Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Beetlejuice View Post
    @OP:

    They are either very bad healers who will run out of mana very fast or they are actually good ones. Nourish is for the bad and mediocre players. For them it kinda replaces the old rejuve spam. Good healers wont need it because it isn't even our most efficient heal. Its just the most easy one to use efficiently.

    Oh and the main reason not to use it is because it is no fun. Filler spells suck. Blizzard already ruined hunter focus model with filler spells like steady shot. Luckily they didn't go so far for resto druids. If you know how to play you don't loose efficiency by not using nourish. But i really wonder why Blizzard thinks spamming one button is so much fun that they even introduced filler spells for healers.
    Sorry, but I gotta disagree here. I don't see how using an efficient heal over an inefficient heal makes one a bad player. Maybe it's not the most complicated way to heal efficiently, but I'll damn sure take a healer that knows how to heal efficiently - however he does it - over one that spams his most expensive heals and goes OOM in 10 seconds.

  2. #22
    Deleted
    It was nice when i got Nourish, something to spam when all HoTs were up. Some cases i put rejuv and regrowth to tank, and when he got low then i spammed nourish. Much more intresting than 3x lifebloom
    But now, nourish, useless..

  3. #23
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Deathblack View Post
    Nourish is lower mana cost and has a higher effect if there's already HOT's on the target. I feel that using nourish should be our main type of heal when we are waiting for those Omen of clarity procs. It refresh's the timer on lifebloom also. That's why I use it. I find myself just putting 3 lifebloom onto the tank and then nourishing until i get a clarity proc. Then i use regrowth on a dps or the tank. Whoever needs the heal the most.

    Just my two cents.
    My views aswell.

    1. Triple Lifebloom
    2. Nourish until more damage is taken.
    3. React accordingly.
    4. Continue Reacting whilst keeping LB up.
    5. When damage dies down, switch back to Nourishing.


    Nourish costs literally no mana, as even entry heroic level gear can give you enough spirit to regen the cost of the mana while you cast the next one.
    I've watched my mana bar to test it :P

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Moontalon View Post
    Sorry, but I gotta disagree here. I don't see how using an efficient heal over an inefficient heal makes one a bad player. Maybe it's not the most complicated way to heal efficiently, but I'll damn sure take a healer that knows how to heal efficiently - however he does it - over one that spams his most expensive heals and goes OOM in 10 seconds.
    Wow, how could you not have read my thread at all and still reply to it?

    Again, nourish is NOT our most effiicient heal. That is a simple fact. It is just the one that is easily spamable. Hence nourish for noobs, rest for the pros.

  5. #25
    Deleted
    In a raid its not effective unless your tank healing, too long a cast time for too little return, prefer to stack lb and rej/SM/WG to keep people up

    It's good if you are tank healing

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Beetlejuice View Post
    Wow, how could you not have read my thread at all and still reply to it?

    Again, nourish is NOT our most effiicient heal. That is a simple fact. It is just the one that is easily spamable. Hence nourish for noobs, rest for the pros.
    Wow, how could you not have read my post at all and still reply to it?

    I never said Nourish was our most efficient heal.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Moontalon View Post
    Wow, how could you not have read my post at all and still reply to it?

    I never said Nourish was our most efficient heal.
    My bad, but the implication on this one was very heavy. Still i never said you should just heal as you usually do and just replace nourish with healing touch. That obviously wouldn't work. And i never said ppl who use nourish are bad players, i said they are mediocre. No shame in that. Statistically most players have to be.

    All i said is that using nourish is not the most efficient way. It just is the most easy one. So easy and efficient playstyle -> mediocre. Difficult and more efficient playstyle -> good. Should really not be so hard to understand.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Beetlejuice View Post
    My bad, but the implication on this one was very heavy. Still i never said you should just heal as you usually do and just replace nourish with healing touch. That obviously wouldn't work. And i never said ppl who use nourish are bad players, i said they are mediocre. No shame in that. Statistically most players have to be.

    All i said is that using nourish is not the most efficient way. It just is the most easy one. So easy and efficient playstyle -> mediocre. Difficult and more efficient playstyle -> good. Should really not be so hard to understand.
    Mediocre has a very negative connotation you should've considered before using it if you did not intend it negatively.


    That said, I also don't see how someone using a more complex playstyle can be considered any better. If the simpler method still gets the job done, then there's no reason people who use it should be considered any worse of a player than those who choose not to. It's a playstyle, that's all. What do you care how I heal as long as we get the dungeon done in a timely manner? I rarely ever have to stop to drink so I see no reason to change the way I heal.
    Last edited by Oerba Yun Fang; 2011-01-06 at 10:20 AM.

  9. #29
    Deleted
    I use nourish and I take serious offence at being called "mediocre".
    I've been healing for 4-5 years and playing for slightly longer. I would consider myself a very good healer :P

    Just because someones play style does not suit your own does not mean they are inferior to you in any way, shape or form.
    If the said players are still using nourish whilst people are dying, then we have a problem.

  10. #30
    Scarab Lord Stanton Biston's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Corvallis, Oregon
    Posts
    4,861
    Lifebloom is cheaper than Nourish. That's why I don't use it- That and Lifebloom ticks give me OoC procs fairly often, and I use HT or Regrowth for those.

    Honestly, I cancel cast HT in there too, depending on the encounter and the tank.
    Quote Originally Posted by Callace View Post
    Considering you just linked a graph with no data plotted on it as factual evidence, I think Stanton can infer whatever the hell he wants.
    Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence - Sometimes I abbreviate this ECREE

  11. #31
    If the tank isn't at full health, and far enough down to get the full heal from Nourish (no overhealing) then I'll use Nourish to refresh Lifebloom. The extra 500 or so mana really isn't a big deal with my mana regeneration rate and it gives the tank an extra boost of health over simply refreshing with Lifebloom.

