3.3 PTR Rejuv change

We don't want rank 15 to have that extra tick. It is technically a bug in that we didn't intend for it to have that behavior, but obviously we sat on the change for awhile. However since the popular Resto style has now become Rejuv on as many people as possible, we thought the extra tick had become problematic. Frankly we think druids can absorb the small nerf without hurting their overall healing much.

We're not trying to hide a nerf, and we can certainly change the patch note to not say bug fix if that makes it go down any easier.

We'll look into any discrepancy in numbers between rank 14 and 15 and make sure things are working as intended.

Q u o t e:
Thanks for the response to this. I'm ok with the duration nerf, and even the healing reduction. But I have a hard time accepting the fact that my rank 14 heals for only 290 less over the duration of the spell than rank 15 does.

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).

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:
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.

Brayne, your screenshots appear to show that the base points improve but that that the coefficient does not increase between rank 14 and 15. Correct? That is exactly how it works. The gain in points between rank 14 and 15 is 40% and goes up to about 52.5% with talents. The coefficient is 0.376 for both ranks, and in fact all ranks. You just suffer a coefficient penalty when you downrank (that probably isn't even needed any longer).

Q u o t e:
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.

The max rank coefficient is correct for a 12 second spell. The error was that the spell was 15 sec long. It was an unintended buff to the max rank. We sat on it for awhile, but decided it was time to make the change. The coefficient is 0.376 on live and will be 0.376 in 3.3.

Q u o t e:
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.

Tealeaf, here is the formula for coefficient penalty for all spells that has been in effect for all of LK:

If caster level is less than max caster level, then the penalty = 1.0.
If caster level is at or greater than max caster level, then the penalty = (22 + max level - caster level) / 20.
The penalty is capped at 0. Max caster level per spell is also pretty inconsistent, but it's around 4 levels higher than the level at which you get the spell.

Basically, once the caster is 3 levels higher than the max cast level of the spell, the standard coefficient of the spell is multiplied by that penalty (losing 5% of the coefficient per level), with the coefficient reaching zero when the player is 22 levels higher than the max cast level.

For Rejuv, this makes the following table of coefficients for a level 80 player:

Rank 15: 0.376
Rank 14: 0.376
Rank 13: 0.376*0.75=0.282
Rank 12: 0.376*0.5=0.188
Rank 11: 0.376*0.35=0.1316
Rank 10: 0.376*0.25=0.094
Rank 9: 0.376*0=0
Rank 8 and lower: 0

As I said, the penalty is kind of an anachronism since the ranks all cost the same amount of mana now, but I can understand why you all might have expected rank 15 to jump in coefficient.

Q u o t e:
Q u o t e:
This is also why we just want to have one rank per character level in Cataclysm.


Huh? I thought it was [going to be] one rank per spell. Could you elaborate, if this isn't too much of a sidetrack?

Essentially there will be no ranks. Instead your spell will just grow every time you gain a level. The biggest difference you will notice is not having to train say rank 16 of Rejuv. Your spellbook would just say "Rejuvenation."

Q u o t e:
Where i think there is concern is that because the base value from rank 14 to 15 changes so little... that no matter what spellpower you have, the difference in output between rank 14 and 15 is tiny (58 healing per tick according to previous posts)

That begs the question, why bother having rank 15 at all. If you include a new rank, people will expect it to be better than the previous rank, and preferable following the pattern of improvement of all previous ranks.

It is better, it's just not better by much. The ranks grow very slowly as you approach max level in order to act as a brake for players gaining so much power through gear. Again, this is why we think ranks are just an outdated concept. You get a new rank but don't see a big improvement.

Q u o t e:
It seems from the way GC laid out his example (i'm almost restating it in different words) that the design forward they want one rank of spells that scales with gear (mostly spellpower). This is interesting but scary too in that a level 75 caster does the same damage/healing as a level 80 caster in the same gear

Base points can still increase. In fact they will increase every level instead of in big chunks.

Assume for the moment you get Rejuv at level 1 instead of level 4. Then imagine there are 85 ranks of Rejuv and you get a new rank automatically whenever you ding without visiting your trainer. It isn't a huge change conceptually, except that your level 79 Rejuvs would be buffed relative to what they are now. Mostly if just gets players to focus less on rank and more on player level (and then ultimately talents, glyphs and gear).

Q u o t e:
Any chance of having all abilities just have 1 rank and scale with level? IE.. You gain rejuvenation at level 4 and from then on it goes up each level. Kind of like the BoA items?

The chance is 100% in fact. :)

But not for 3.3.