Healer gear

[Kincaide]

Why should I take the time to write up some big shot argumen

Because that's the only way anyone will ever take you seriously.

OK clearly Goesid is only here to troll, and has admitted that he isn't capable of making a rational argument in favor of his opinion, so if anyone else wants to actually make a real argument based on real, shown and compiled data like I did then I look forward to reading it.

But you sir, need to sit down or walk out. You have nothing.

 

[Dramatized]

Before you walk into a long thread and make snide irrelevant remarks, you probably ought to take the time to actually read the thread so you know what you're talking about.

Nowhere did I say that an additional 230-360hp is going to save you in all situations from all threats. Anyone would have to be stupid to believe that's what I was saying. What I said, very specifically, was that that additional stamina would make a difference, in terms of survival or deterrence, in statistically far more situations than the number of times a healer misses a critical heal that would have changed the outcome of the game by less than one tenth of one second.

all 24s/20 hunters two shots you, 200 hp wont make any difference. you can dress up your words and sentences as fancy as you want but it wont make you look less pathetic. are you the 20-24 bracket's mocha by any chance?

this all leads me to think that your healing play is subpar and that you need that extra stamina because of your inabilty to fake cast fast enough or to position yourself decently.

The statistical probability of my surviving an attack long enough to bubble or heal because I had an additional 230-360hp happens on the order of several times per game. The statistical probability of my saving myself or a teammate because I had a heal land 1/20th of one second sooner, where other factors like reaction time and latency have a greater delay and make a larger difference, would be measured on the order of a few times per year.

you're talking about "statstical probability" and are you aware of that it's pvp we're speaking of? not your dps on a dummy-doll. i could replace your "230-360hp" with haste and argue that the extra haste would save x many players in my team.

If you're so disinterested in the actual conversation that you don't even bother to understand the fundamental arguments being made, then maybe you'd be better off going and trolling another thread where the intelligent people aren't having a grown-up conversation.

whoa, is it 3 people who disagree with you in this thread that you have dismissed as "trolls" now? cool man, still waiting for broken to remove goesid's "troll posts".

 

[Mesikämmen]

The statistical probability of my saving myself or a teammate because I had a heal land 1/20th of one second sooner, where other factors like reaction time and latency have a greater delay and make a larger difference, would be measured on the order of a few times per year.

You seem like a smart guy, but seriously where the hell are you pulling this from?

 

[Goesid]

Because that's the only way anyone will ever take you seriously.

OK clearly Goesid is only here to troll, and has admitted that he isn't capable of making a rational argument in favor of his opinion, so if anyone else wants to actually make a real argument based on real, shown and compiled data like I did then I look forward to reading it.

But you sir, need to sit down or walk out. You have nothing.

You think people take you seriously?
Provide faulty information to supply your argument?
When shown wrong you blame others.


Everybody reading Kincaide is only here to troll and has adimitted incapable of taking fault in such cases proven wrong.

You have no right to talk down to me when you are doing nothing constructive here yourself.

 

[Kincaide]

You're just further cementing the proof that you don't understand the fundamental argument being discussed here. There are plenty of people who hold a different opinion from mine, AND there also happen to be two (where did you get three? I count you and Goesid, that's two) trolls who also think it's cute to try to take advantage of someone arguing the less popular opinion.

I'll say the same thing to you I did to Goesid. Your grade-school level ad hominem attacks are woefully insufficient in an actual intellectual conversation, and if you're capable of making a rational, fully supported argument, as Goesid was not, then I look forward to reading it. Otherwise though you're just increasing the noise level.

 

[Srs]

When men are the most sure and arrogant they are commonly the most mistaken, giving views to passion without that proper deliberation and suspense which alone can secure them from the grossest absurdities.


David Hume (1711 - 1776)

 

[Kincaide]

You seem like a smart guy, but seriously where the hell are you pulling this from?

