Replenishment: What are the odds?
There was a recent flurry of interest surrounding the Replenishment mechanic due to Ghostcrawler's statement that "we assume that you have Replenishment available to your raid." He said that it doesn't mean raids will be undoable without it, but that they're tuned assuming you have it, and if you don't, you'll need to out-gear or out-skill the raid, or else you'll have problems.
In this post, I'd like to look at just how easy it is to get Replenishment in your raid. There are three Replenishment specs: Retribution Paladin, Shadow Priest, and Survival Hunter. As you can see, they're all DPS specs. Historically speaking, these specs were probably selected because they had been viewed as suboptimal for raiding (in the case of Survival and Ret), or because they had been valued for their mana regeneration (in the case of Shadow), although at the moment all three of these specs have competitive DPS and don't really need group utility to prop them up.
Unfortunately, GC never clarified whether he was talking about 10- or 25-person raiding, so I'll examine both. I will make the simplifying assumption that the 30 specs are equally distributed in the raiding population: any given character is 1/30 likely to be of any given spec. Put another way, each spec enjoys a 3.3% share of the character base. I know this is not actually true, but it's a very helpful simplification and I don't think it will distort my numbers too much. Edit: Yes, I'm also assuming every Survival, Shadow, and Retribution raider has the relevant Replenishment talents. I think this is a pretty safe assumption.
In a 10-man raid, you have six DPS slots (or five, depending on how many healers you're running with). Three specs can provide Replenishment, out of 21 DPS specs (I'm assuming Feral druids, and all death knights, are equally likely to be DPS as tanks). If DPS players are randomly selected, then, the odds of zero out of six DPS providing Replenishment are (18/21)^6 = 39.7%. In other words, you're only 60% likely to wind up with Replenishment in your 10-man.
But maybe Ghostcrawler was just talking about 25-man raids. What do the odds look like there? Let's say you have 3 tanks, 7 healers, and 15 DPS. The same 21 DPS specs exist, and the same 18 of them don't give Replenishment. The chance of not having Replenishment with 15 DPSers is then (18/21)^15 = 9.9%, so you're about 90% likely to have Replenishment in a randomly assorted 25-man. This number is high enough that it makes sense to start talking about assuming a raid has Replenishment, and of course it's always possible to purposely select a shadow priest, ret pally, or survival hunter.
Still, it does partially do away with the notion of "bring the player, not the class." Consider that each class has three specs, and there are three specs that have Replenishment. Numbers wise, then, saying "Replenishment is mandatory" is not really any better than saying "rogues are mandatory." If there was some mandatory rogue function, all 3 rogue specs would provide it; all 3 Replenishment specs provide Replenishment. When you're putting your raid together, there's a similar constraint: have one DPS slot left, and no Replenishment yet? It's going to the Replenisher, just like it would have to go to the rogue if rogues were mandatory.
Aside from Razuvius in heroic Naxx (where priests are required, for mind control purposes), I don't think there's any other part of the current raiding game where it is assumed that you will have at least one of three particular specs in your raid. Debuff types (poison, disease, magic, curse) are typically dispellable by two classes, and any spec of those classes can do the job (with the exception of feral druids). I think upping Replenishment to being provided by six specs would be a big step towards making something that's supposed to be mandatory easier to access.
There's no particular reason it has to be a DPS class, either. Healing classes are the ones that worry most about running OOM; maybe Blizz doesn't want to make it harder for them to do that, but I'd certainly appreciate Replenishment on my priest. Paladin tanks also use mana. Let's imagine Replenishment is given to three additional specs, healers and/or DPS. There are 26 non-tank specs (again counting Ferals, and each DK tree, as 0.5). The odds then work out to (20/26)^8 = 12.3% likely not to have Replenishment in a 10-man (with 2 tanks), and (20/26)^22 = 0.3% likely not to have it in a 25-man with 3 tanks, a small enough number that you can pretty much write it off completely.
Of course, this analysis goes out the window somewhat when dual-spec comes along; if every hunter, priest, and paladin sets their Replenishment spec as one of their two specs, your raid is again almost guaranteed to have access to the buff. But then they have to gear for the Replenishment spec, and that may not be the spec they wanted for PvP/soloing, and so forth. It's probably to soon to predict what all the social ramifications of dual-spec will be. For now, if they're going to assume every raid has Replenishment, they need to give it to more players.
Filed under: Hunter, Paladin, Priest, Analysis / Opinion, Raiding, Classes






Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Kvothe Feb 3rd 2009 8:09PM
Every raid I go to has a 100 percent chance at replenishment, because I'm always there. Your math is faulty!
my2cents Feb 3rd 2009 10:45PM
Yay, me too!
About "bring the player, not the class," the idea was never that you can completely throw together a raid at random with no thought to what buffs/debuffs you're bringing. Nor was it that there would be no such thing as a "mandatory" buff.
The idea was that no single spec should offer a buff/debuff that only they can offer and that is so important as to guarantee them a raid spot. In other words, there will still be borderline mandatory buffs/debuffs, but they should not be offered by only one spec.
There's still the issue of heroism and imp scorch, but otherwise this philosophy has been implemented pretty well. GC must really regret ever saying "bring the player, not the class" seeing as it gets quoted out of context over and over on a regular basis.
M Feb 4th 2009 10:50AM
Isn't there a limit of 10 people that Replenishment can affect? Or am I remembering something incorrectly?
If that is so, you'd need at least 2 raiders that can provide Replenishment per 25-man.
Hobbes Feb 3rd 2009 8:10PM
If you make replenishment so common that 99.7% of random 25-man raids have it, what's the point of the buff in the first place? You may as well remove it from the game and bake it into the mana regeneration mechanics.
I like the idea that raid leaders have to be kind of selective about the class makeup. They can bring a shadowpriest for replenishment, or a rogue for higher DPS. I'm assuming, of course, that Blizzard makes good on its promise to make pure-DPS classes do a bit more than hybrids in challenging endgame content.
Dave Feb 4th 2009 12:19AM
The point, essentially, is that any changes to the base mana/health regeneration system would have drastic effects on PVP. This, combined with the increasing desire to eliminate the necessity of consumables in raids with the 1-pot per fight (so no chain chugging mana pots every fight) means that something has to exist to fill the gap between start to OOM. They can't make the bosses have less HP or take less time to defeat since it still needs to be tuned to have undergeared groups or uncoordinated groups hit an enrage timer.
So, replenishment exists as a decent way to keep casters from running out of mana while in a fight but not in a totally unbalancing way.
Also, as a Hunter I haven't seen a single rogue out DPS me in this expansion so far. Ever. If you want the best of everything a Survival Hunter is going to get you a lot of great utility with misdirects and replenishment as well as top tier DPS. Same goes for a Ret Paladin which I've seen top the DPS charts often enough too. It's not that you're sacrificing anything at all bringing these guys, you're really sacrificing more by NOT bringing them if you want to bring a Rogue instead. Unfortunately, Rogues pretty much are crap right now for anything except just standing around and stabbing things now that Sap is all but useless in most instances.
Malkavos Feb 4th 2009 10:40AM
As a rogue, it pains me, but I have to agree with you. Combat specced in heroic/10 man gear, I am thrilled when I top 3000 DPS in a single target fight, and that pretty much only happens in the more buff friendly world of 25 mans, which I pug when I can. Several other class/specs, some of whom offer replenishment, can blow those numbers away with relative ease and under a wider array of conditions.
With the limited amount of group buffs available from rogues, our DPS needs to be much more compelling to justify our raid spots. Luckily, there has already been much discussion on the development side of upcoming buffs for rogues, so I can sit back and keep hoping.
Wurzmychiken Feb 3rd 2009 8:11PM
I never run with Replenishment in my raids, only times I have were on random pug 25 mans on my server, and it didn't seem to make too much of a difference anyways. Maybe I wasn't paying attention to it.
expat28 Feb 3rd 2009 8:12PM
I'm guessing the answer is no - but is there some advantage to including all three (Ret, Shadow, SV) in a raid?
Arrowsmith Feb 4th 2009 10:20AM
I did a Naxx-25 last night with a Surv Hunter and a Shadow Priest. Hunting Party and Vampiric Touch did in fact stack, and my MM Hunter never dipped below 90% mana. It kicked ass.
emptyrepublic Feb 3rd 2009 8:13PM
I don't mean to quibble too much but I think there is a serious flaw in your math. In order for your numbers to work one has to assume when a player picks a class and a spec it is done randomly assuming standard laws of probability with no influence of personal preference or preferences of the community. This, of course, is far from the case. Players are going to choose classes/specs that maximize their perceived utility (i.e. what will give them the most enjoyment). This is not an easily quantifiable variable.
I'm not a hard-core stat major, but I've done enough quantitative analysis to know that you are making assumptions on the game's population that are clearly not reflected in reality.
Obvi Feb 3rd 2009 8:21PM
Good job summarizing paragraph #3.
krizzlybear Feb 3rd 2009 8:26PM
Agreed. The fault in the logic here is the class and spec population distribution, which varies between both factions and servers, not to mention the assumption that players who spend talent points in those particular trees actually use those spells or invest talent points to obtain them in the first place.
isaac.cajina Feb 3rd 2009 11:51PM
The other thing to consider is that Ret Paladins and Shadow Priests dominate the rankings at TalentChic. Hunters, as a class with 3 DPS specs (and valuable buffs in each tree) are going to focus more on perceived utility in deciding what to be.
While the analysis is solid napkin math, it's not much more than that.
emptyrepublic Feb 3rd 2009 8:31PM
Well egg on my face for missing that line by reading too fast.
I still maintain though that it's too large of an assumption to be making for this argument. I'm not asking the author to do this, but there probably is enough information out there available to the public to allow someone to make a sufficiently through analysis of the character population to determine how likely it is to have at least one character with replenishment.
That's probably more math than anyone would care to do and I wouldn't blame them. In the end the simplest solution (which people do) is to say, "LFM - DPS that has replenishment buff, for Naxx".
Kakistocracy Feb 3rd 2009 8:38PM
Also, is that assuming that each tree is a spec, so 10 classes times 3 trees per class equals 30 classes? Because mages seem to have four, frost, fire, frostfire, and arcane. and it's my understanding that DKs have specs for deep into each of the trees as well as a duel wield spec which involves a certain degree of hybridization to grab the tastier dw talents. Those are the only classes I am currently raiding with, so maybe there are a few trees that are unable to support a spec, or maybe there are well over 30 total specs.
Mr Magoo Feb 3rd 2009 9:00PM
While the article pays lip service to the fact that the entire article is a waste of time, it does still go on to post itself. :)
Hence the comment "Good job summarizing paragraph #3." is a little rough and short sighted.
This article is complete rubbish because the assumptions in it are rubbish. It even says so, although not strongly enough.
What is worse is that there are websites that allow you top use the REAL CLASS DISTRIBUTION and not phoney and exceptionally naive numbers to calculate.
If I was not the busy person I am, I would bother to run the numbers ith this data.
Eliah Hecht Feb 3rd 2009 9:01PM
If anyone points me to a website that has accurate, reliable information on spec distribution, I'd be happy to run the numbers with that data. I have not yet seen any such site.
Mr Magoo Feb 4th 2009 8:02PM
For all servers: http://www.warcraftrealms.com/census.php?serverid=-1&factionid=-1&minlevel=10&maxlevel=80&servertypeid=2
All there in bar graphs no less. Yes it is a self submit census, but there is no bias in that the /who they use to take the census has no opt-out for those online. I am sure you could find niggles and small holes in the sampling method that would increase the error by 5% or so.
Does not matter thought because it is 1000% better than 1/30?!?
ZIngy Feb 3rd 2009 8:20PM
Not sure if you did or not, but did you take into account that you'd have to have 2-3 replenishment classes running in a 25 man for every mana user to get the buff? All of the spells that grant replenishment say "up to ten" party or raid members.
Graargh Feb 3rd 2009 8:32PM
That's not how it works. It always targets the 10 raid members with the lowest percentage of mana remaning. Having two members in the raid whose Replenishment fires at the same time will just waste one of them. It still only affects the 10 players who need it most. And the proc rate of the ability is high enough that it'll pretty much stay up all the time, even with only one player having it.