---

Q u o t e:


It's just kind of the way Rejuv works. The base points aren't that great but with a lot of spellpower, it really shines.

With 15 ranks the jump between ranks isn't going to ever be very big. Many other spells scale with rank similarly, which is one of the reasons we want to move to a one rank-per level system (i.e. ranks are kind of dumb).

---

It's not scaling with spell power at all, the only thing that causes a change to make the difference in ticks is talents. Ive already shown proof of that.

To be brutally honest, from day one when I noticed that rank 15 lasts longer than the previous ranks, but at the time healed for almost exactly the same, I thought that was an intended change in order to balance the spell differently - they didnt want to up the healing done per tick, so instead they powered up the spell. No worries, we lose a fair bit to overhealing since that last tick so often is, but whatever. If they take it away and leave the spell as essentially rank 14, then I will be pissed.

2 out of 3 resto tier sets have thus far been aimed at increasing our usage of rejuv.
Lifebloom was heavily nerfed in order to make us turn to other spells, with rejuv being the one that best performs the same task.
Nourish continues to be buffed on the premise that we have hots up on the target, the first of which is always going to be rejuv based on the above two points.

Now you come back to us and say geewhiz harry my boy, you are using too much rejuv.

Guess what blizzard - you control the spells we use, not us. I guess you know that though, what with the whole removing 20% efficiency from... well damn, rejuv! Only this time, we are going to keep using rejuv in exactly the same way, because we don't have another spell that does the same job. Wonderful.


Then you add insult to injury trying to pass it off as a bug fix. Personally I don't give a flying crap if they change the wording now, what's done is done. When you take your customers for idiots, they remember it. If you want good customer relations, don't lie to people, especially not when you don't have to - I'm pretty sure having been given an explanation (hey guys, initially it was a bug giving rejuv an extra tick, but we decided to roll with it, only now you are doing too much), most druids probably would have given some begrudging murmurs and got on with it. Instead you tried to pass it off as something it blatently is not, a lie so obvious that I can only believe that you knew people would call you on it - what purpose you thought that would serve I have no idea.

---

Q u o t e:


It's just kind of the way Rejuv works. The base points aren't that great but with a lot of spellpower, it really shines.

With 15 ranks the jump between ranks isn't going to ever be very big. Many other spells scale with rank similarly, which is one of the reasons we want to move to a one rank-per level system (i.e. ranks are kind of dumb).

---

Does that mean we won't have to waste so much money leveling up anymore just to buy new ranks of old spells, only buy entirely new spells in the future? Because that would be way cooler, heh.


Of course, so would spell appearance leveling with you so a lv1 fireball doesn't look the same as a lv85 one, but that's a different topic. :p

---

Q u o t e:


It's just kind of the way Rejuv works. The base points aren't that great but with a lot of spellpower, it really shines.

With 15 ranks the jump between ranks isn't going to ever be very big. Many other spells scale with rank similarly, which is one of the reasons we want to move to a one rank-per level system (i.e. ranks are kind of dumb).

---

Heres the proof in case you missed it, It is not scaling with Spell Power at all, 0, nothing, nadda, squat. It's not the way it works, its NOT WORKING PROPERLY AT ALL.

http://img71.imageshack.us/i/wowscrnshot100209071350.jpg/
http://img340.imageshack.us/i/wowscrnshot100209071456.jpg/
http://img14.imageshack.us/i/wowscrnshot100209073453.jpg/
http://img340.imageshack.us/i/wowscrnshot100209072313.jpg/

Dude, calm down, it's day 2 of the PTR, you don't need to attack GC over a bug, especially when people are being confusing and implying they're mad that the tooltip healing is slightly different rather than the actual healing. Go report it in the PTR forum and wait for a new build, seriously.

---

Q u o t e:
To be brutally honest, from day one when I noticed that rank 15 lasts longer than the previous ranks, but at the time healed for almost exactly the same, I thought that was an intended change in order to balance the spell differently - they didnt want to up the healing done per tick, so instead they powered up the spell. No worries, we lose a fair bit to overhealing since that last tick so often is, but whatever. If they take it away and leave the spell as essentially rank 14, then I will be pissed.

2 out of 3 resto tier sets have thus far been aimed at increasing our usage of rejuv.
Lifebloom was heavily nerfed in order to make us turn to other spells, with rejuv being the one that best performs the same task.
Nourish continues to be buffed on the premise that we have hots up on the target, the first of which is always going to be rejuv based on the above two points.

Now you come back to us and say geewhiz harry my boy, you are using too much rejuv.

Guess what blizzard - you control the spells we use, not us. I guess you know that though, what with the whole removing 20% efficiency from... well damn, rejuv! Only this time, we are going to keep using rejuv in exactly the same way, because we don't have another spell that does the same job. Wonderful.


Then you add insult to injury trying to pass it off as a bug fix. Personally I don't give a flying crap if they change the wording now, what's done is done. When you take your customers for idiots, they remember it. If you want good customer relations, don't lie to people, especially not when you don't have to - I'm pretty sure having been given an explanation (hey guys, initially it was a bug giving rejuv an extra tick, but we decided to roll with it, only now you are doing too much), most druids probably would have given some begrudging murmurs and got on with it. Instead you tried to pass it off as something it blatently is not, a lie so obvious that I can only believe that you knew people would call you on it - what purpose you thought that would serve I have no idea.

---

The entire premise though is that everyone made an assumption that rank 15 was intended to have 5 ticks instead of 4. We never asked about it, and Blizzard never made a statement about it until now, even though they were apparently aware of the issue.

Even then, this is not a nerf to the healing aspect of the spell at all. Each tick still ticks for as much as before. It just doesn't last as long - meaning you can't have as many up simultaneously (which honestly, even in 25 man raids, if you're casting rejuv every GCD, you're probably over healing by a lot), or you lose a little mana efficiency if you're just keeping it up on tanks.

Frankly, you're getting too worked up because they're making one rank of a spell work like all the other ranks of that spell.

---

Q u o t e:
I realize a lot of you are trying to come up with a unified theory of how we scale spell ranks, which is admirable, but the coefficients are correct. We increase the healing per rank by as small an amount as we can get away with because we know spellpower is going to grow so massively.

This is one of the reasons we had to do away with downranking - the base points have less and less effect and the coefficients have a greater and greater effect as your spellpower increases. Going from rank 14 to rank 15 may not be a huge leap in HPS, but going from say 1000 to 2000 spellpower is. Looking at some of the curves you have produced, it's easy to see where the coefficients get nailed. This is also why we just want to have one rank per character level in Cataclysm.

It's totally fair (and appreciated!) to call out when you think you have detected bugs on our part. In this case, however, the numbers appear to be where we want them.

We also totally agree that Gift of the Earth Mother ends up being problematic with regard to GCD lock. We'd love to change it if we could do so without massively nerfing druids.

---

Im confused, are you not looking at the screenshots showing you that no amount of spell power is changing the difference between the two ranks? How can you say going from 1,000 sp to 2,000 is a huge difference when there is 0 change from 0 spell to over 2700 unbuffed. NO CHANGE AT ALL.

---

Q u o t e:


With 15 ranks the jump between ranks isn't going to ever be very big. Many other spells scale with rank similarly, which is one of the reasons we want to move to a one rank-per level system (i.e. ranks are kind of dumb).

---

Ranks are kind of dumb, but, as I'm sure you realize, also give the player an almost 'tangible' accomplishment on gaining a level. Rarely, they may even effect play style between upgrading different spells.

So don't be too hard on ranks, they do have a useful psychological purpose. I mean, you could just give each new rank a different name, a la EQ, but that just gets silly.

---

Q u o t e:


It's just kind of the way Rejuv works. The base points aren't that great but with a lot of spellpower, it really shines.