    If that's not the case, I'll use Lifebloom to refresh it, so as to not waste mana on overhealing.

    When Omen procs, I'll use either Regrowth or HT on the tank or a DPS depending on who needs it more and how large a heal is needed how fast.

    Is it the most efficient way of healing as a druid? I'm sure it isn't. Does it get the job done? Sure does.

  12. #32
    Mechagnome Jeffyjimbob's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    The inside world.
    Posts
    696
    ...wat.

    I use it, literally, constantly if I'm not already casting. Its so cheap, I do believe my mana regen (revitalize, replenishment, etc) actually covers the cost. Its what, 12XX mana with talents? And at a 2(ish) second cast, that makes it around 6XX mana per second, and I think most people level 85 have that much MP5. If not, it's very close, because I really can just sit there spamming it for ages if I have LB up on the target.

    It's my "no one is about to die, OOC hasn't procced, people need minor healing, and the tank could be topped off" heal. Hell, I'll use it if our tank is sitting at 60%-70% if I know I'll be safe just because LB + nourish will slowly get the tank back to full. Maybe even lower.

  13. #33
    Deleted
    Its about max'ing efficiency and getting a feeling on how fast incoming dmg is coming.

    I tend to put rejuv on people that need healing but are not in risk of dieing and let them heal up, as long as it will gain all its ticks or most of them without overhealing. If a few members have taken a scratch, around the 10k or so health loss, i tend to cast nourish to top them off.

    If raid dmg is coming fast, then the 2.1sec casts on nourish normally get replaced with rejuv, regrowth and HT.

    Most of my healing is done from rejuv, wildgrowth and lifebloom, probably with OoC procced Regrowth as 4th but i sitll cast Nourish and HT during raids but not as often as i thought when i first started doing heroics.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Moontalon View Post
    Mediocre has a very negative connotation you should've considered before using it if you did not intend it negatively.


    That said, I also don't see how someone using a more complex playstyle can be considered any better. If the simpler method still gets the job done, then there's no reason people who use it should be considered any worse of a player than those who choose not to. It's a playstyle, that's all. What do you care how I heal as long as we get the dungeon done in a timely manner? I rarely ever have to stop to drink so I see no reason to change the way I heal.
    Sorry if that is the case. English is not my native language. What i meant was average then. If that has a negative connotation for you too then i am fairly certain that it is a problem on your end though.

    And the more complex playstyle isn't better because it is more complex but because it is both more mana and castingtime efficient.

    And i never said you should change your playstyle in any way. I was just refering to all the posts claiming that everyone never using nourish has to be a noob, while, if at all, it is the other way round.

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanorian View Post
    I use nourish and I take serious offence at being called "mediocre".
    I've been healing for 4-5 years and playing for slightly longer. I would consider myself a very good healer :P

    Just because someones play style does not suit your own does not mean they are inferior to you in any way, shape or form.
    If the said players are still using nourish whilst people are dying, then we have a problem.
    If you ask around i bet at least 70% would say they are above average healers. Statistics can be funny sometimes .

    Actually usually i don't rank playstyles, especially for healers. There are many different ways to heal efficiently and a smart healer chooses the one that fits him best over the one that might have the theoretical best outcome because his personal performance will usually be much better this way. But after reading this thread and its general consensus that a druid not using nourish must be brain dead i thought i should correct this very erroneous opinion.

    And sorry about that, but wether you like it or not, nourish is not our most mana efficient heal (and very obviously not our most casting time efficient too). That is simply a mathematical fact. And not even you taking offense in it will change that.

    Nourish is an easy spell, not a good one. If you use it you choose the easy route (and again, nothing wrong about it, doesn't even lead to the dark side this time ), but not the most efficient one.

  15. #35
    Dreadlord Findus707's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Norway, Trondheim
    Posts
    822
    Not using Nourish cause of the cast time, useless.

  16. #36
    Deleted
    Nourish to me seems a lazy healer's escape, instead of acting reactively to damage you are spamming a heal which doesnt heal that much, with the same cast time as HT, its gonna lead to alot of over healing, making nourish even LESS effiecent. plus since Ooc procs so much basically every 6-8 seconds you get a free HT which heals for 4-6~ times more dpending if you have WG on tank as well. I just don't see the point to loose that reaction time. its hardly gonna stop a spike where a SM->NS+HT macro will.
    Last edited by mmoc1cd9ad8285; 2011-01-06 at 11:53 AM.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Fateofman View Post
    nourish to me seems a lazy healer's escape, instead of acting reactively to damage you are spamming a heal which doesnt heal that much, with the same cast time as HT, its gonna lead to alot of over healing, making nourish even LESS effiecent. plus since Ooc procs so much basically every 6-8 seconds you get a free HT which heals for 4-6~ times more dpending if you have WG on tank as well. I just don't see the point to loose that reaction time. its hardly gonna stop a spike where a SM->NS+HT macro will.
    If you're spamming Nourish endlessly, then yeah, you're using it wrong.

  18. #38
    I haven't used Nourish personally for maybe 3 weeks or so, I do believe its a matter of gear though. I always use healing touch over nourish and never go oom.

  19. #39
    There is not reason to use Healing Touch over Nourish, Overheal? I just use Healing Touch when Nourish + 3 Stacks Lifebloom + Reju cant heal the damage that the tank is taking in that moment.. I have ~115k Mana(no raid gear), Dont know SP... ~2900 Spirit ... And 15k Nourish Crit are nice... a little less than Healing Touch.. for alot less Mana..

  20. #40
    Deleted
    Nourish is my main healing ability besides from lifebloom...

    Like it or not, its the main healing thing now.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •