Glub, glub, glub! Improve your piscatorial pursuits with this handy macro that will handle equipping your fishing pole, equipping a lure, and casting your line — all in one button! Fish will FEAR you!
You may recall this snippet from my previous article, Living Seed, Replenish, and Gift of the Earthmother:
Unlike other talents that affect casting speed, the reductions from spell haste and GotEM are additive; both values are calculated off a 1.5 second global cooldown and are not applied in any particular order. This means it actually scales better than it would otherwise and, contrary to popular belief, does not scale inversely with haste. Nonetheless, plan to drop one or more points out of this talent as your haste increases.
With the release of Patch 3.08, this is no longer the case. Gift of the Earthmother has been changed so that it’s applied the same way other self-hasting talents are, representing a considerable nerf to its effectiveness. As a point of reference, you now need 655 haste rating (19.98%) to reach the same 1.0 sec GCD you could formerly reach with only 505 haste rating, assuming 5/5 Gift of the Earthmother.
We can adapt the formula provided by Zoltair of Korialstrasz (US) via Elitist Jerks to solve for the amount of haste needed to reach a 1.0 sec GCD at different points in GotEM:
Haste from Gear = (1.5 * (1 – GotEM%) / ((1 + WoAT%) * (1 + Aura%) * (1 + CF%))) – 1
You can use the following JavaScript-driven calculator to determine the necessary haste rating to reach a 1.0 second GCD based on the number of points you have invested in Gift of the Earthmother (and how useful your raidmates are):
Thanks to readers Zoltiar and Trellan of Ravencrest for the heads up on this change and to Zoltair of Korialstrasz (US) for the math!
Related Posts
16 Comments
Trackbacks
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Surely the totem and the auras don’t stack? That would be odd under the new system, to say the least.
Actually, they do. Swift Retribution and Imp. Moonkin Aura are universal haste buffs, while Wrath of Air is pure spell haste and and Windfury Totem and Imp. Icy Talons are pure melee/ranged haste.
@Rawfle: Thank you for the clarification. I actually wasn’t sure WHY they stacked, just knew that they did.
Aaah, thank you Rawfle.
How are you sure that Gotem is applied differently? Since I don’t have a lot of haste I can’t really notice a difference.
Raaffs last blog post..Haste is seldom good (irl)!
Sigh… I just spent all week working out how to get 505 haste without loosing my set bonus *crumples up the bit of paper and starts again*
Riverwishs last blog post..Dead dragons and titles galore!
I’m sorry my very first comment on your blog has to be so inane, but I honestly BURST out laughing when i saw the title of this post.
Brilliance.
-Splintered
Splintereds last blog post..
thanks for this post Phae, this issue was driving me slightly crazy. i had been following the thread in EJ but no one has really picked up on it and the OP in the restoration itemisation thread hasn’t changed his softcap numbers (as yet). i am curious as to how this nerf could occur without the issue making it into the patch notes (as far as i could see) or otherwise being signalled in advance. the change means that you need about another 140 haste to achieve 1 sec GCD with wrath of air and improved moonkin aura – seems to me to be reasonably significant.
Quick correction: Since Patch 3.0.3, WT/IIT no longer give ranged haste, just melee. Sorry Hunters.
I’m glad for this quick write up, so many druids didn’t seem to know what was going on with this – also your JavaScript-driven calculator is very nice. GG Phae!
I thought I was going crazy. I kept running into the GC when casting lifeblooms and couldn’t figure out why. I got used to just knowing by instinct how often I could cast and suddenly I was just a bit off. This explains it.
Dysmorphias last blog post..Excerpt from today’s Darrowmere Herald Tribune Daily Globe
@Raaff: I am sure because … it was posted on Elitist Jerks by people who are sure.
@Riverwish: I know, right? I just redid the direct healing numbers using 505 as the haste target. Phooey.
@Splintered: Hehe, why thank you.
Bel: I actually only became aware of the change because a couple of readers and commenters pointed it out. I wish I had more time to follow the EJ forums!
@Rawfle: Poor Hunters. T_T
@Kirkie: I’m so glad it’s useful! The numbers were already published, but I thought it might be helpful to have a generator for the various levels of talent investment others might have made.
@Dysmorphia: Good to have some observational confirmation that this is true.
Hey, this is really handy. I actually had a similar idea when the tables came out, and made an excel file calculator, but to slightly different ends. Mine tells you your current GCD based on talents, buffs and haste from gear, as opposed to telling you how much haste you need to get to the 1s GCD.
Not sure if this would be useful or helpful, but I’ve hosted it on google.doc (since I don’t know how to write Java apps), and if it IS useful, I don’t mind if someone wants to adapt it to be more user friendly.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p31vFPVQYwBkkkc–uNe2JA
You have to hit edit at the bottom of the page to be able to enter numbers.
edit to say that I’ve used the new numbers in my formulas, since they changed recently-ish
This is actually really useful – thanks for this!
Is it still current and user friendly?
I somehow managed to get up to 740 Haste without trying, and even with scrapping all haste enchants and gems – I am still languishing on 723
Not to distract from your information, but this is confuddling to me. Everyone on the druid forums just touts that with CF and GOTEM you should see 735 haste on your character sheet? Are they just dead wrong?
@Terrorpaw: This information is vastly outdated. Notice that the article indicates patch 3.0.8 while the current version is 3.3. The amount of haste needed for resto druids to reach 1 second GCD has been shuffled considerably. I’ve been poking around on this site and I find it likely that much of the information here might be outdated.