Lifebloom nerf removed from updated patch notes.

[Volkogluk]

I guess your definition of a long time differs from mine. Also looks like you have not bared new content learning in mind.

and a little amendment :
Note the "6+"? meaning at least 7 people he can rolled LB on with 3 stack.

471 * 7 every 9 seconds. = 3297 - 1080 - 450 = 1767
20k / 1767 = 11 * 9 = 101s = 1 min 40 s.

before going OOM. ... That's even less time.

Most "average" guilds does 4-5 mins on bosses. (some even longer with less geared people).

1 mins some isn't an awful long time.

It is if all he is looking for is to top healing meters. In which case no point to argue with him. Just stop reading his posts. I sure as hell going to try.

[Degrador]

In what fight exactly you have 6 pple being constantly damaged?

I realise that having lifebloom rolling on so many people is useless, my point is simply that the power and efficiency of the spell is that good that it's possible to do it. As I said, LB is OP atm for the amount of healing done versus the cost.

Key word here is "currently".

These changes are scheduled to take place on the crux of NEW content.

Progression attempts can easily last longer than 5 minutes.

Once again, the point is not that you would want to, simply that it's possible.

At the end of the day, lifebloom is easily the most powerful (~13k heal for a 1s GCD, no CD) and most efficient (~13k heal for 470 mana or whatever it is) healing spell in the game. You shouldn't have both within the single spell.

[palanator]

GTFO druid forums. OP yeah right.

HAHA saying it wasnt op is like saying hpaladins and dks are fine as they are. Go get a clue please, or ebay a clue if you'r they clueless.

WoW PvP isnt like TBC anymore where you just had to log in the druid to get gladiator. Sadly enough as i've got my druid inactive aswell atm, but i much rather play a class which isnt so OP and easy to play.

Those days are hopefully over.

[Volkogluk]

At the end of the day, lifebloom is easily the most powerful (~13k heal for a 1s GCD, no CD) and most efficient (~13k heal for 470 mana or whatever it is) healing spell in the game. You shouldn't have both within the single spell.

What you fail to understand is that it MUST be this way, because its a HoT . You can't see the future, and , like you said , it can do 13k for 470 mana. BUT ! Unlike direct heal you run the risk of it doing 1.5k heal for those 470 mana. In which case its crp. Even on tanks it doesn't tick every time ( other healers take tank to top + then he evades some strikes = several LB seconds wasted.) Thats the problem with hoTs. When they work - they are great and efficient. BUT already they have les raw healing power then EVERY single direct healing clas in game , and if you paid attention you would have seen that blizzards solution to this problem was to give us a crpflash heal. Instead of buffing our Hots.
Nerfing the hell out of a spell because in an ideal case scenario it can do good job doesn't sound like such a great idea to me consider what I just said. ~13k heal for a 1s GCD, no CD sounds OP, sure, and it would have been, exept you are failing to add several things to the equation : OVER 9 seconds, demands initial investment of x3 mana + 3 GCDs, demands constant attention. Pallie can pretty consistently crit with big heals for 16-17k while having a beacon on another person. thats at the very least 32-34k for 2.5 seconds ( I think its even less, but lets say 2.5) thats 13.2k per second + they get mana back from crits. Wow. lets nerf .

[Degrador]

BUT ! Unlike direct heal you run the risk of it doing 1.5k heal for those 470 mana. In which case its crp. Even on tanks it doesn't tick every time ( other healers take tank to top + then he evades some strikes = several LB seconds wasted.)

How is that different to a direct heal? Are you suggesting that other healers have perfect reflexes and are able to cancel their heals when other healers land theirs first?

if you paid attention you would have seen that blizzards solution to this problem was to give us a crpflash heal. Instead of buffing our Hots.

Firstly, Nourish is hardly a crap flash heal. On top of that it's getting a lot of buffs with 3.1 (Imp Regrowth changes and Living Seed change). Secondly, we've got 4 HoTs we regularly use. You don't need LB to be incredibly OP in order to still have a very powerful arsenal of HoTs.

