The Egregious Classic Resto Shaman Progressive BiS


  • Founder Shaman

    @Silver-Hawke said in The Egregious Classic Resto Shaman Progressive BiS:

    @Egregious could you elaborate further on the tiers of T2 pieces? currently have T2 legs, was about to apply ZG class enchant on it but decided against it while looking up guides (and stumbled upon this). i don't have T2 bracers or belt because i have Loomguard Armbraces and Corehound Belt, but if T2 legs are that bad i'd try to get the bracers so i can replace pants with Empowered Leggings.

    Yes. Basically you always want to equip whatever 3 pieces of T2 you have and then focus on acquiring the ideal set items. It doesn't matter what 3 pieces you have, equipping any 3 will be a massive improvement to CH regardless of what +healing items you lose. Shoulders should be avoided at all costs unless you need it for T2 3pc and legs aren't phenomenal. I rank the T2 pieces in those 3 tiers of priority as those pieces listed in tier 1 have the greatest longevity throughout Classic.

    It also absolutely depends on from what perspective we're talking. The BiS T2 pieces will be different in BWL and will change if you run T2.5 5pc, etc. So context is important.


  • Initiate

    @Egregious
    I am not a shaman, but I am GM/MT trying to understand the argument the shamans in my guild are having. We currently have no resto druid so one of our shaman are running 8/8 t1 to assist in the tank healing role. I was hoping I could get a little bit of insight on if 8/8 T1 is going to be better on the tanks than 3/8 T2 with off pieces going into AQ40 if the healer's main target is going to be me the tank. Sorry if this has all be answered above, It seems similar questions have been asked but I'm just trying to understand what is making one or the other better with our comp of 5 Shaman 5 priests healing.


  • Initiate

    @BigbufordHUDS My understanding is that if you are primarily assigned to tank heals as a shaman t1 8/8 has a better single target throughput and recoups mana from the 5 pc bonus. The "icing" is that there are splash heals help on fights where the tanks are localized plus increases the chance on 5pc procing.

    The only thing that I am really curious about is any of that really worth it when chain heal has less overheal on the front and always goes to the lowest on the 2nd and 3rd targets. It seems like it would take even more awareness on a t1 8/8 sham to really maximize the different healing style.


  • Founder Shaman

    @BigbufordHUDS said in The Egregious Classic Resto Shaman Progressive BiS:

    @Egregious
    I am not a shaman, but I am GM/MT trying to understand the argument the shamans in my guild are having. We currently have no resto druid so one of our shaman are running 8/8 t1 to assist in the tank healing role. I was hoping I could get a little bit of insight on if 8/8 T1 is going to be better on the tanks than 3/8 T2 with off pieces going into AQ40 if the healer's main target is going to be me the tank. Sorry if this has all be answered above, It seems similar questions have been asked but I'm just trying to understand what is making one or the other better with our comp of 5 Shaman 5 priests healing.

    If you are lacking a Druid or Priest a T1 8pc Shaman is a solid option. If you have the capacity to allow them to run Healing Way it will further increase their impact. T1 8pc is a better tank healing option than +heal and T2. If you assign a healer to a MT role it's best they commit to that role. It's a bit incoherent to have them fill the tank and raid healing roles. There are two options for a tank healing Shama; 1) to run T1 8pc and 2) to run full +heal offpieces in order to generate the highest amount of throughput on a single target. The benefit of T1 is that it redistributes some of the potential overheal from the front-loaded spell and redistributes it to nearby players while increasing the HPM of HW, and the benefit of full +healing gear providing the largest potential heal to the target.

    @polaski said in The Egregious Classic Resto Shaman Progressive BiS:

    The only thing that I am really curious about is any of that really worth it when chain heal has less overheal on the front and always goes to the lowest on the 2nd and 3rd targets. It seems like it would take even more awareness on a t1 8/8 sham to really maximize the different healing style.

    The goal is to have a large land on the initial target from a tank healing perspective. Either that or a quick one. CH is an undesirable primary tank heal but can be utilized by the raid healing Shaman when healing melee to provide an extra buffer. It is inadvisable to primarily tank heal with CH in any fashion. The goal of tank healing is to provide sustained heavy direct healing to the tank, not necessarily to be the most efficient.


  • Founder Shaman

    This post is deleted!

  • Initiate

    @Egregious
    Perfect! I was also running the napkin math on best HSP itemization. Technically the Bracelets of Royal Redemption inconjuction with T2 helm/gloves/belt have slightly more HSP (16) but you lose a crap ton of MP5 (-17); is this one of those corner cases where you just want to get the "best bang for your buck"?


