[Resto] Druid Guide & Discussion (6.0.3)

[Tiberria]

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.

Having Disc have a mandatory spot may not have been a problem back in 25H raids, when you had 5-6 healing spots to work with, but it's absolutely a problem in the 20 Mythic setup. It's already been proven this tier that while they give lip service to the "5 healers is standard" concept, for all practical purposes, almost all fights are 4 healer fights. I think that Imperator and Blast Furnace (and maybe Beast Lord the first week before the nerf) were the only fights this tier that were typically 5 healed.

When you only have 4 healing spots, and 6 healing specs, it is absolutely a problem for one of those spots to be reserved for one specific spec, because you then only have 3 spots remaining for 5 other specs combined. That essentially gives Disc 25% representation, with every other spec fighting for an average of 15% representation, and makes that one healing spec effectively 40% overrepresented. On top of that, the practical reality is that at least one Holy Paladin is also all but mandatory, making 50% of the spots locked to 2 healing specs with 50% remaining for the remaining 4 healers. That is just not acceptable. Either they need to go back to needing 5-6 healers for every fight (in which case mandatory specs is somewhat tolerable), or they need to balance the viability of the throughput healers so they have things in their toolkits that are equally as required as that of Paladins and Disc.

- - - Updated - - -

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%

Overall Mythic parses are heavily skewed by the early bosses and by very casual guilds that are just getting into early Mythics. Lower ranked guilds generally can't tailor their raid comp; they have what they have, and what they have is heavily infleuenced by player population (i.e. Resto Druids are the most highly represented healer in the overall player population). For example, there is something like 7 times as many Beast Lord parses as Blast Furnace. If you parse out only the last bosses - IM, BF and BH, you get the following representation numbers:

Disc Priest - 25.7%
Holy Paladin - 25.1%
Resto Shaman - 17.0%
Resto Druid - 16.5%
Mistweaver - 10.5%
Holy Priest - 5.7%

The numbers for the actual end tier bosses very closely mirror the paradigm of - Disc and Pally have 50% of the raid spots locked up, other 4 specs get to fight for the scraps problem I was referring to.

- - - Updated - - -

This site gives another view of the issue - it shows you the percentage of the overall player pool with 1 or more Mythic kills in WoD play each spec.

http://www.worldofwargraphs.com/statspve-classesrepartition-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0.html

Looking at the healing specs:

Resto Druid - 5.1%
Disc Priest - 4.3%
Holy Paladin - 3.8%
Resto Shaman - 3.5%
Mistweaver Monk - 2.0%
Holy Priest - 1.5%

So, when you look at the raiding population (or at least the raiding population with any level of Mythic experience), Resto Druids are the most played healer by nearly a 20% margin. However, when you look at healer representation at the highest level (i.e. 3 most difficult bosses), Resto Druids drop to 4th out of 6 healing specs. I think that speaks pretty clearly to a problem with the spec actively lacking viability at the high end Mythic level.

[Percolator]

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%

You do appreciate that linking statistics for class distribution months after progress is essentially meaningless? If you think that I'm talking about your average week farming trivial bosses which were out geared months ago, then you've completely missed the point. I'm talking about progression where setups matter, for most guilds it won't be much of a problem, however for any top guild it is.

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.

During a few fights on the PTR I found great difficulty in completing a tranq due to the absurd amount of movement, specifically Archimonde, Mannoroth and Kilrogg. This is just another example where monks can provide the same thing (strong raid throughput cooldown) and they aren't punished by anything (movement).

[Supliftz]

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.

This argument no longer exists because of extend life. Monks get to match/surpass druids controlled hps, on top of naturally having higher hps. This is why druids needed 60% lifebloom to keep up with the monk 4pc.

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.

Consistent tank healing is the only real advantage druids have over monks right now in 6.2. Even post nerfs, it's a pain in the ass to keep 100% uptime of extend life on tanks because of the 12 second duration. Even still, that's not really a relevant advantage because of how powerful holy paladins and disc priests are now.

Revival vs Tranq discussions are also pretty meaningless, because the hps differences between the two spells hardly matter. So it really comes down to mobility. On fights like Kilrogg deadeye and mannoroth, you would be pretty hard-pressed to get good tranqs off, compared to resto shamans dropping htt or a monk using revival.

[Pennoyer]

You do appreciate that linking statistics for class distribution months after progress is essentially meaningless? If you think that I'm talking about your average week farming trivial bosses which were out geared months ago, then you've completely missed the point. I'm talking about progression where setups matter, for most guilds it won't be much of a problem, however for any top guild it is.



