View Single Post

cs_zoltan's Avatar

01.22.2015 , 12:17 PM | #103
Also I had to repeat everything i said because you ignored it very time.
But if you don't believe me I hope you believe KBN who is know for his precise theorycrafting:
Quote: Originally Posted by KeyboardNinja View Post
Kym is not wrong that Alacrity produces more consistent results for all healers, including scoundrels/operatives. Whether or not you're using instant-cast abilities is completely irrelevant. 1% of alacrity is, very directly, 1% more healing done. It is always 1% more healing done barring lag and player error. Surge is variable in that it raises the standard deviation on your healing output and makes individual heals (most noticeably, big heals) more RNG-dependent.

Also remember that the rate of return on surge drops into the toilet as you start exceeding the 300-400 mark. Alacrity simply provides better HPS returns, point-for-point, than surge does once you start getting to those relative levels (i.e. when surge is around 400 and alacrity is around 100). Better HPS return means higher ceiling on your potential healing output, and since alacrity is providing that HPS in a controlled fashion, a skilled healer will be able to convert 100% of that HPS into eHPS.

This is completely ignoring the most significant factor of alacrity though, which is that it improves the responsiveness of your heals. Being able to do more things faster as a healer means that you can target swap at tighter intervals, shorten your response times to damage, and contract your burst window when needed. This is an ancillary benefit to alacrity that DPS do not get. Thus, alacrity is a fantastic stat on paper when you measure increasing HPS. It's a nearly god-like stat in practice when you combine that with the added control.

Putting it plainly, if you're running a low-alacrity build as a healer, you're doing it wrong. The only exception is if you have an absolutely wretched internet connection and your lag is variable and extreme, since that will wash out any benefits from the time shortening. I highly recommend no less than a 50/50 alacrity-to-surge ratio. Running even more alacrity than this ratio (i.e. a 75/25 ratio) would not be harmful. Crit is to taste, certainly, though I wouldn't go much above 400 (even as a scoundrel), and certainly not above 500.


Countering the OP's points more directly… The implication is that alacrity is all about regenerating energy. This makes absolutely zero sense, since alacrity reduces your cast times and GCD duration by exactly the same amount as it increases your regeneration. Thus, the two are in balance. Alacrity is simply a "do everything the same, but faster" stat.

Additionally, the argument has been raised that it's not really practical to get enough alacrity to make a difference on instant cast timings. This argument is based on the fallacy of perception. Sure, you're not fitting in an "extra" GCD in any short time window, but alacrity isn't about fitting in extra GCDs, it's just about doing everything faster. Think about it. This argument is analogous to claiming that power is useless because it would require an impractical amount to double the value of Underworld Medicine. It's not about doubling up; it's about small incremental gains and optimizing those gains.

Alacrity is one of the best stats in the game right now, and the only reason it isn't used more heavily by DPS is because they are constrained to spend a minimum of 6 item slots on accuracy, leaving them so little stat room that surge (with its excellent low-pool rate of returns) plays the dominate role. Healers have no such constraints, and they get additional benefits out of alacrity (i.e. responsiveness and control). There is absolutely no reason to under-stat on alacrity.