  • Initiate

    Friend showed me this but it seems for pure throughput it is probably better to go Royal Redemption Bracers + t2 boots over t2 bracers + boots of pure thought.

    Seen below.

    https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/671158427241939006/745669021273161798/unknown.png


  • Initiate

    T2 throughput can be theoretically higher depending on the healing coefficient, for example
    if you have 1000 HP with T2 versus 800 with T2.5
    you can model a single variable function to denote the healing power at any given time t as

    F(t) = t/2.5 * 1000 for 1000 T2 set
    F(t) = t/2.1 * 800 for 800 T2.5 set

    4cca9c86-c706-45f9-b07e-25f5da338487-image.png

    These linear functions simply divide the duration of casting time (t) by the casting time of chain heal (2.5, 2.1) to get the number of casts and then multiply it by the healing power. We ignore the coefficient for healing power for chain heal because these functions both utilize the same spell. Three assumptions are made by these functions ->

    1. you are casting on a single target
    2. You are casting with 0 overheal
    3. there are no critical strikes

    Modelling with multiple targets ->

    F(t) = t/2.5 * 1.975(1000)
    F(t) = t/2.5 * 1.975(800)

    Again three assumptions are made

    1. You are casting on three targets
    2. There is no overheal
    3. There are no critical strikes

    As we can see with the example models above, T2 will theoretically always be higher than T2.5.

    The differences T2.5 has is the ability to snipe heals. That's it. In practicality T2 has the potential to output higher HPS assuming you always get that chain heal with minimal overheal and maximum chains. T2.5 takes less effort to get these off and that's why it's a better choice.

    The graph isn't accurate because it's based on empirical evidence, and individual skill.

    Also, as a final note critical strikes are not proportional to the set. They are independent of the set bonus and therefore a T2.5 set will have more critical strikes (more casts per second) versus T2 which can lead to a higher throughput.

    Modelling for critical strikes (assuming 11% critical strike)

    F(t) = (t/2.5)0.11500 + (t/2.5 * 1000)
    F(t) = (t/2.1)*(0.11)*400 + (t/2.1 * 800)

    Factoring ->

    F(t) = t(422)
    F(t) = t(402)

    Yields a higher healing power coefficient for all t > 0

    To sum it up, under the two assumptions

    1. No overhealing
    2. Single Target

    T2 will always have a higher HPS than T2.5 theoretically. Even with critical strikes taken into account. In practice, T2.5 proves to be better at a point because of the ability to snipe heals, and with those heals you also snipe chains.

    There's a reason why the bonus set isn't -0.5, and -0.4. The coefficient would be too overpowered for T2.5 and would be more theoretical HPS than T2. I guess this is blizzard's way of balancing.

    So if you're a confident healer who can get minimal overheal with maximum chains you should use T2 because this will triumph T2.5.

    The data shown by OP outlines what I've said above, and since this data was collected in a practical environment it is common to see T2.5 overpower T2 because of the reasons aforementioned.

    I myself will continue to use T2.5 for most boss fights, I will only pull out T2 when we have less healers and thus more opportunity to minimize overheals.


  • Founder Shaman

    @polaski said in The Egregious Classic Resto Shaman Progressive BiS:

    @Egregious
    Perfect! I was also running the napkin math on best HSP itemization. Technically the Bracelets of Royal Redemption inconjuction with T2 helm/gloves/belt have slightly more HSP (16) but you lose a crap ton of MP5 (-17); is this one of those corner cases where you just want to get the "best bang for your buck"?

    @Kenny said in The Egregious Classic Resto Shaman Progressive BiS:

    Friend showed me this but it seems for pure throughput it is probably better to go Royal Redemption Bracers + t2 boots over t2 bracers + boots of pure thought.

    Seen below.

    https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/671158427241939006/745669021273161798/unknown.png

    Yes, technically Royal Redemption are better from a pure throughput perspective but that's not what BiS technically is. Or rather it would be if the lens you were viewing BiS through was specifically throughput in a situation with no mana constraints. There are all manner of margin calls I make when I consider BiS but, for general use, I adhere to this gear list when I can. Not everyone plays under the same environmental factors so the weights are geared around 3 to 5 minutes of combat. For individual boss encounters, not trash which is the majority of the instance and most significant aspect of a raid, you may want to go full throughput when mana constraints are irrelevant.