I don't think most people truly understand just how incredibly small a span of time six one-hundredths of one second is. I could go even farther and make the argument that the number of times that a cast completing in six one-hundredths of one second actually making a difference in a year is ZERO, because reaction time and latency are slower than this, but then even more people who don't understand statistical significance would be all over me, and frankly I have enough of a headache dealing with the usual snarky trolls.

 

[Goesid]

You're just further cementing the proof that you don't understand the fundamental argument being discussed here. There are plenty of people who hold a different opinion from mine, AND there also happen to be two (where did you get three? I count you and Goesid, that's two) trolls who also think it's cute to try to take advantage of someone arguing the less popular opinion.

I'll say the same thing to you I did to Goesid. Your grade-school level ad hominem attacks are woefully insufficient in an actual intellectual conversation, and if you're capable of making a rational, fully supported argument, as Goesid was not, then I look forward to reading it. Otherwise though you're just increasing the noise level.

We can't help you until you admit you are wrong

 

[Kincaide]

When men are the most sure and arrogant they are commonly the most mistaken, giving views to passion without that proper deliberation and suspense which alone can secure them from the grossest absurdities.


David Hume (1711 - 1776)

Thank you, that says better what I've been trying to say about proper support in an argument than I was able to.

 

[Kincaide]

We can't help you until you admit you are wrong

God what do they teach you children in grade school these days? Even if I were inaccurate in my calculations by a couple of stamina points (Edit: which you still haven't even sufficiently proved), that doesn't cause my entire argument to collapse and become "wrong". Do you really understand even the first thing about making rational arguments?

I have repeatedly invited actual debate with actual fully supported data, and you have repeatedly dodged it and shot off wisecracks from a safe distance. You hav no idea what you're doing. You're a troll.

 

[Srs]

Thank you, that says better what I've been trying to say about proper support in an argument than I was able to.

It goes for women too.

 

[Hashbrowns]

Lol at all this.

I want to write something but it's just a rehash of everything I wrote on page 8 that got buried in 4 pages of "my way is better cause I want it to be" (from both sides)
And be nice to [MENTION=8138]Kincaide[/MENTION].

 

[Goesid]

God what do they teach you children in grade school these days? Even if I were inaccurate in my calculations by a couple of stamina points (Edit: which you still haven't even sufficiently proved), that doesn't cause my entire argument to collapse and become "wrong". Do you really understand even the first thing about making rational arguments?

I have repeatedly invited actual debate with actual fully supported data, and you have repeatedly dodged it and shot off wisecracks from a safe distance. You hav no idea what you're doing. You're a troll.

You were proven wrong and instead of admitting fault you blamed Lil who had no part in this. I do not wish to get engaged in an argument with you because I fear it would never end you would just blame lost land on others. How is in your face and getting called on it from a safe distance?

Yes, I do not agree with you and for that I am a troll. Now we are getting somewhere.

 

[Mesikämmen]

I don't think most people truly understand just how incredibly small a span of time six one-hundredths of one second is. I could go even farther and make the argument that the number of times that a cast completing in six one-hundredths of one second actually making a difference in a year is ZERO, because reaction time and latency are slower than this, but then even more people who don't understand statistical significance would be all over me, and frankly I have enough of a headache dealing with the usual snarky trolls.

If they're trolls, why don't you just stop feeding them then?

Obviously 0,06sec is a small time. Now multiply it by 1000 globals / flash heal casts (which i'd imagine you could pull in a 20min bg if it's an intensive one and you use healhut/manapots/spirit gear to your benefit), and you just "gained" an additional minute of casting. On top of that you'll find it easier to get heals in before your target dies.

I don't see how latency or reaction time would cancel out hastes benefits. Even if you had a reaction time of 1 second between seeing someone low health and healing him, the cast will be 0,06sec faster, thus increasing the chances that your target will live until you land your heal. Hell, I'd even say that a slow reaction time or latency makes haste more valuable, since you'll probably have more problems getting the heal in before your teammate dies

Also have to repeat my question: where the hell did you get this from?
"The statistical probability of me saving myself or a teammate because I had a heal land 1/20th of one second sooner, where other factors like reaction time and latency have a greater delay and make a larger difference, would be measured on the order of a few times per year.

 

[Kincaide]

Well, another healthy debate grinds to a standstill by a clueless troll who doesn't understand the first thing about making and supporting an argument. It's people like you, with your insistence upon rendering every valuable thread worthless, that are the ultimate demise of what was once a vibrant place to learn and discuss. I truly pity you, if you think that claiming (without sufficient evidence) the slightest discrepancy is one tiny part of a calculation renders that person's entire argument "wrong". I wish people like you would keep your mouth shut until you've reached a level of education where you actually understand debate and logical argument, but I don't have the option of preventing the ignorant from speaking, nor will the moderators do their jobs and prevent the trollers from trolling.

 

[Kincaide]

Obviously 0,06sec is a small time. Now multiply it by 1000 globals / flash heal casts (which i'd imagine you could pull in a 20min bg if it's an intensive one and you use healhut/manapots/spirit gear to your benefit), and you just "gained" an additional minute of casting.

I appreciate you re-injecting actual math into the conversation, but unfortunately your math is flawed. 1000 globals time 1.5sec per global is 25 minutes. A battleground is 20 minutes long, so even if you were standing perfectly still and doing absolutely nothing but chain casting for the whole battleground, then your time gained would be 40 seconds. But why even talk about such a completely unrealistic scenario? This point was addressed like back on page 2. You can't chain-cast for more than ~30 seconds before going OOM, and obviously the time advantage of .06s per cast ends when you have to stop casting for any reason, so let's look at it in 30-second chunks. 30 seconds is 20 globals, and over those 20 globals at .06s per global you gain 1.2 seconds... or not even one additional cast. All of this has already been said in this thread.[/quote]

Even if you had a reaction time of 1 second between seeing someone low health and healing him, the cast will be 0,06sec faster, thus increasing the chances that your target will live until you land your heal.

Again, this is repeating what's already in the thread, but, the only situation in which that .06s would matter were the situations when the target dies without the .06s gain in speed, but lives with the .06s gain in speed. When a person truly understands how small an amount of time /06s is, it's not hard to understand how EXTREMELY unlikely it is that a heal is going to land right in that critical <.06s window. Imagine that your loved one was being held at knife point by an intruder, and you have a pistol, and they are using your loved one as a human shield, and you know that at some point, you are going to have a window of opportunity six hundredths of one second wide in which to shoot the the intruder. Considering your body's reaction time, bullet travel time (latency), how often do you think you would hit that window? Would you take that shot?

 

[Mesikämmen]

Again, this is repeating what's already in the thread, but, the only situation in which that .06s would matter were the situations when the target dies without the .06s gain in speed, but lives with the .06s gain in speed. When a person truly understands how small an amount of time /06s is, it's not hard to understand how EXTREMELY unlikely it is that a heal is going to land right in that critical <.06s window. Imagine that your loved one was being held at knife point by an intruder, and you have a pistol, and they are using your loved one as a human shield, and you know that at some point, you are going to have a window of opportunity six hundredths of one second wide in which to shoot the the intruder. Considering your body's reaction time, bullet travel time (latency), how often do you think you would hit that window? Would you take that shot?

You're right about the my calculations being wrong, my bad. Point still stands though, however little 0,06sec sounds, over time it will stack and grant you quite a bit of extra healing. On top of that you have faster cast times which help you get heal in before your teammate dies. I still don't get this "0,06 seconds is so short that it'll never make or break whether your heal target dies or lives". From my experience this happens every bg a couple of times, you actually get your castbar to finish but your target dies the exact moment your castbar is finished. 0,06 seconds should be just enough to land the heal before he dies. Mind you that 100hp is not even half of a crit from any class, so we're not talking about a very big effect on using stam pieces over haste pieces either...

Your parable however is so far-fetched that I'm not even going to bother replying to it.