Pallie can pretty consistently crit with big heals for 16-17k while having a beacon on another person. thats at the very least 32-34k for 2.5 seconds ( I think its even less, but lets say 2.5) thats 13.2k per second + they get mana back from crits. Wow. lets nerf .

You can argue it both ways. A pally crit for 16-17k is almost certainly going to be mostly overheal. Next, Beacon of Light only heals the other person for the effective heal - overheals are ignored. Then add that it's quite likely the beacon target will be full HP, meaning all of beacon is overheal.

Personally I'd much rather be using HoTs where I know that when the tank takes damage I'm definitely going to have ~7.5k healing him in the next 3s without any action required from me (3x 1.5k LB ticks, 2k Rejuv tick and 1k Regrowth tick). If I'm not busy with anything else and the tank really needs a lot of heals I can then add two Nourish casts in that 3s for 8k each, and in 3.1 that'll be ~50% chance to crit for 12k with a 4k shield for the next time he gets hit.

Besides, the nerfs aren't changing the healing output anyway, it's merely the mana cost. If you're having mana issues atm as a resto druid (including if you have to cast Innervate on yourself) you're doing something wrong. Yes there are upcoming spirit mana regen changes, but the in-combat regen (atm on PTR at least) should remain the same, meaning it's only Innervate which changes, which as before you shouldn't need anyway. This is the only change that will actually affect your mana, and it's desperately needed if healers are ever going to be concerned about mana (which they damn well should be).

Incidentally, it looks like you failed:

Just stop reading his posts. I sure as hell going to try.

[Volkogluk]

How is that different to a direct heal? Are you suggesting that other healers have perfect reflexes and are able to cancel their heals when other healers land theirs first?

Yes. Cause they CAN cancel their cast. And they do. we can't. See the difference yet?

Firstly, Nourish is hardly a crap flash heal. On top of that it's getting a lot of buffs with 3.1 (Imp Regrowth changes and Living Seed change). Secondly, we've got 4 HoTs we regularly use. You don't need LB to be incredibly OP in order to still have a very powerful arsenal of HoTs.

Imp regrowth change is a nerf. 50% crit on 1 spell > 25% crit on 2 spells. Reliability is a factor. Living seed is the only buff here. And yes, it is nice, but that is not the issue. + Having a powerfull arsenal of HoTs doesn't help if you have no mana to cast them with.

You can argue it both ways. A pally crit for 16-17k is almost certainly going to be mostly overheal. Next, Beacon of Light only heals the other person for the effective heal - overheals are ignored. Then add that it's quite likely the beacon target will be full HP, meaning all of beacon is overheal.

Quite a lot of fights involve 2 tanks. ( unlike the 6 LB targets suggested earlier, this is actually a real case) beacon on one + heal the other = overheals on minimum. Think a bit sometime.

Personally I'd much rather be using HoTs where I know that when the tank takes damage I'm definitely going to have ~7.5k healing him in the next 3s without any action required from me (3x 1.5k LB ticks, 2k Rejuv tick and 1k Regrowth tick). If I'm not busy with anything else and the tank really needs a lot of heals I can then add two Nourish casts in that 3s for 8k each, and in 3.1 that'll be ~50% chance to crit for 12k with a 4k shield for the next time he gets hit.

Besides, the nerfs aren't changing the healing output anyway, it's merely the mana cost. If you're having mana issues atm as a resto druid (including if you have to cast Innervate on yourself) you're doing something wrong. Yes there are upcoming spirit mana regen changes, but the in-combat regen (atm on PTR at least) should remain the same, meaning it's only Innervate which changes, which as before you shouldn't need anyway. This is the only change that will actually affect your mana, and it's desperately needed if healers are ever going to be concerned about mana (which they damn well should be).

I like the way you are "forgetting" things. First of all , mana cost = healing output. Cause you have no healing output when you are OOM. Secondly, out of combat regen was impotant, cause good healers tryed to maximize inc mana by stealing those precious few seconds not casting to get a bit of mana when you saw that in those next seconds the damage will be tolerable / covered by others anyway. (3) We are NOT talking about atm ! We are talking of nerfs on top of harder content release, for gods sake ! Its like what was done to BM hunters. Several nerfs ( all perfectly fine if taken one by one ), when taken TOGETHER they killed that specc raidwise.
P.S.:
Incidently , note how much of my original post you have made no reply to. Selective reading?

Incidentally, it looks like you failed:

Yes. I failed. cause I am talking to a wall here. Come back when you wil learn to read and comment the entire post, instead just the parts you feel you can troll about.

[Deleted]

Yes. Cause they CAN cancel their cast. And they do.
[...]
Quite a lot of fights involve 2 tanks. ( unlike the 6 LB targets suggested earlier, this is actually a real case) beacon on one + heal the other = overheals on minimum.

That's not a realistic situation on fights where tank damage is high (Patchwerk and equivalents) either.

Healers have stopped healing reactively before BC and have had to adapt to being pro-active, which means keep heals coming even if there is no damage. You don't cancel heals on Patchwerk, that's suicide.
Of course there are bosses where damage is low enough that you can slack (in which case any healer can heal that whatever way and druids are actually in a very good spot to do that with their hots). Those aren't really usefull to the argument anyway.

Same for paladins, you don't let the paladin be the only healer on 2 tanks if the damage isn't very predictable. As such, the beacon heal has a lot of chances to become overheal. It is usefull and does add-up on the long term, but counting both spells as 100% heals is not going to be a strong argument.

[Volkogluk]

That's not a realistic situation on fights where tank damage is high (Patchwerk and equivalents) either.

Healers have stopped healing reactively before BC and have had to adapt to being pro-active, which means keep heals coming even if there is no damage. You don't cancel heals on Patchwerk, that's suicide.
Of course there are bosses where damage is low enough that you can slack (in which case any healer can heal that whatever way and druids are actually in a very good spot to do that with their hots). Those aren't really usefull to the argument anyway.

Same for paladins, you don't let the paladin be the only healer on 2 tanks if the damage isn't very predictable. As such, the beacon heal has a lot of chances to become overheal. It is usefull and does add-up on the long term, but counting both spells as 100% heals is not going to be a strong argument.

You misunderstand my point . It being that a direct healer can stop his cast if he sees that his target was topped by another ( be it by another healer, or w/e ). Druid can't. If you had put a LB or a WG on some1 , and a second later that person was topped by another healer, your HPM went down. Thats a given. So yes, LB is very efficient. In a PERFECT world where druid is the only healer ( which means only 5 mans.) In a 10/25 man some of LBs ticks won't even happen ( tank was topped, and then evaded a hit or 2 ). THAT is my point. And thats also why I said that the example of rolling 6 LBs is complete BS, cause 3 or 4 out of those LBs won't even tick most of the time in almost all the fights. Which will make that druid's HPM and HPS a complete laughing stock. Which still will leave druids raw healing in the dust behind a good pallie.

[Degrador]

Yes. Cause they CAN cancel their cast. And they do. we can't. See the difference yet?

No, they don't. Healers haven't been stop-casting since classic WoW. For one, because it's not necessary (due to my entire point - we have too much mana), and two because these days the damage input is a lot less predictable and more devastating (there were very few bosses in classic WoW in the early raid content that could 2 shot a tank with fast swing timers).

Imp regrowth change is a nerf. 50% crit on 1 spell > 25% crit on 2 spells. Reliability is a factor.

Personally I disagree. Nourish is a better spell to be using for healing spike damage - I'd prefer to be using it than Regrowth, and it doesn't make sense for Regrowth to provide a better DH compared to Nourish on top of a long lasting HoT.

Living seed is the only buff here. And yes, it is nice, but that is not the issue. + Having a powerfull arsenal of HoTs doesn't help if you have no mana to cast them with.

Ok, I've covered this several times, the only change of significance to our mana regen is the LB nerf. Currently mana is not an issue, so let me make this clear. WE NEED A NERF TO OUR MANA REGEN OR OUR EFFICIENCY.. We are at the first tier of raiding and healers already don't care about mana. That is stupid. Being efficient is one of the tricks to being a good healer - requiring efficiency is a good thing. You keep comparing us to Holy pallies and their regen - they are getting nerfed too.