    Also the Helm, Gloves, Belt sacrifices CAC, DGC or Don Rig's. If you wanted to go Royal Redemption you should run Gloves, Belt, Boots. Balancing T2 3pc among all possible loot permutations makes it very complicated for the playerbase as well. As @Kenny pointed out in the snap he linked, that reduces the +heal gain to 9 and a loss of 6MP5. Only for extremely short encounters would I make that trade and I definitely wouldn't build my entire purchase power around it. If you can pick up Royal Redemption for the use cases it is ideal in without taking it away from a player for whom it would be of greater impact, or if BoPT are extremely rare for your raid, sure, more power to you. IMO the Royal Redemption gear set is overall slightly inferior to the BoPT gear set but still completely viable.

    @Turm-Runescape This isn't true, T2.5 will overtake T2 concretely typically after ~25 seconds assuming balanced gear between both sets. Actually slightly faster which is related to the point you brought up about Crit. The value of T2.5 is not sniping. I really disagree with the entire concept of sniping. Sniping is only sniping if you are purposefully using a lower cast time spell and OOMing yourself in the process to accomplish cosmetically higher healing in relation to your healing roster. Basically expending your mana needlessly to push out other healers from the available damage pool. This also assumes the benefit of casting the faster heal is minimal; which, the majority of the time, it isn't. There is nearly always a strong benefit to getting healing out more promptly. That is why I argue it is very hard to actually "snipe" healing in the way people commonly gripe about it. However, that is not what T2.5 is at all and it would be extremely hard to use it as a "snipe set" if that were a thing. If you were to argue it is the entire premise there is that "Haste is for sniping" which is not true.

    But you are correct about the strengths of T2 in an environment with fewer healers or less competition and in regards to the ease of a T2.5 Shaman "slotting" their heal into available health deficits. In reality you want some Shaman on T2.5 and the remainder on T2 outside of strat specific requirements as they provide two slightly different styles of CH. The real reason T2.5 isn't straight up better in every situation is because of the manner in which damage is done in Classic. Most encounters have mechanics which apply damage over a brief duration followed by downtime until the next damaging mechanic. This means that there can be significant stoppage and startage of casting and, during the periods of damage, only a few GCDs are capable of being expended before the raid is stable. A proactive healer precasting into this kind of damage drastically reduces the benefit of T2.5 as the entire benefit of the set can be lost in comparison to T2 -assuming both sets are being worn by players of equal skill. If a damaging mechanic only has 3 to 5 GCDs worth of casts before the raid is capped before a stoppage period occurs it can be challenging for the T2.5 Shaman to get the full use out of their set. However, it can definitely offset a reactive healer's ability to respond to damage and this, in practice, is what most people perceive as the actual benefit of the set despite it being only an incidental benefit. Two reactive healers addressing the same 3 to 5 GCDs worth of damage before the raid is capped and a break in casting occurs finds the T2.5 set is at a distinct advantage.


  • Initiate

    @Egregious The math speaks for itself, the linear functions show that the coefficient of healing power is greater for T2 than it is for T2.5. Your data is collected through empiricism and therefore can't be assessed in a theoretical analysis. In other words, casting chain heal with 100% uptime repetitively is merely a linear function. The time it takes to cast a chain heal, and the duration of casting is all you need to produce these numbers. Therefore in theory to acquire the #1 spot for a specific boss requires a T2 set with maximum power. (Maximizing the utter most HPS on a boss is RNG at the end of the day at this level, but a T2 set is a MUST with a team that has coordination among st the healers)

    You can logically assess this in any private server given the equal parameters (Three dummies, healing power delta of 200) and by casting on a free object you will find that the HPS is better on T2 as predicted by the mathematics in a theoretical environment. Your data was collected through practice which means sniping, and min-maxing through chain heals was in use. Your 25 second interval isn't going to be the same for other individuals. There are a lot of parameters that deduce at what time your set will be better at performing.

    1. The amount of healers on your team
    2. The individual skill of healers
    3. your uptime
    4. overhealing

    The point I brought up about crit was further investigated below, and it has no effect. Applying a crit factor has no probabilistic difference in the outcome. So the math contradicted my hypothesis.

    The differences in the sets is therefore the ability to cast the first heal on a set of people in a raid relative to other shamans and healers in your group.

    There's a reason why blizzard chose -0.4 seconds and not -0.5.

    Apply a thought experiment,
    take three dummies and repetitively heal them with T2 and T2.5 sets with a delta of 200 healing power between both for a duration. At the end you'll find that the coefficient of T2.5 (X/2.1)(H-200) versus (X/2.5)(H) yields T2 to be the top.

    My point is, in a controlled environment where you setup your raid such that everyone is clumped up with a minimum amount of healers you will come out better than if you were to replace your set with T2.5 in the same scenario. In any given scenario where your uptime is less than 100%, and you have overheals 2.5 will prevail,,, as shown by your data in practice. The theoretical values are achievable, just through coordination.