 

[Kincaide]

You're right about the my calculations being wrong, my bad. Point still stands though, however little 0,06sec sounds, over time it will stack and grant you quite a bit of extra healing. On top of that you have faster cast times which help you get heal in before your teammate dies. I still don't get this "0,06 seconds is so short that it'll never make or break whether your heal target dies or lives". From my experience this happens every bg a couple of times, you actually get your castbar to finish but your target dies the exact moment your castbar is finished. 0,06 seconds should be just enough to land the heal before he dies. Mind you that 100hp is not even half of a crit from any class, so we're not talking about a very big effect on using stam pieces over haste pieces either...

Your parable however is so far-fetched that I'm not even going to bother replying to it.

It's really not, though. The times that you perceive your cast bar finishing but the target dies anyway are attributed to latency normalization, which fluctuates greater than the different in cast time that 20 haste makes. It is a flaw of human perception that they know that they have an additional .06s per cast, and believe that therefore every time a heal barely lands, it must be attributable to that extra .06s and not a multitude of other factors that make a much greater difference than that haste.

Additionally, don't keep repeating that 100hp propaganda that that troll put out there, it's a gearing difference of approximately 230 to 360hp. If I as a rogue see one character at 1600 health, and another at 1960 health, who do you think I would try to ambush? Especially if one also has a ~750hp bubble on?

I appreciate the fact that we're at least back to debating the relative merits of 360hp increased survivability vs 6/100ths of a second of increased latency compensation, but again as I've said, this is a rehash and a repeat of what's already been said in the thread. Most people have fallen quiet because they have already decided which way is the better way for them personally. Neither side is WRONG, just one sees the benefit of marginally increased survivability and the other sees the benefit of marginally increased cast time. We could debate all night over how significant 360hp is, or how significant .06s is, but we've for certain reached a point where no one's mind is going to be changed, so let's talk about something else.

 

[Goesid]

It's really not, though. The times that you perceive your cast bar finishing but the target dies anyway are attributed to latency normalization, which fluctuates greater than the different in cast time that 20 haste makes. It is a flaw of human perception that they know that they have an additional .06s per cast, and believe that therefore every time a heal barely lands, it must be attributable to that extra .06s and not a multitude of other factors that make a much greater difference than that haste.

Additionally, don't keep repeating that 100hp propaganda that that troll put out there, it's a gearing difference of approximately 230 to 360hp. If I as a rogue see one character at 1600 health, and another at 1960 health, who do you think I would try to ambush? Especially if one also has a ~750hp bubble on?

I appreciate the fact that we're at least back to debating the relative merits of 360hp increased survivability vs 6/100ths of a second of increased latency compensation, but again as I've said, this is a rehash and a repeat of what's already been said in the thread. Most people have fallen quiet because they have already decided which way is the better way for them personally. Neither side is WRONG, just one sees the benefit of marginally increased survivability and the other sees the benefit of marginally increased cast time. We could debate all night over how significant 360hp is, or how significant .06s is, but we've for certain reached a point where no one's mind is going to be changed, so let's talk about something else.

Where are you getting 360 hp from?
Are you healing in bear form?
belt difference is 6 and 12 where haste is 6 stam
cloak is 4 and 8 haste being 4
mace + oh and staff are on par or mace and tome falls behind with 1 stam I'm not 100%
But I do know that 10-11 stam is not gonna give you 360 hp

 

[Palonabanana]

In my experience, saving someone by landing a heal 0,05s sooner happens sometimes but not frequently enough to be the core part of the argument. What usually happens looks a little bit different. I often find myself in a middle of a larger fight, where my teammates (including myself) are being dpsed by a number of enemies. The enemies are not particularly coordinated, nor really bursty, but still, despite my best efforts, the health bars are falling. I simply can't keep up with the stream of incoming damage, there's not enough healing throughput, and my mates are dying one by one.

It's not 5.1 anymore where a single heal could top up a player. The damage is higher now, and battle fatigue ensures you actually need 4-5 casts to get someone to full health. Throughput matters, if you find yourself trying to heal 3 people at the same time, including yourself.

Of course, I still should replace my shoulders with MM.