[Resto] Druid Guide & Discussion (6.0.3)

[Renchy]

When it procs and you are a haste build druid you can get 5/6 regrowths off if you are stationary!

So using that method clearly i was moving or casting something else but good job for thinking i just stand completely still!

If I didnt have MoC ofcourse I would find something else to feel the void of those GCG's perhaps help out on DPS as a second rejuv would be pointless or will you disagree with that as well?

By using MoC as a 'mana talent' yes it will save you mana in some cases however it also allows you to open up the possibility of casting regrowth outside of the MoC proc again to aid with spot healing. Allows you to WG on CD basically just grants you the ability to spam more heals as you are saving mana from the 7seconds of casting, but again please feel free to disagree with me. This is my personal go to talent, and I have been getting some decent results from it.

[theburned]

68/19 = 3.6
So much for your 5-6 regrowths.

Btw: when you say the second rejuv would have to do 5m healing, are you intending to imply that you would leave all those GCDs empty if you weren't specced MoC, or do you just not understand what you are even talking about?

Also if mana was such a non-issue (your claim - not mine) MoC would LITERALLY do nothing. Literally. It's a mana talent that only generates throughput by replacing lower throughput spells, or enabling additional casts.


Anything else we can explain to you?

My claim was that you would not replace the regrowths with cheaper spells, which is the reason for why I consider it better if you got throughput gear, 28% uptime seems low compared to my experiences.. Which is why I consider it a very good talent if you are running throughput gear as your mana is very limited so casts gotten off during this time translates to other heals.

He has a lot of flawed logic though, as you still get of some regrowth casts without it from 2p and OoC.
His claim was that mana was a non-issue with the talent does not make mana a non-issue without the talent, as you say MoC is a mana talent, thus it is a huge difference.

[Brilynn]

2 pc LB proc chance nerfed back down to 30%

le sigh

[Sprucelee]

2 pc LB proc chance nerfed back down to 30%

le sigh

Which is honestly a good spot. It was a bit much at 60%, I expected this. Though the Monk T18 remains a bit overboard, I expect it will be next.

- - - Updated - - -

And we did indirectly get a buff (doubled mana reduction) to our BIS trinket:

http://ptr.wowhead.com/item=124233/d...tery&bonus=567

[Tiberria]

The problem with the set bonus nerf is - even with the completely overpowered 2/4 piece, Druids were only barely keeping up in PTR logs with Disc/HPally/Mistweavers. This nerf effectively takes away about 10% of our raw output, and unless compensatory buffs are given elsewhere during numbers tuning (unlikely due to PvP balance), we will likely be in a very weak spot.

Yes, having 20-25% of your output tied into set bonuses is idiotic, but unless they are going to buff our base spells, we needed that set bonus to be viable.

[Sprucelee]

What are you talking about? Are you really using HPS from people's short testing/wipe pulls as evidence now? Even then, Druids are performing well. Give up the pity party routine dude.

We did not "need" it in BRF, and we do not "need" now.

[Brilynn]

I agree that throughout PTR testing even with the 60% bloom chance, Druids weren't on top of meters. It wasn't too OP by any means in comparison to other healers. That being said, I don't think it's going to put us "in a very weak spot." We will be okay, not incredible on the regular. But as with everything, if you know your class you can pull it off. I don't think the nerf is anything to sit your druids over. Annoying, frustrating, and a little disheartening, yes. Something to panic over, no.

- - - Updated - - -

And we did indirectly get a buff (doubled mana reduction) to our BIS trinket:

http://ptr.wowhead.com/item=124233/d...tery&bonus=567

Ooh, that's nice! I didn't notice that, but a fun something to find out indeed.

[Pyrianis]

In addition to the proc nerf, it looks like the 2set-bloom now heals for 2/3 of a normal bloom.

Yay for the Seed of Creation buff, though.