With 15 ranks the jump between ranks isn't going to ever be very big. Many other spells scale with rank similarly, which is one of the reasons we want to move to a one rank-per level system (i.e. ranks are kind of dumb).

---

Hey now, don't knock the original designers. =p Wasn't the point of ranks to stagger power gains throughout levels so that certain levels would experience a more dramatic boost in power and therefore be more exciting? I think "outlived its usefulness" would be a better way to say it.

Right now on the PTR There is no difference between ranks 14 and 15, if you removed rejuv rank 15 the only thing that would be missed is 52 healing per tick and thats because of talents not because of a difference in spell power.

---

Q u o t e:
I realize a lot of you are trying to come up with a unified theory of how we scale spell ranks, which is admirable, but the coefficients are correct. We increase the healing per rank by as small an amount as we can get away with because we know spellpower is going to grow so massively.

This is one of the reasons we had to do away with downranking - the base points have less and less effect and the coefficients have a greater and greater effect as your spellpower increases. Going from rank 14 to rank 15 may not be a huge leap in HPS, but going from say 1000 to 2000 spellpower is. Looking at some of the curves you have produced, it's easy to see where the coefficients get nailed. This is also why we just want to have one rank per character level in Cataclysm.

It's totally fair (and appreciated!) to call out when you think you have detected bugs on our part. In this case, however, the numbers appear to be where we want them.

We also totally agree that Gift of the Earth Mother ends up being problematic with regard to GCD lock. We'd love to change it if we could do so without massively nerfing druids.

---

Because you didn't read it when I posted it before, there is no leap in HPS from R14 to R15. R15 ***IS*** R14 with an extra tic. That is the only difference between the two spells.

repost follows:

Nope. R14 is always 56-58 healing per tic behind R15, no matter what spellpower I have (given both cast at the same spellpower).

For giggles max tic of rejuv on LIVE SERVER:

Resto spec, bear gear, TOL (81 SP):



11: 337

12: 361     +7%   

13: 419     +16%

14: 480     +14.5%

15: 537     +12%



Resto spec, resto gear, TOL, procs (2877 SP):



11: 969      

12: 1264     +30%

13: 1775     +40%

14: 2288     +29%

15: 2346     +2.5%

Yep, there's something rotten with R15. Fixing this "bug" will mean my rejuvs should land for almost 3k/tic before raid buffs.

Kinda funny, because fixing the "bug" will actually INCREASE druid healing potential significantly.

I was the first to want to look at how ranks were scaling on the Live build because we didn't have yet access to the PTR.So trying to put in evidence if rank 14 to 15 were outrageously increased compared to other ranks difference, that is my fault, I planted the idea in this thread.

BUT that being said, no one can lose the perspective that druids aren't the only healers in the game.
Their spells have to scale with other healers spells before scaling with other rejuv ranks.
And that was terribly wrong. Rejuv was too present in raids, 18 players at once, it was a disguised AOE heal, I'm sorry.
In TBC Druids rejuv and Priest renew had about the same total amount healed and about the same tick. The advantage for druids was a cheaper mana cost and being able to keep it over 15 players while priest only on 10 players at once (12 with the T5 4 pieces bonus).
But thats it. Rejuv and renew are cousins and should heal for about the same amount on a single target.
Druids can just cast more of them at once for a discounted mana price when compared to priests and the difference ends here, it can not heal for more (like 16% one tick more).

---

Q u o t e:
I realize a lot of you are trying to come up with a unified theory of how we scale spell ranks, which is admirable, but the coefficients are correct. We increase the healing per rank by as small an amount as we can get away with because we know spellpower is going to grow so massively.

This is one of the reasons we had to do away with downranking - the base points have less and less effect and the coefficients have a greater and greater effect as your spellpower increases. Going from rank 14 to rank 15 may not be a huge leap in HPS, but going from say 1000 to 2000 spellpower is. Looking at some of the curves you have produced, it's easy to see where the coefficients get nailed. This is also why we just want to have one rank per character level in Cataclysm.

