets are really underwhelming

http://ptr.wowhead.com/item=124231/b...et-1&bonus=567
is worse than my mythic blast furnace using geodews stat weights, even if you punish the blast furnace proc by like 50% because it's unreliable, its still better.

http://ptr.wowhead.com/item=124232/b...et-2&bonus=567
Is even debatable if it's a upgrade, it depends how much you value the on use vs proc. If you take the average uptimes the blast furnace is far ahead, this one will probably come down to the fight, but i'm not a fan of trinkets from old tiers being good, let alone possibly still BiS (depends how the leech/class trinket works out)

(701*2.45)+(476.68*1.09)= 2237.0312 From furnace
(502*2.45)+(827.5*0.98) = 2040.85 that spirit/crit
Those are with no punishment/bonus for (un)reliability. If anyone could check that i'm not being dumb and missing something obvious that'd be great, but as it stands autoclave + elementalist's are better with the current stat weights than every mythic trinket that i'v done the math on (leech/class excluded)

[Supliftz]

The stats on the trinkets are probably undertuned, there's no reason why spirit on trinkets would go down this tier.

At correct spirit levels for the ilvl, I would imagine the massive crit proc with huge burst phases would be most ideal for monk.

[Deleted]

The stats on the trinkets are probably undertuned, there's no reason why spirit on trinkets would go down this tier.

At correct spirit levels for the ilvl, I would imagine the massive crit proc with huge burst phases would be most ideal for monk.

Yea, as soon as they get a bit of spirit added to them they're all much better, although if the spirit continues in the trend it has we're not far off being unable to OOM without RJW, like all out chi generators and spending the chi will be mana neutral or positive, i feel really close to that point right now, will feel kinda weird to have a single spell that we actually have to pay attention to mana for using

[Pinch]

The leech trinket seems pretty useful if I'm understanding it correctly. It won't help you much on the meters, but it should be very powerful.

http://ptr.wowhead.com/item=124234/b...nket-4&bonus=0

I'm assuming it means it gives you leech rating, so if you effectively heal someone for 30k with an uplift, they would get ~300 leech rating (with the mythic version), which is around 4.3% leech. That's pretty amazing considering it will scale with DPS gear / fight times / the fact that it will probably be on 10+ people constantly.

[Buildapanda]

kromrok looks to be a fight with a ton of stance changing
shadow lord tons of burst damage told ya floopa

[Geodew]

https://cranecentral.wordpress.com/2...-weapon-speed/

I think I could do a non-sim version. It's just a chain of probabilities.

- - - Updated - - -

For reference, wowhead link: http://www.wowhead.com/spell=120272/tiger-strikes

I'll do the 6.2 version first since it's easier, and then show how to extend it to 6.1.

So in the steady state (after the first 8 seconds of being in Crane), since Tiger Strikes lasts 8 seconds, you want to worry about the last n autoattack swings where n = floor(8.0 / (seconds per swing)) + 1. Putting it that way is quite mathy, so have some examples: if your swing speed is 2.0, you'd swing at 0.0, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, and 8.0, so n = 5. For a 1.5s swing speed, you'd swing at 0.0, 1.5, 3.0, 4.5, 6.0, and 7.5, so n = 6.

The reason why we're concerned with the most recent n swings is because, thinking with positive time signifying events in the past, a swing at t=0.0 might have the Tiger Strikes buff from a swing at t=7.5, but not at t=9.0.

Now, suppose the probability of triggering Tiger Strikes in a single swing is p (in the set [0, 1] of course). That means we have a probability p of the buff being up from swing n, and a probability 1-p of it either being up from a different swing or not being up at all. Further, since Tiger Strikes duration overwrites instead of extending, the amount of Tiger Strikes time gained varies based on time left on the buff. If swing n at time t_n (e.g. t_n=7.5) procced Tiger Strikes, and no other swings did, then we gain t_n seconds of Tiger Strikes. The most recent proc determines the value of another proc.

V := Buff time/value gained at t=0.0 for current swing (swing 1) =
p*(t_2*P[most recent proc was swing 2] + t_3*P[most recent proc was swing 3] + ... + t_n*P[most recent proc was swing n] + 8.0*P[Tiger Strikes not currently up])

where P[x] detones the probability of event x, commonly also denoted P(x) in probability textbooks, and ":=" means "is defined as."

Continuing,
P[most recent proc was swing 2] = P[swing 2 procced] = P[any particular swing procced] = p
P[most recent proc was swing 3] = P[swing 3 procced AND swing 2 did NOT proc] = (SEE NOTE) P[swing 3 procced] * P[swing 2 did NOT proc] = p*(1-p)
P[most recent proc was swing 4] = p*(1-p)^2
...