[Percolator]

What are you talking about? Are you really using HPS from people's short testing/wipe pulls as evidence now? Even then, Druids are performing well. Give up the pity party routine dude.

We did not "need" it in BRF, and we do not "need" now.

The set bonus prior to the nerf was really the only reason to bring a resto druid to next tier, now why bother when all the other classes can easily outperform us?

[Tiberria]

Exactly. Resto Druids are mediocre on live/in BRF right now. On an aggregate level, we are doing less overall healing than HPallies/Disc Priests, despite having upwards of 20% of that healing locked into a raid cooldown while HPallies/Disc do more healing plus have their raid cooldown not counted/over and above the healing they do. On top of that, the actual healing that Druids do offer (HoTs and dumbed down smart heals) is objectively less valuable than absorbs and strong spot healing.

When you look at 6.2, nothing has been done about Disc, Holy Pallies have been arguably buffed (Devo Aura now affects everything and Flash of Light made more attractive). Druids are actually nerfed by the Amp Magic and especially the Aspect of the Fox removal, which we have not been compensated for. There's every reason to believe that independent of set bonuses, we actually lose ground to HPally/Disc in 6.2 - when they already had 2-3 mandatory raid spots in a 4 healer Mythic comp. Literally, that set bonus was the only thing propping Druids up going into 6.2.

Also, you can't dismiss "short logs in PTR testing". Do you not realize that those short logs are actually generally favorable to Druids (because using Tranq once in a 2 minute log or twice in a 4 minute log skews our output), but that PTR logs have always overstated throughput healer healing relative to absorb healers (because a lot more damage is taken than will be taken once strategies and mechanics are clear). It's why you saw RShaman smashing Disc Priests by a 2:1 margin on 5.4 PTR tests and RDruids (even after the nerfs) smashing HPally/DPriest in 6.0 beta raid tests.

The bottom line is, the logs in PTR testing heavily suggested Druids and Monks were only about keeping up with other healers even with the overpowered set bonuses accounting for about 25% of their healing. This set bonus nerf is upwards of a 10% nerf, and closer to a 15% nerf if the reports of the set bonus bloom healing amount also being nerfed by 1/3 are true. Basic common sense says that if you're only keeping up as is, and then get nerfed 15%, you are going to be behind by a significant margin - especially because PTR logs historically overstate the performance of your spec to begin with.

[Hypasonic]

Ah well, got my pala geared up incase we roll with 2 this tier, would be nice to play my druid on some bosses though :<.

[Sprucelee]

The set bonus prior to the nerf was really the only reason to bring a resto druid to next tier, now why bother when all the other classes can easily outperform us?

Exactly. Resto Druids are mediocre on live/in BRF right now. On an aggregate level, we are doing less overall healing than HPallies/Disc Priests, despite having upwards of 20% of that healing locked into a raid cooldown while HPallies/Disc do more healing plus have their raid cooldown not counted/over and above the healing they do. On top of that, the actual healing that Druids do offer (HoTs and dumbed down smart heals) is objectively less valuable than absorbs and strong spot healing.

When you look at 6.2, nothing has been done about Disc, Holy Pallies have been arguably buffed (Devo Aura now affects everything and Flash of Light made more attractive). Druids are actually nerfed by the Amp Magic and especially the Aspect of the Fox removal, which we have not been compensated for. There's every reason to believe that independent of set bonuses, we actually lose ground to HPally/Disc in 6.2 - when they already had 2-3 mandatory raid spots in a 4 healer Mythic comp. Literally, that set bonus was the only thing propping Druids up going into 6.2.

Also, you can't dismiss "short logs in PTR testing". Do you not realize that those short logs are actually generally favorable to Druids (because using Tranq once in a 2 minute log or twice in a 4 minute log skews our output), but that PTR logs have always overstated throughput healer healing relative to absorb healers (because a lot more damage is taken than will be taken once strategies and mechanics are clear). It's why you saw RShaman smashing Disc Priests by a 2:1 margin on 5.4 PTR tests and RDruids (even after the nerfs) smashing HPally/DPriest in 6.0 beta raid tests.