During a few fights on the PTR I found great difficulty in completing a tranq due to the absurd amount of movement, specifically Archimonde, Mannoroth and Kilrogg. This is just another example where monks can provide the same thing (strong raid throughput cooldown) and they aren't punished by anything (movement).

This particular discussion will be at a bit of an impasse if you think Blizzard is balancing/should balance classes around "progression where setups matter." Your complaint seems to only affect a hundred or so people who play WoW. If anything, Blizzard is balancing around what you discount in your post.

As for class representation, I looked up # of healer parses on WCL. IM and BF show that resto druid is about tied with shaman in representation, and is actually not too far behind pally and disc for Furnace. It's Blackhand where representation drops, and the reason for that is obvious and isn't really related to their ability to heal the encounter at this point.

[Tiberria]

This particular discussion will be at a bit of an impasse if you think Blizzard is balancing/should balance classes around "progression where setups matter." Your complaint seems to only affect a hundred or so people who play WoW. If anything, Blizzard is balancing around what you discount in your post.

As for class representation, I looked up # of healer parses on WCL. IM and BF show that resto druid is about tied with shaman in representation, and is actually not too far behind pally and disc for Furnace. It's Blackhand where representation drops, and the reason for that is obvious and isn't really related to their ability to heal the encounter at this point.

If you throw BH out and only look at IM and BF, this is representation:

Disc - 26.1%
Pally - 24.8%
Druid - 17.1%
Shaman - 16.6%
Monk - 9.8%
HPriest - 5.7%

I don't know how you can classify having nearly 35% less representation than Pally/Disc as "not too far behind".

[Sprucelee]

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.

The most recent I would point to is BH. Dealing with cinders soaking in P1>P2, and then dealing with increasing Impale de-buffs in P3.

Unfortunately I have little time to PTR test these days, but I am seeing a fair amount of DoT de-buffs on several encounters, I have always considered this our bread & butter. But I am sure you have seen much more

- - - Updated - - -

If you throw BH out and only look at IM and BF, this is representation:

Disc - 26.1%
Pally - 24.8%
Druid - 17.1%
Shaman - 16.6%
Monk - 9.8%
HPriest - 5.7%

I don't know how you can classify having nearly 35% less representation than Pally/Disc as "not too far behind".

I'll entertain your silly post for a second... and just say: 3rd out of 6, when you arbitrarily trim the data to support your argument, is bad?

The fact you included Iron Maidens in any argument just shows how inept you are... Iron Maidens... probably the most poorly designed fight I have ever seen. Like really...

- - - Updated - - -

You do appreciate that linking statistics for class distribution months after progress is essentially meaningless? If you think that I'm talking about your average week farming trivial bosses which were out geared months ago, then you've completely missed the point. I'm talking about progression where setups matter, for most guilds it won't be much of a problem, however for any top guild it is.



During a few fights on the PTR I found great difficulty in completing a tranq due to the absurd amount of movement, specifically Archimonde, Mannoroth and Kilrogg. This is just another example where monks can provide the same thing (strong raid throughput cooldown) and they aren't punished by anything (movement).

You can dig through my posts, but this distribution has not changed significantly, and we have been top three all tier.

[Tiberria]

3rd out of 6 is bad when the difference between 2 and 3 is nearly 40%. It's also bad when there are more Resto Druids raiding than any other spec, but the spec is only in the middle of the pack in representation in the fights that actually matter. How can you not see how big of a gap there is in both representation and overall viability/essentialness between HPally/Disc and all 4 of the other specs?

You can dismiss Maidens or Blackhand, or whatever numbers are brought up all you want; you clearly just want to cherry pick whatever suits your argument.

[Sprucelee]

This argument no longer exists because of extend life. Monks get to match/surpass druids controlled hps, on top of naturally having higher hps. This is why druids needed 60% lifebloom to keep up with the monk 4pc.



Consistent tank healing is the only real advantage druids have over monks right now in 6.2. Even post nerfs, it's a pain in the ass to keep 100% uptime of extend life on tanks because of the 12 second duration. Even still, that's not really a relevant advantage because of how powerful holy paladins and disc priests are now.

Revival vs Tranq discussions are also pretty meaningless, because the hps differences between the two spells hardly matter. So it really comes down to mobility. On fights like Kilrogg deadeye and mannoroth, you would be pretty hard-pressed to get good tranqs off, compared to resto shamans dropping htt or a monk using revival.

Monk 4pc in its current state will not go live... Pretty certain on that. Disc will probably get reverted/nerfed some too. Anyway, I just fall back on my main point, I think with correct encounter design, a Druids control becomes important. This might also need a slight buff to rejuv to emphasize the strength, something I have thought might be needed.