It's totally fair (and appreciated!) to call out when you think you have detected bugs on our part. In this case, however, the numbers appear to be where we want them.

We also totally agree that Gift of the Earth Mother ends up being problematic with regard to GCD lock. We'd love to change it if we could do so without massively nerfing druids.

---

---

Q u o t e:


Please tell me "It's just kind of the way it [it] works" isn't the end of this.

The tooltip indicates that there should be a pretty significant difference between R14 and R15. The actual results are that no matter what spell power you have it ticks for 58 more at R15.

---

As odd as it seems, that is the case. The difference in spell level is only 5 so rank 14 suffers no down-ranking penalty, and thus spell power scaling is the same as rank 15. So the only difference between the spells is the baseline difference which is static.

(15 tick - 14 tick ) x talents
= (338 - 298) x (1+ 15% + 5% + 10%) x 106% x 104%
= 58

Spell power bonus scaling on both spells is the same.

The jump from rank 14 to 15 is not inline with all of the increases from the ranks before it. 14 to 15 is 3x the typical increase. A 4 tick baseline would have been inline with previous deltas between ranks, which gives credence to bug fix claim.

However, I don't think going back to a 4 tick baseline is a good move in the context of where druid healing has evolved. I already explained why in a previous post. Hopefully the balanced state of the overall performance coupled with how much this will hurt will give the Dev's pause before they implement.

---

Q u o t e:
I realize a lot of you are trying to come up with a unified theory of how we scale spell ranks, which is admirable, but the coefficients are correct.

---

Problem with coefficients here isn't particularly the rank, GC.

When a max rank Rejuv goes from a 15 second HoT to a 12 second HoT, its SP coefficient inherently goes down because the duration of it is the primary factor in determining how much of your SP it benefits from. I mean, you guys designed it this way. I feel like an unbearable prick for repeating this here ;)

Anyways, the issue that people were raising was that when you guys shave 3 seconds off its duration, will you also be slightly buffing the max rank coefficient so that the amount healed per tick is the same as what a 15 second Rejuv would tick for.

People can cope with one less tick per cast. That's not too big a deal, besides maybe rolling Rejuv on one less target overall. The greater issue is if the spell's potency is going eat a nerf as an extension of the duration "fix".

---

Q u o t e:


It's just kind of the way Rejuv works. The base points aren't that great but with a lot of spellpower, it really shines.

With 15 ranks the jump between ranks isn't going to ever be very big. Many other spells scale with rank similarly, which is one of the reasons we want to move to a one rank-per level system (i.e. ranks are kind of dumb).

---

You're talking like you can judge a spell in isolation. You can't, Rejuvenation didn't become a standard in the Druid arsenal until WoTLK. It just wasn't that useful. Justifying a nerf by comparing it to a time when it wasn’t useful is saying, you don't want the spell to be useful. If you want to kill it then DO IT and rebalance or wait until the expansion.


If you want to eliminate it fine. Remove auras from all encounters because if you keep it up no one is going to be able to handle them. Remove the Rejuvenation and Regrowth requirement from Swiftmend and Nourish and change Druids into a Direct Healing class. Then stop claiming you want classes to be unique.

I know its not possible to talk the dev team out of a change/nerf, but I hope you all will pay attention to how this affects druids in PvP. It may not be a huge PvE nerf, but coupled with the changes to lifebloom and its implications on swift mend I am worried about arena.

Right now druids main strengths in arena arent as powerful in the 3v3 and 5v5 brackets, and I feel like by nerfing rejuv and with it swiftmend, it will compound problems.

Can you tell me how much R13 is supposed to be penalized for downranking? It might make this make more sense to me.

I don't think you would be giving out a competetive advantage to us if you told us how this mechanism works at this time, if you haven't done so before.

I guess maybe I've been confused by the tooltips - I never did understand why sometimes it shows that a spell will heal for 1000 and it does, and somtimes it says it will heal for 2000 and it heals for 10,000.