Quite a lot of fights involve 2 tanks. ( unlike the 6 LB targets suggested earlier, this is actually a real case) beacon on one + heal the other = overheals on minimum. Think a bit sometime.

Perhaps you should do the same? Here's a WWS of a patchwerk fight from Alpha with two pally healers. I suggest you look at their overheal, and the amount of contribution to their heals that beacon did: http://wowwebstats.com/q4jk3v2ajpfd1?s=364646-397291

Marlakk: 55% total overheal, beacon was 31% of heals with 68% of it overheal.
Muldir: 68% total overheal, beacon was 15% of heals with 25% of it overheal.

I'd hardly call that 'overheals on minimum'. In fact, looking at just about all their fights I'm struggling to find one where the pally overheals aren't 50+%. Even on Rasuvious where the healing targets take a lot of damage.

I like the way you are "forgetting" things. First of all , mana cost = healing output. Cause you have no healing output when you are OOM.

To be honest, it seems like we disagree on how healing should work. Personally I think it should be required that you be efficient - anyone can just spam buttons to get heals out on as many people as possible, but actually having to be efficient and make decisions about which heal to use when, and whether or not you can leave healing that person for another healer to save mana, these are things that introduce skill into healing. Requiring skill is a good thing.

Secondly, out of combat regen was impotant, cause good healers tryed to maximize inc mana by stealing those precious few seconds not casting to get a bit of mana when you saw that in those next seconds the damage will be tolerable / covered by others anyway.

Yes, this was a trick that could be used, but it certainly wasn't needed to be used. This will still be there to some extent - out of combat regen will still be better than in-combat, and if you have the chance to get a few seconds without casting then you should still take it.

(3) We are NOT talking about atm ! We are talking of nerfs on top of harder content release, for gods sake !

And we're also talking about having better gear for this harder content too.

P.S.:
Incidently , note how much of my original post you have made no reply to. Selective reading? Yes. I failed. cause I am talking to a wall here. Come back when you wil learn to read and comment the entire post, instead just the parts you feel you can troll about.

Could've said exactly the same thing. Where in any of the above have you addressed the fact that we needed a nerf to our mana?

[Volkogluk]

Could've said exactly the same thing. Where in any of the above have you addressed the fact that we needed a nerf to our mana?

I agree we needed a nerf to our mana. Like I agreed that BM hunters should be nerfed. Problem is - its too many nerfs at the same time. Don't you think it may be a bit overdoing it? Thats the bottom line of all I am getting to. All nerfs are ok. IF taken one at a time. maximum 2. But not together.

No, they don't. Healers haven't been stop-casting since classic WoW. For one, because it's not necessary (due to my entire point - we have too much mana), and two because these days the damage input is a lot less predictable and more devastating (there were very few bosses in classic WoW in the early raid content that could 2 shot a tank with fast swing timers).

We are probably talking of different healers then. Cause The healers I raid with do stop healing. ( Except a couple, but they are not a majority. )

Personally I disagree. Nourish is a better spell to be using for healing spike damage - I'd prefer to be using it than Regrowth, and it doesn't make sense for Regrowth to provide a better DH compared to Nourish on top of a long lasting HoT.

50 crit = more healing ( reliable healing ) + way to swiftmend + more chance to get a seed in place. Plus Npurish is much more situational then regrowth ( w/o the 4p T7 / glyph it heals even less on average then glyphed HT. wow. )

Ok, I've covered this several times, the only change of significance to our mana regen is the LB nerf. Currently mana is not an issue, so let me make this clear. WE NEED A NERF TO OUR MANA REGEN OR OUR EFFICIENCY.. We are at the first tier of raiding and healers already don't care about mana. That is stupid. Being efficient is one of the tricks to being a good healer - requiring efficiency is a good thing. You keep comparing us to Holy pallies and their regen - they are getting nerfed too.

DP wasn't nerfed ( and spirit nerf didn't touch pallies. And the 50% healing reduction while taken with their overheal numbers is an outright lol. ) . as you said yourself - pallies overheal a lot. using your own numbers - pallies can still DP at every CD. It will just cause them to overheal less. Therefore they won't be OOM ever. Unlike druids.