Of course, if the design fits Monks higher overall TP, then it will be hard to compete, I concede that.

[Alzu]

The most recent I would point to is BH. Dealing with cinders soaking in P1>P2, and then dealing with increasing Impale de-buffs in P3.

Now that I think about it, the flames do prefer Druid healers (assuming you have to Revival P1, if not, then...) but it's such a minor part compared to P3 where you are stacked and the constant small ticking damage makes it a monk heaven.

[Sprucelee]

3rd out of 6 is bad when the difference between 2 and 3 is nearly 40%. It's also bad when there are more Resto Druids raiding than any other spec, but the spec is only in the middle of the pack in representation in the fights that actually matter. How can you not see how big of a gap there is in both representation and overall viability/essentialness between HPally/Disc and all 4 of the other specs?

You can dismiss Maidens or Blackhand, or whatever numbers are brought up all you want; you clearly just want to cherry pick whatever suits your argument.

I used ALL the data, while you are picking and choosing fights to skew the numbers to support your argument; and you say that I am "cherry picking", you really are comedy.

[Supliftz]

Monk 4pc in its current state will not go live... Pretty certain on that. Disc will probably get reverted/nerfed some too. Anyway, I just fall back on my main point, I think with correct encounter design, a Druids control becomes important. This might also need a slight buff to rejuv to emphasize the strength, something I have thought might be needed.

Of course, if the design fits Monks higher overall TP, then it will be hard to compete, I concede that.

Trust me i'm as shocked as you are, about the no nerfs to monk 4pc.

I hope it does get it nerfed.

[Sprucelee]

Now that I think about it, the flames do prefer Druid healers (assuming you have to Revival P1, if not, then...) but it's such a minor part compared to P3 where you are stacked and the constant small ticking damage makes it a monk heaven.

I just pray for design to fit us. I reminiscence on Plasma healing on Spine of DW.

I still think that our ability to keep impaled targets up (especially in the 30-45 seconds of ToL+HoTW) is on par with the overall healing of Monks in P3 BH.

[Tiberria]

I just pray for design to fit us. I reminiscence on Plasma healing on Spine of DW.

I still think that our ability to keep impaled targets up (especially in the 30-45 seconds of ToL+HoTW) is on par with the overall healing of Monks in P3 BH.

By the time you get to the point where there is enough healing to be done in P3 that class balance matters, literally the entire ranged group will have impaled debuffs on them anyway, pretty much negating any disadvantage Monks have.

[Sprucelee]

By the time you get to the point where there is enough healing to be done in P3 that class balance matters, literally the entire ranged group will have impaled debuffs on them anyway, pretty much negating any disadvantage Monks have.

And a Druid can focus their healing on that (roughly) half of the raid with HotW+ToL rejuvs.... of course as P3 reaches its peak (which is where Tranq and other CDs are chained anyway), the value is continuously diminished, but it is not "negated" for the entirety of the phase.

[Pennoyer]

If you throw BH out and only look at IM and BF, this is representation:

Disc - 26.1%
Pally - 24.8%
Druid - 17.1%
Shaman - 16.6%
Monk - 9.8%
HPriest - 5.7%

I don't know how you can classify having nearly 35% less representation than Pally/Disc as "not too far behind".

My "not too far behind" comment was referencing Furnace, which is much more of a genuine healer check then Iron Maidens. According to WCL, there are 757 druid parses for Furnace, while there are 871 for disc and 1071 for pally. Yes, druid is behind those healers for that fight, but also ahead of the other 3 healing specs and not by 35% as you claim.

It's interesting that you're talking about 'cherry picking', considering you were the one who started talking about class representation on three specific fights identified by yourself (where two out of three of them have special circumstances that detract from resto druid representation that really don't involve how well a druid heals). I could legitimately argue that even a fight like Beastlord is a much more topic-appropriate encounter to consider than something like Iron Maidens, and there you'll see druid is tied or ahead of every other spec.

[Lazyo]

About the parses on Blast Furnace, don't forget that this has been a 5 healers fight for almost the entire top-progression guilds.
If you look at the numbers, I dont see where we can say that druids are favored over others, especialy considering the amount of resto druids in the game.
Paladin 1,017
Priest 871
Druid 757
Shaman 750
Monk 466
Priest 367

If BF was a fight who was 4 healed during progression I'm sure most of us would have been playing as moonkin.
So, as we where speaking about a t18 4 healed fight I don't see why we will be choose over a monk or a shamy and that's a problem because there is only 2 healer spot left.

I'm ok with an absorb healer being mandatory, like in T16 10HM but I'm not okay with both disc and Hpal being mandatory on a 4healers fight.

Let's be honest, Bliz said that most of MM fights would have been designed with a 5 healers perspective and that we would sometimes see 4 and 6 healers setup. In practice, 3/4 fight are 4 healed, some are 3 healed ( Tectus, Ka'graz) and so far Darmac is the only boss where I remember seeing 6 healers. That's a fail and druids / Hpriest are suffering from that.

[Coppas]

@Tiberria

I'm not going to say resto druids are in a great place at all for HFC but if you took the amount of time you spend on forums arguing that R druids are garbage you could of easily levelled and geared a paladin alt.

Chances are that if your in that good of a guild that comp decisions require you to play a specific class for a tier then you should already have one as an alt ready to go. If your not playing in that sort of incredibly competitive environment then whatever class you choose to play will be fine assuming your a good enough player.

Blizzard are never going to perfectly balance anything and if it bothers you that much then why not give yourself and your raid the option to choose between different alts.

[Floopa]

im in agreement with tiberria here

prior to the set bonus nerf in 6.2 there was a likelihood you may see a resto druid however with the nerf it's too much. there's 0 reason to take a resto druid. the only reason is that your DKs/Warlocks/Boomkins are so bad and brain dead that they can't CR and you need a resto druid to do so, or you desperately need 4 roars on a fight (and even then taking 4 boomkins wont be a bad idea the majority of the time).

you are losing the ability to tranq on the move, this nerfs tranq from the strongest raid CD to 1 of the weakest quite frankly. it's obviously better than DH which is garbage, but it's still trash. you can't HoP and tranq either. all the damage is magic which you would be tranqing on.

you are losing the HPS war vs monks/resto shaman. MWs/resto shamans do more hps than druids, have more survivability than resto druids

i understand the nerf to the resto shaman set bonus, prior the set bonus accounted for around 30-35% additional healing however the resto druid 1 (from what i can see on logs which go beyond 3 minutes) only accounted for an additional 25% healing. the MW set bonus hovers between 15-20% additional healing (where the resto shaman set bonus lies atm, and probably the druid 1 too).

there was a guy in this thread who linked logs of a resto druid "winning" healing on fights where HOTW had a 40% uptime... a 6 minute cooldown doesn't have a 40% uptime in any raiding situation. in a 6:40 fight (allowing 2 HotW usages) HotW would have a 20% uptime and this is the most promising (and most unlikely) scenario, and that was pre-nerf on the set bonuses.

yes: phylactery got buffed and is now god tier for resto druids, but i would err on the side of caution - that trinket will go to discs first (and then probably resto shaman/holy paladins) because they are deemed "more useful". yes, your class trinket got buffed but it's still probably not possible to run as you have a huge reliance on double spirit trinkets for output.

tl;dr- resto druids are not in a good spot atm. not vs discs/resto shamans/monks/paladins

[Drefan]

@Tiberria

I'm not going to say resto druids are in a great place at all for HFC but if you took the amount of time you spend on forums arguing that R druids are garbage you could of easily levelled and geared a paladin alt.

Chances are that if your in that good of a guild that comp decisions require you to play a specific class for a tier then you should already have one as an alt ready to go. If your not playing in that sort of incredibly competitive environment then whatever class you choose to play will be fine assuming your a good enough player.

Blizzard are never going to perfectly balance anything and if it bothers you that much then why not give yourself and your raid the option to choose between different alts.

While this is true that if you play on a competetive level you should have diffrent alts so that you can adapt to what the guild needs.

I guess the main problem Tiberria is concerned with is that if you love to raid as a Rdruid, you're not in a good spot when it comes to high end raiding.
The whole balancing argument, even if its valid, it still feels a bit overused since more often than not Disc and Hpaladins are in a good spot compared to the rest.

[Coppas]

While this is true that if you play on a competetive level you should have diffrent alts so that you can adapt to what the guild needs.

I guess the main problem Tiberria is concerned with is that if you love to raid as a Rdruid, you're not in a good spot when it comes to high end raiding.
The whole balancing argument, even if its valid, it still feels a bit overused since more often than not Disc and Hpaladins are in a good spot compared to the rest.

I'm sure all the players that play the most competitive level value World Firsts and progression above anything else. Some of them probably prefer playing specific classes but that pales in comparison to playing a less desirable classes that allows you to be there for your guilds first mythic kills.

And the chances are that unless blizzard completely overhauls healing (which lets be real here is never going to happen) Discs and paladins will always be the strongest healers because of how absorbs work.