Responding to comment thread on the actual blog (https://cranecentral.wordpress.com/2...trikes-uptime/)

Their anti-spam thing kicked in and stopped letting me post my work. I wasn't about to post line-by-line, so it's here instead, for all interested parties.
-----------------------------------------------------
Yes, I did see what you guys said, and I was trying to reply :P. It seemed like Hamlet was not sure whether or not the expression
1-(1-p)^(8/(swing speed)) = 1-(1-.1)^5.98325
was correctly giving the %time uptime, though. I'm claiming that it is not correct, nor is 1-(1-.1)^5, nor is the continuous-time poisson process model you did.

Hamlet was correct in realizing that 1-(1-p)^n gives uptime only in the sense of "percentage of autoattacks for which Tiger Strikes is up." That's not the formula we want, though, as you two realized; we want "percentage of time for which Tiger Strikes is up." To help you understand, let me re-derive the formula for the former:

Tiger Strikes average "uptime," for autoattacks ONLY
= P[Tiger Strikes is up at the time of any given autoattack]
= P[Tiger Strikes has procced in the last 8 seconds, given the current time is that of an autoattack]
= P[Tiger Strikes has procced in the last n autoattack swings]
>> where n = floor(8 / T), i.e. Hamlet's definition; T = time between autoattack swings, including haste effects
= 1 - P[Tiger Strikes has NOT procced in the last n autoattack swings]
>> Assume 6.2 proc behavior for now
= 1 - (1-p)^n
Q.E.D.

However, what we actually wanted was this:

Tiger Strikes average uptime for all steady-state time
= P[Tiger Strikes is up at time t]
>> where t is a uniformly random variable in [8.0, infinity) (8.0 to allow steady-state)
= SUM(P[i autoattacks occurred in the last 8 seconds, given the current time is t] * P[Tiger Strikes would proc after i subsequent attacks]) for i = 0 to +infinity
= P[n autoattacks occured in the last 8 seconds, given the current time is t] * P[Tiger Strikes would proc after n subsequent attacks] + P[n+1 autoattacks occured in the last 8 seconds, given the current time is t] * P[Tiger Strikes would proc after n+1 subsequent attacks]
>> See http://imgur.com/OCJYrvM to convince yourself of the above step and the next step
>> Still assuming 6.2 proc behavior
= (((n+1)*T - 8.0) / T) * (1 - (1-p)^n) + (((8.0+T) - (n+1)*T) / T) * (1 - (1-p)^(n+1))
>> for n=5, T=1.6/1.19665, and p=0.1, yields 0.46756992925, which is more than reasonably close to the simulation to give credibility
Q.E.D.

However, this makes assumptions about the proc behavior. The reason I derived the formula the way I did on MMOC is because the MMOC formula is easily extensible to the 6.1 case.

In fact, we can prove the equivalence of the two expressions (i.e. the one above and the first one I derived on MMOC) with some mathemagical algebra.

Tiger Strikes average uptime for all steady-state time
= (((n+1)*T - 8.0) / T) * (1 - (1-p)^n) + (((8.0+T) - (n+1)*T) / T) * (1 - (1-p)^(n+1))
= (1-(1-p)^n) * ((n+1)*T - 8.0) / T + (1-(1-p)^(n+1)) * ((8.0+T) - (n+1)*T) / T
= (1-(1-p)^n) * ((n+1)*T - 8.0) / T + (1-(1-p)^(n+1)) * (8.0 - n*T) / T
= (1-(1-p)^n) * ((n+1)*T - 8.0) / T + (1-(1-p)*(1-p)^n) * (8.0 - n*T) / T
= (1-(1-p)^n) * ((n+1)*T - 8.0) / T + (1-(1-p)^n + p*(1-p)^n) * (8.0 - n*T) / T
= (1-(1-p)^n) * ((n+1)*T - 8.0) / T + (1-(1-p)^n) * (8.0 - n*T) / T + (p*(1-p)^n) * (8.0 - n*T) / T
= (1-(1-p)^n) * (((n+1)*T - 8.0) + (8.0 - n*T)) / T + (p*(1-p)^n) * (8.0 - n*T) / T
= (1-(1-p)^n) + (p*(1-p)^n) * (8.0 - n*T) / T
= 1 - (1-p)^n + (p*(1-p)^n) * (8.0/T) - n*p*(1-p)^n)
= 1 - (1-p)^n * (1+n*p) + (p*(1-p)^n)*(8.0/T)
>> Let N = n + 1 = my MMOC definition of n; => n = N-1
= 1 - (1-p)^(N-1) * (1+(N-1)*p) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
>> Now begins a pattern
= 1 - (1-p)*(1-p)^(N-2) * (1+(N-1)*p) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p)^(N-2) * (1+(N-1)*p) + p*(1-p)^(N-2) * (1+(N-1)*p) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p)^(N-2) * (1+(N-1)*p) + p*(1-p)^(N-2) + p*(1-p)^(N-2) * ((N-1)*p) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p)^(N-2) * (1+(N-1)*p-p) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p)^(N-2) * (1+(N-2)*p) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
>> Now begins 2nd iteration of pattern
= 1 - (1-p)*(1-p)^(N-3) * (1+(N-2)*p) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p)^(N-3) * (1+(N-2)*p) + p*(1-p)^(N-3) * (1+(N-2)*p) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p)^(N-3) * (1+(N-2)*p) + p*(1-p)^(N-3) + p*(1-p)^(N-3) * ((N-2)*p) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p)^(N-3) * (1+(N-2)*p-p) + (N-2)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-3) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p)^(N-3) * (1+(N-3)*p) + (N-2)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-3) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
>> Continue pattern
= ...
= 1 - (1-p)^2 * (1+2*p) + 3*p*p*(1-p)^2 + 4*p*p*(1-p)^3 + ... + (N-2)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-3) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p)*(1-p) * (1+2*p) + 3*p*p*(1-p)^2 + 4*p*p*(1-p)^3 + ... + (N-2)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-3) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p) * (1+2*p) + p*(1-p) + 2*p*p*(1-p) + 3*p*p*(1-p)^2 + 4*p*p*(1-p)^3 + ... + (N-2)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-3) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p) * (1+2*p-p) + 2*p*p*(1-p) + 3*p*p*(1-p)^2 + 4*p*p*(1-p)^3 + ... + (N-2)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-3) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= 1 - (1-p)*(1+p) + 2*p*p*(1-p) + 3*p*p*(1-p)^2 + 4*p*p*(1-p)^3 + ... + (N-2)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-3) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
>> Difference of squares formula on 2nd term
= 1 - (1-p*p) + 2*p*p*(1-p) + 3*p*p*(1-p)^2 + 4*p*p*(1-p)^3 + ... + (N-2)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-3) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= p*p + 2*p*p*(1-p) + 3*p*p*(1-p)^2 + 4*p*p*(1-p)^3 + ... + (N-2)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-3) + (N-1)*p*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (p*(1-p)^(N-1))*(8.0/T)
= p * [p + 2*p*(1-p) + 3*p*(1-p)^2 + 4*p*(1-p)^3 + ... + (N-2)*p*(1-p)^(N-3) + (N-1)*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + (1-p)^(N-1)*(8.0/T)]
= p * [T*p + 2*T*p*(1-p) + 3*T*p*(1-p)^2 + 4*T*p*(1-p)^3 + ... + (N-2)*T*p*(1-p)^(N-3) + (N-1)*T*p*(1-p)^(N-2) + 8.0*(1-p)^(N-1)] / T
>> for n=5, T=1.6/1.19665, and p=0.1, still yields 0.46756992925, so an error is unlikely
Q.E.D.

Now hopefully you can trust my formula for the 6.1 case by extension of my 6.2 formula. No real additional math to do for that, so I guess we're done!

-------------------------

TLDR Tiger Strikes uptime in Crane with Fang of the Earth (1.6s swing speed) and +19.665% Haste is 46.757% (Patch 6.2).

[Volibear]

TLDR Tiger Strikes uptime in Crane with Fang of the Earth (1.6s swing speed) and +19.665% Haste is 46.757%.

Pretty strong uptime!

[Geodew]

The stats on the trinkets are probably undertuned, there's no reason why spirit on trinkets would go down this tier.

They probably shifted itemization from the trinkets' Spirit into <other stat>. There's "no reason" the proc strengths should double over 30 ilvls, either. :P

- - - Updated - - -

Pretty strong uptime!

Yup, though the other weapons are lower

[Deleted]

Could use that fang of the earth to switch when going in for fistweaving.

[Supliftz]

They probably shifted itemization from the trinkets' Spirit into <other stat>. There's "no reason" the proc strengths should double over 30 ilvls, either. :P

Then you run into the problem of the new trinkets not being worthwhile for MW (outside of the crit one).

kromrok looks to be a fight with a ton of stance changing
shadow lord tons of burst damage told ya floopa

I love how we're going from gorefiend (a great boss for healing in general) to just AoE damage every x seconds, and in between you just afk. At least monks can fistweave \o/

EDIT: And by afk I mean hpals/disc snipe everything until the scripted burst

[Volibear]

Then you run into the problem of the new trinkets not being worthwhile for MW (outside of the crit one).



I love how we're going from gorefiend (a great boss for healing in general) to just AoE damage every x seconds, and in between you just afk. At least monks can fistweave \o/

EDIT: And by afk I mean hpals/disc snipe everything until the scripted burst

Burst heal with RJW, fistweave when damage stops, then back to RJW and channel tea while spinning

[Supliftz]

Burst heal with RJW, fistweave when damage stops, then back to RJW and channel tea while spinning

I mean yeah, monks will do fine obviously on these types of encounters. It's just I dislike how we go from a great healing fight like gorefiend (so sad I didn't get to test it :<) to iron reaver/fel gronn guy. Kilrogg is the same thing.

Just heavily encourages you to continue to stack absorb healers.