To be honest, it seems like we disagree on how healing should work. Personally I think it should be required that you be efficient - anyone can just spam buttons to get heals out on as many people as possible, but actually having to be efficient and make decisions about which heal to use when, and whether or not you can leave healing that person for another healer to save mana, these are things that introduce skill into healing. Requiring skill is a good thing.

We are already making decisions, tyvm. Making a spell not worth it actually lessens our decision making. And making LB cost double the mana ( considering that it won't even tick every second , making it HPM less cause what it can heal in a perfect world is outright stupid. ) Lets face it - hots get sniped. a lot. Which reduces their HPM and HPS. but no1 takes that into account for some reason. And you can't tell other healers to not do that. Since both healing wave and CoH will continue to do that ( and CoH was even buffed. unlike WG. wow. )

And we're also talking about having better gear for this harder content too.

To get that gear you first must get past that content. Which you won't if cause of you being OOM your raid wipes, and then eventually replaces you with a pallie. ( Again, it happened in the past. SWP, any1? Just continuing to ignore the past will not stop it from repeating. )

Hmm. I think I commented everything.

[thunderchunk]

Degrador, I've been attempting to jam these rational thoughts in Volkogluk's head for a while now.

Some people just aren't worth saving.

[WorldTree]

You mean spilling senseless crap and sharing with us that you have "mentally challenged amigos"?

Ok... ..., but other than that, you did nothing worth mentioning.

[Volkogluk]

Some people just aren't worth saving.

I'd call you retarded right now, but I feel that it'd be an insult to my mentally challenged amigos.

Here's what I'd like you to do:

1)Think about what you say before you say it.
2)Once you've got a good way to word it, write it down in these forums.
3)Run to the tallest building in your district and climb to the roof of it.
4)Jump.

Its ok. Some of your posts already shown what can be expected from you and what your opinions are worth. Gave up on you already.
/Waiting for Degradors answers to my post.

[Tigercat]

You mean spilling senseless crap and sharing with us that you have "mentally challenged amigos"?

Ok... ..., but other than that, you did nothing worth mentioning.

Actually that seems to be all YOU talk about, he actually has some substance.

[Degrador]

I agree we needed a nerf to our mana. Like I agreed that BM hunters should be nerfed. Problem is - its too many nerfs at the same time. Don't you think it may be a bit overdoing it? Thats the bottom line of all I am getting to. All nerfs are ok. IF taken one at a time. maximum 2. But not together.

What multiple nerfs are you talking about? AFAIK the only two are Lifebloom and out-of-combat regen (which I guess could be considered a third if you include Innervate, but most druids never cast it on themselves anyway). Out-of-combat regen already wasn't that important because for the more difficult fights as you didn't spend time outside FSR anyway. So at the end of the day the only nerf we need to worry about is the Lifebloom one, and as I've been saying (and you agree with) it's needed.

50 crit = more healing ( reliable healing ) + way to swiftmend + more chance to get a seed in place. Plus Npurish is much more situational then regrowth ( w/o the 4p T7 / glyph it heals even less on average then glyphed HT. wow. )

Nourish definitely has its place as a flash heal atm with 4T7 - I agree without it it's not that great. But for 3.1 the changes will definitely make Nourish an excellent heal to use in general, mainly due to the Imp Regrowth and Living Seed changes, but also due to the glyph. Maybe once you replace 4T7 it won't be as good, but it'll still be better than Regrowth which is exactly as it should be.

DP wasn't nerfed ( and spirit nerf didn't touch pallies. And the 50% healing reduction while taken with their overheal numbers is an outright lol. ) . as you said yourself - pallies overheal a lot. using your own numbers - pallies can still DP at every CD. It will just cause them to overheal less. Therefore they won't be OOM ever.

Pally overheal isn't only because their crits are wasted. Some of it is due to that, but some of it is due to heals landing when the target is full. You say that the healers you roll with would cancel it, but then if they don't go OOM why would you stop a heal?

So far pallies have had DP nerfed, SA nerfed, plus GC was saying they'll still be looking at whether they need to nerf pallies more simply because they're not affected by the spirit regen changes.