The bottom line is, the logs in PTR testing heavily suggested Druids and Monks were only about keeping up with other healers even with the overpowered set bonuses accounting for about 25% of their healing. This set bonus nerf is upwards of a 10% nerf, and closer to a 15% nerf if the reports of the set bonus bloom healing amount also being nerfed by 1/3 are true. Basic common sense says that if you're only keeping up as is, and then get nerfed 15%, you are going to be behind by a significant margin - especially because PTR logs historically overstate the performance of your spec to begin with.

lol..........

I just can't take you seriously anymore. Have fun next tier

[Tiberria]

lol..........

I just can't take you seriously anymore. Have fun next tier

So, you'd rather dig your head in the sand again than address and provide feedback about real issues? I shouldn't expect any less from you.

[Sprucelee]

Ah well, got my pala geared up incase we roll with 2 this tier, would be nice to play my druid on some bosses though :<.

We are really well suited for many fights and strong on the PTR right now. Much of Lifebloom was already not critical tank healing alongside a Paladin and Monk, as there was an extraordinary amount of over-healing being done. Now, even after the changes, these set bonuses still make two paladins less appealing, as the overall power of beacon is diminished.

Anyway, here is some glimpses into the PTR:

https://www.warcraftlogs.com/reports/all/8/

Do not let Tiberria and his hand wringing worry you. lets see how the rest of PTR tuning shakes out before playing chicken little for the 100th time.

- - - Updated - - -

So, you'd rather dig your head in the sand again than address and provide feedback about real issues? I shouldn't expect any less from you.

I constantly give feedback on the PTR forums where people actually read it... But I give real, and honest feedback, not fish for buffs and exaggerate everything based on half-assed TC. Right now I am more concerned with them fixing the control-ability of the 4pc, because I knew this change would be made (it was ridiculously OP). Making it more functional is far more important...

They have not even made their overall number passes yet, which makes your whole chicken little routine even more comical; they are still tweaking items and scaling, such as secondary stat balance/scaling, trinkets, and set bonuses etc..

What I don't do is constantly whine and complain, and react hysterically to every single set of patch notes. Like, really, your performance in the Paladin forum is embarrassing.

[Pennoyer]

The set bonus prior to the nerf was really the only reason to bring a resto druid to next tier, now why bother when all the other classes can easily outperform us?

The set bonus was stupidly overpowered and would have probably trivialized a ton of mechanics that shouldn't have been. A 1.5k mana, no cast time HOT that does like 30K HPS is probably not going to make it live and goes way, way above and beyond what discs and pallies have been bringing to raids.

[Sprucelee]

So, you'd rather dig your head in the sand again than address and provide feedback about real issues? I shouldn't expect any less from you.

To expand:

You are so woefully incapable of discussing real balance, it is comical. You are honestly trying to argue that an OP set bonus should be used as a balance tool... like seriously, how could anyone at Blizzard ever take you seriously? I have a feeling more than a few have hit that block/ignore button by now.

No, what they should do is exactly this, get the set bonuses to be in-line across classes to be a similar performance boost. Than they should do their numbers pass to bring the classes themselves in-line. Anyone paying attention to the patch notes sees that has not occurred yet.

Sorry, having crazy OP set bonuses for a couple classes is NOT a good way to balance, or argue balance. So, I can not take you seriously.

- - - Updated - - -

The set bonus was stupidly overpowered and would have probably trivialized a ton of mechanics that shouldn't have been. A 1.5k mana, no cast time HOT that does like 30K HPS is probably not going to make it live and goes way, way above and beyond what discs and pallies have been bringing to raids.

Exactly, it was ridiculous for so many mechanics; de-buffs were trivialized, healing the NPCs on Gorefiend, etc..

Not good for the game, not at all.

[Tiberria]

We are really well suited for many fights and strong on the PTR right now. Much of Lifebloom was already not critical tank healing alongside a Paladin and Monk, as there was an extraordinary amount of over-healing being done. Now, even after the changes, these set bonuses still make two paladins less appealing, as the overall power of beacon is diminished.

Anyway, here is some glimpses into the PTR:

https://www.warcraftlogs.com/reports...s=1800&wipes=1

Do not let Tiberria and his hand wringing worry you. lets see how the rest of PTR tuning shakes out before playing chicken little for the 100th time.

- - - Updated - - -



I constantly give feedback on the PTR forums where people actually read it... But I give real, and honest feedback, not fish for buffs and exaggerate everything based on half-assed TC. Right now I am more concerned with them fixing the control-ability of the 4pc, because I knew this change would be made (it was ridiculously OP). Making it more functional is far more important...

They have not even made their number overall passes yet, which makes your whole chicken little routine even more comical; they are still tweaking secondary balance and set bonuses etc..

What I don't do is constantly whine and complain, and react hysterically to every single set of patch notes. Like, really, your performance in the Paladin forum is embarrassing.

How is the 4 piece not controllable? We fully control what targets we have Lifebloom on, and given how much healing it is (or at least was), and moving LB to non tank targets that need healing when tanks are covered will likely very much become a viable thing in 6.2.

Also, you just shot your credibility completely by linking those logs. It is completely shocking and totally unexpected that in attempts that average about 90 seconds, during which the Resto Druid is using HoTW - Tranq during each one that Druid output would be extremely high. That isn't close to what is going to happen in a realistic 6-14 minute fight, when the healing numbers aren't skewed by a 6 minute cooldown. Druids are also more mana constrained than any other healer, and will always look better on short PTR logs.

In fact, that logs actually proves my point completely. Despite burning HoTW- Tranq in each short attempt, he is only about 10% ahead of the other healers - with the pre-nerf set bonus. The set bonus nerf brings that output down 15% and the impact of Tranq and HoTW being leveled out over a 6+ minute duration will bring it down another 15% or so. That log suggests that we are probably 20% behind other healers given the changes.

- - - Updated - - -

To expand:

You are so woefully incapable of discussing real balance, it is comical. You are honestly trying to argue that an OP set bonus should be used as a balance tool... like seriously, how could anyone at Blizzard ever take you seriously? I have a feeling more than a few have hit that block/ignore button by now.

No, what they should do is exactly this, get the set bonuses to be in-line across classes to be a similar performance boost. Than they should do their numbers pass to bring the classes themselves in-line. Anyone paying attention to the patch notes sees that has not occurred yet.

Sorry, having crazy OP set bonuses for a couple classes is NOT a good way to balance, or argue balance. So, I can not take you seriously.

- - - Updated - - -



Exactly, it was ridiculous for so many mechanics; de-buffs were trivialized, healing the NPCs on Gorefiend, etc..

Not good for the game, not at all.

I agree with you 100%; it is ridiculous to balance a spec around a set bonus and it would be far better to have each spec balanced with each spec without set bonuses and then have the set bonuses balanced around each other. However, the developers own decisions this PTR cycle is what had lead a lot of people to come up with the theory of them balancing around set bonuses.

It has been clear to almost everyone (except delusional Holy Paladins) that HPallies and Disc need to come down and/or throughput healers need to come up in terms of raid desirability compared to where they are on live. However, they have effectively buffed Paladins (Devo Aura buff) and left Disc unchanged in 6.2, and have done nothing to make throughput healers more attractive. Meanwhile, they come up with completely overpowered Druid/Monk/arguably Shaman set bonuses, and the immediate thought is they are using the set bonuses to level the playing field. It just seems like a really convenient way for them to be able to balance PvE independent of PvP impacts.

[Percolator]

On a recent healing podcast Hamlet suggested that the only real metric we have for healer balance is raid compositions. In a team of 4 healers, two guaranteed spots will be your disc and holy paladin. Your third spot will likely be given to a shaman due to strong throughput and having a solid healing cool down, so now it comes to deciding for your final spot. If you need more raid healing, why would you pick a restoration druid over a monk? Monks will easily do more aoe throughput, and with the removal of fox it has become ever more difficult to execute tranqs (especially with the excessive movement on many fights on the PTR). If you need more tank healing? Why not just bring a second holy paladin, which allows you to essentially ignore tanks while providing strong raid healing.

I don't disagree that the 4 set prior to the nerf was overpowered, a nerf was needed. Next tier druids won't be miles behind, they will keep up. However that's all they will be able to do, keep up. They don't excel in anything, so my question is - why bring them?

[Sprucelee]

How is the 4 piece not controllable? We fully control what targets we have Lifebloom on, and given how much healing it is (or at least was), and moving LB to non tank targets that need healing when tanks are covered will likely very much become a viable thing in 6.2.

Currently direct heals on a LB target are not recognized by the 4pc, meaning that you can refresh a low duration LB on a tank/target, and your next LB cast will still strip that tank/target of their LB. This makes direct heals on LB targets, and a fundamental LB mechanic, a waste.

In terms of control, having this work correctly will make it much easier to manage a “floating” LB on the raid. Being able to refresh LB on the tank with direct heals will aid in making make it more static, so you can always have a LB on the current tank, and a LB on the raid (if there are not two active tanks).

Also, you just shot your credibility completely by linking those logs. It is completely shocking and totally unexpected that in attempts that average about 90 seconds, during which the Resto Druid is using HoTW - Tranq during each one that Druid output would be extremely high. That isn't close to what is going to happen in a realistic 6-14 minute fight, when the healing numbers aren't skewed by a 6 minute cooldown. Druids are also more mana constrained than any other healer, and will always look better on short PTR logs.

In fact, that logs actually proves my point completely. Despite burning HoTW- Tranq in each short attempt, he is only about 10% ahead of the other healers - with the pre-nerf set bonus. The set bonus nerf brings that output down 15% and the impact of Tranq and HoTW being leveled out over a 6+ minute duration will bring it down another 15% or so. That log suggests that we are probably 20% behind other healers given the changes.

I agree with you 100%; it is ridiculous to balance a spec around a set bonus and it would be far better to have each spec balanced with each spec without set bonuses and then have the set bonuses balanced around each other. However, the developers own decisions this PTR cycle is what had lead a lot of people to come up with the theory of them balancing around set bonuses.

It has been clear to almost everyone (except delusional Holy Paladins) that HPallies and Disc need to come down and/or throughput healers need to come up in terms of raid desirability compared to where they are on live. However, they have effectively buffed Paladins (Devo Aura buff) and left Disc unchanged in 6.2, and have done nothing to make throughput healers more attractive. Meanwhile, they come up with completely overpowered Druid/Monk/arguably Shaman set bonuses, and the immediate thought is they are using the set bonuses to level the playing field. It just seems like a really convenient way for them to be able to balance PvE independent of PvP impacts.

You see, one big problem with your assessment is that I do not agree that there is a big problem with 6.1 balance to begin with. See the representation numbers in my next post. I have disagreed with you on this point before, and still do. My only caveat was that I thought Paladins were a bit too strong (partially due to their utility matching BRF encounters), which inflated their representation a bit, that Resto Tier 17 was a bit out of balance, and PW:S spam is a bit too strong (and boring, poor priests), but overall I think balance was pretty solid.

One big break I make from many healers (and you) if that I never concern myself with Disc priests that much,; having 1 being mandatory is not a real concern for me, as they have designed the class to make 2 not desirable (withstanding ridiculous and anomalous fights like Maidens). To go along with that, their stated goal is 5 healers, and therefore having EACH class in a position that 1 is desirable, is a good goal. I feel like this is what they continue to strive for. Of course, when 4 heal fights keep popping up, it makes the question of balance harder, but I still think class representation in BRF was pretty good.

