Mar 17th 2008 6:00PM I'm not really sure brook's law really applies. The content packs in WoW are largely independent. You could create an entirely additional content team to craft a set of instances in blades's edge or skettis or something while the current team continues on their merry way polishing up the sunwell stuff.
Sure there's some universal issues like drag as new employees learn the tools, but the communication complexity of a traditional monolithic software development effort don't really apply to adding content without changing the rules.
In short, more manpower could easily produce more content in less time, even if it wouldn't speed it up in the first month or so.
Mar 17th 2008 3:13PM It probably fell "afoul" of the titles rules? I mean, it's asinine, but I'm betting that was it.
Mar 17th 2008 2:57PM Research shows that lifebloom's bloom is actually without any threat. I believed this as well, but lots of experimenting shows it not to be true.
Relying heavily on lifebloom's bloom while party-healing is still a good thing, because it means about half the party healing will not produce healing threat on the resto druid. Relying on the bloom significantly on the tank is only viable when the dungeon is SUPER easy, because the throughput and efficiency of a 3-stacked lifebloom is so much better than letting it bloom.
I agree with you 100% about Prayer of Mending, however, and have no experience with earth shield.
Mar 17th 2008 2:51PM Callandra: Overtaking the tank's threat by a little is often WORSE than overtaking it by a lot. Either way the mob starts taking off, and either way the tank needs to taunt it off you. If she taunts off you for a little heal, more heals will come and the taunt is on cooldown. If she taunts off you after a *big* heal, that's tons of free threat for the tank.
Again, the only cut and dry issue is that it's necessary to *wait* before beginning healing, at least with a larger pull, and that if you can get away with a smaller heal as your initial heal that's a good idea. But often when running without any kind of CC, your first heal is optimally going to be something like a greater heal, because that means it can land *that much later* in the fight.
Mar 17th 2008 2:35AM Silverslide, that's kinda cute, but not what was requested. Your script macro marks the current target with a skull.
What doyesac requested was a macro to target the already skull-marked mob.
I doubt this will ever be possible because it would make some things brainless.
Mar 17th 2008 1:10AM On kilrogg, there are different systems I encounter in different groups.
I prefer discuss, then click need/pass. In my groups greed is essentially pointless, and is sometimes used by enchanters.
Some enchanters always click greed without mentioning. Some warn. Some wait for all to pass.
Some groups are hostile to the discussion and insist that everyone just click *checks watch* i've got badges to get here people!!!
Mar 17th 2008 1:02AM Single best single target healer? Meet paladins.
Mar 17th 2008 12:56AM Speaking as a PVE restoration druid who finds arena spazzy and unpleasant, I use cyclone all the time.
It's a fantastic oh-shit button. I use it to save myself, to save hunters whose traps have failed. I'll cyclone a nasty while the tank is feared, because I can't do jack about fear as a druid. In heroic 5-mans, cyclone is great. It's one of those wild-card saving throw moves that you can use to save the team. It buys enough time for everyone to very easily see the problem and decide what to do about it. Maybe it's useless in raiding. I don't know.
And yeah, I'm a little bummed about the distance reduction. Sometimes i stand way back as a healer, and it will be sad if I try to save someone and can't because .. out of range. But it certainly isn't a huge change for any of the three druid specs.
In fact, I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that this change is pvp-oriented. And I'm going to further guess that it will do little to nothing to address any perceived balance issues. I think the change is inconsequential, and thus pointless churn. But it just doesn't matter enough to get upset.
Mar 17th 2008 12:31AM This article talks about how "big heals" have "more aggro", but it just isn't true. Threat scales with effective healing and ignores overheal, and so healing threat is bounded at the minimum by death and at the maximum by the top of the player's health bars. It doesn't matter at all how "big" your heals are, it just matters where the health of your tank is in the bar. If the tank's health is at the top, you've acquired maximum threat possible. If the tank is 1 hitpoint from dead, you've acquired the minimum.
Of course, letting a tank's health float much below the maximum is an invitation to tank-death, so most healing rotations will push the tank's health toward or completely to full at one time or another, ie. maximum threat.
So we see that the *size* of the heals doesn't really have an effect upon a healer's threat level.
What is something that healers have to consider is when to *push* the tank's health up and when to let up and let it sink for a time. This is a matter of timing. Obviously early in the pull, there has to be some sinking. When adds appear, there will be some sinking. When aggro is solidly established, there should be some health rising. Essentially healing is about the tempo of the fight and knowledge of how your tank applies threat to the total group.
Mar 14th 2008 5:56PM You're probably right, although it wouldn't be such a big deal if wow-related software was properly hosted.
Why don't authors of wow related software simply make a minimal website using Trac or similar to post minimal docs and for people to refer to for downloads? It's really not hard. If you can write an addon you can do this.