Unlike druids.

Have you actually played on the PTR? Or even watched the streams of end game guilds testing Ulduar? They still have plenty of trees and they're definitely not going OOM.

We are already making decisions, tyvm. Making a spell not worth it actually lessens our decision making. And making LB cost double the mana ( considering that it won't even tick every second , making it HPM less cause what it can heal in a perfect world is outright stupid. ) Lets face it - hots get sniped. a lot. Which reduces their HPM and HPS. but no1 takes that into account for some reason. And you can't tell other healers to not do that. Since both healing wave and CoH will continue to do that ( and CoH was even buffed. unlike WG. wow. )

Yes they do take it into account. We are HoT healers and always will be, but just because HoTs never get their full effect doesn't mean they're useless. Even with them getting 'sniped' as you put it they still make up for a LOT of healing - I don't know about you but in 25 man raids I'm always in the top 3 for heals, with LB almost always > 20% of my healing.

I can see we're never going to settle this. You believe that these changes will definitely cause you to go OOM every fight and prevent you from being an effective healer. Personally I don't. How about we just agree to wait for 3.1 and see what happens then before you go crying out doom for all resto druids when not even all druids agree with you?

[Volkogluk]

What multiple nerfs are you talking about? AFAIK the only two are Lifebloom and out-of-combat regen (which I guess could be considered a third if you include Innervate, but most druids never cast it on themselves anyway). Out-of-combat regen already wasn't that important because for the more difficult fights as you didn't spend time outside FSR anyway. So at the end of the day the only nerf we need to worry about is the Lifebloom one, and as I've been saying (and you agree with) it's needed.

I am including Innervate, cause in hard fights ( OS 3D for example), you do end up using it. With my style of healing I am almost never outside the FSR, but there are druids who are. Thats why I am talking of all 3.

Nourish definitely has its place as a flash heal atm with 4T7 - I agree without it it's not that great. But for 3.1 the changes will definitely make Nourish an excellent heal to use in general, mainly due to the Imp Regrowth and Living Seed changes, but also due to the glyph. Maybe once you replace 4T7 it won't be as good, but it'll still be better than Regrowth which is exactly as it should be.

Guess thats a matter of opinion ( personally hate nourish with a vengeance)

Pally overheal isn't only because their crits are wasted. Some of it is due to that, but some of it is due to heals landing when the target is full. You say that the healers you roll with would cancel it, but then if they don't go OOM why would you stop a heal?

Not all healers = pallies. Incidently most of the healers I raid with are priests and a couple of shammies, with a healer pallie sometime making a cameo appearance. Priests do stop casts. If the raid healing is mainly composed from pallies - they really have no reason to stop casts. Cause they can't go OOM w/e they do.

So far pallies have had DP nerfed, SA nerfed, plus GC was saying they'll still be looking at whether they need to nerf pallies more simply because they're not affected by the spirit regen changes.

SA wasn't what made healing pallies be neverOOM. DP does. And it wasn't nerf - cause a pallie can still spam his heals whil getting exactly same amounts of mana as before. Just his overhealing amount will be smaller. And don't forget the diference of the mana pool sizes between druids and pallys . who gets more benefit out of replenishment?

Have you actually played on the PTR? Or even watched the streams of end game guilds testing Ulduar? They still have plenty of trees and they're definitely not going OOM.

I am not talking of the regular Ulduar. blue posts already stated it won't be THAT horible a place. The real test will be the hard modes. Have they been done yet by guilds running pallies/ tree healers ? Cause you COULD do SWP with some druid healers. As long as you had enough shammies , that is.

I can see we're never going to settle this. You believe that these changes will definitely cause you to go OOM every fight and prevent you from being an effective healer. Personally I don't. How about we just agree to wait for 3.1 and see what happens then before you go crying out doom for all resto druids when not even all druids agree with you?

You are right on that account. Problem is - it might be too late by then . Blizz aren't exactly fast with fixing this ( took them quite enough time to fix BM hunters back after overnerfing. ) Still, thats all IMO. ( also quite a few BM hunters agreed that the overnerf was needed before it was implemented . It didn't make them any less wrong. ;D )