Also, on one hand you talk about lack of changes, yet suddenly we are at the “bottom”, when, if anything, we have been slightly buffed relative to other classes, and were in a solid positon to begin with. We gained a 2pc/4pc that increases performance, while some classes have gained less, or even lost relative performance when going from T17 to T18. For example,. A shaman transitioning from T17 to T18 (even if their T18 maths out to be strong), compared to a Druid actually GAINING a 4pc (and a 2pc that actually increases healing, not just functionally changing it) where they had none previously, is a marked contrast.

Again, the balance pass on numbers has not occurred yet, but I honestly do not even think it is really that important. As I said, I never saw a big problem in 6.1 balance to begin with, other than small caveats I previously noted, which are already showing signs of being mitigated.

On a recent healing podcast Hamlet suggested that the only real metric we have for healer balance is raid compositions. In a team of 4 healers, two guaranteed spots will be your disc and holy paladin. Your third spot will likely be given to a shaman due to strong throughput and having a solid healing cool down, so now it comes to deciding for your final spot. If you need more raid healing, why would you pick a restoration druid over a monk? Monks will easily do more aoe throughput, and with the removal of fox it has become ever more difficult to execute tranqs (especially with the excessive movement on many fights on the PTR). If you need more tank healing? Why not just bring a second holy paladin, which allows you to essentially ignore tanks while providing strong raid healing.

I don't disagree that the 4 set prior to the nerf was overpowered, a nerf was needed. Next tier druids won't be miles behind, they will keep up. However that's all they will be able to do, keep up. They don't excel in anything, so my question is - why bring them?

Well, I suggest your look at the overall mythic statistics for BRF then, here is the representation of total parses:

1. Paladin 26,942 22.3%
2. Priest 25,501 21.2%
3. Druid 23,305 19.3%
4. Shaman 21,495 17.8%
5. Monk 12,196 10.1%
6. Priest (Holy) 11,131 9.2%

And that was with arguably the worst 4pc of any class (non-existent is a better way to put it).

As for a Monk versus a Druid, the main distinction is simple, control. A Monk brings superior throughput when there is widespread raid damage that is either uniform/random. A Druid is superior when the raid damage is targeted, such as healing multiple de-buffs on the raid. It has always been this way; a Monks slightly weaker control is off-set by higher overall throughput, when needed. Additionally, a Druid also has more consistent tank healing, and a mechanically different cool down that is often superior (particularly now with the matched 40-yard ranges). From another angle, a Druid has the best burst DPS for a healer, and OK sustained; a Monk has very high sustained DPS, but weaker burst. A druid has a 1 minute external, a Monk as a 2 minute external. So, like it should be, it comes down to a fight-to-fight distinction which one will be better, depending on the mechanics. But, their stated goal is 5 healers anyway, optimally you will have one of each class. They missed the mark too many times in HM/BRF, so hopefully they hit their mark for in HFC!

I personally have never been reliant on fox for Tranq; only on BH did I really depend on it (initially really), and even then, with only 1-2 Hunters, I routinely just used BoP. I think P1 BH was an anomaly anyway, it was a rare combination of forced continuous movement coinciding with extreme raid damage. Otherwise, I honestly do not find it that difficult to time Tranqs.

As for a second Paladin, the Druid and Monk 4pc (even in nerfed states) will devalue a second Paladin's beacon, I do not see them being nearly as strong as pairs next tier. I also have yet to see as many mechanics that make BoP/SaC as strong (which was another reason for pairs on certain fights), but then, that has yet to be fully seen as strategies develop.

[Alzu]

As for A Monk versus a Druid, the main distinction is simple, control.

While correct that druids can control their targets more, when is the last time an encounter has had a mechanic where that actually matters? It's just not important enough to favour druids when monks have higher hps.