Hhp and (e)Hps

90 Draenei Shaman
16765
HPS(e) is just the healing done divided by the entire fight length. The only way to improve it is to simply do more healing. If absorbs help you do that, then you should probably keep doing it.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Priest
10645
It bothers me because the data is inconsistent and/or i am just misunderstanding something.

OK, here's how it's calculated:

1) HPS(e):
Very simple. WoL takes your total effective healing done and divides it by the length of the fight.

This number basically measures the same thing as Healing Done, but normalized to the length of the fight, which makes it useful for cross-fight comparisons. This is the number that's used for rankings.

2) HPS:
WoL takes your total effective healing done and divides it by your "active time", which is the time during which you were actively generating healing or overhealing events in the log.

This is intended to be useful for getting an idea of your performance on pulls where you died or DC'd or had to do some job that prevented you from healing. For most healers, if you're alive and healing for the entire fight, it should be close to HPS(e).

The issue is in the method used for estimating active time. It's designed to exclude time you spent doing nothing, or doing something other than healing. So any time that you're dead, AFK, or purely DPSing doesn't count.

The tricky thing for Disc is that any significant chunks of time you spend exclusively casting absorbs don't count either; absorbs get added into your healing done, but the time you spent casting them doesn't get added into your active time unless you're also generating healing events in some other way (e.g. Renews are ticking or something).

So for Disc, HPS is artificially inflated. It's giving you credit for all of your absorbs, but not accounting for the time you spent casting them.

Recount has a similar issue, but even weirder because it's doing the estimations on the fly. Skada seems to keep counting active time as long as your absorbs are being absorbed, so it's not as bad as either Recount or WoL's HPS, but it's still not as good as HPS(e). WoL HPS(e) is the gold standard of lolmeters.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Priest
5045
The tricky thing for Disc is that any significant chunks of time you spend exclusively casting absorbs don't count either; absorbs get added into your healing done, but the time you spent casting them doesn't get added into your active time unless you're also generating healing events in some other way (e.g. Renews are ticking or something)


Huh Kaels, that is especially problematic. Is there a reason that it was programmed that way, or ... it just "is"? I mean, it should take into account the atonement mechanic, we are dps'ing, sure, but we're effectively healing as a by-product. Or rather, the dps is a by-product of our healing through atonement.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
16765
I imagine it does take into account for Atonement, which is likely why Kaels used the phrase "purely DPS". Your active time healing only detects TYPE_HEAL events, which Atonement triggers.

HPS(e) has absolutely nothing to do with active time, but HPS does.

Note this quote:

05/03/2013 09:52 AMPosted by Kaels
So for Disc, HPS is artificially inflated. It's giving you credit for all of your absorbs, but not accounting for the time you spent casting them.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Priest
5045
But it doesn't take into account DA from dps'ing? I mean I guess I didn't grasp the quote I quoted. PW: Shield is instant cast, but is that was you were referring to?

(trying to learn here)
Reply Quote
90 Pandaren Priest
12820
Its not so much a concern with ranking as much as understanding why data is so different. We can go in and under heal content or faceroll content if rankings were what we wanted. I am trying to understand why there seems to always be a 10kish or in this case 18k difference between hps and ehps.

The best i can conclude is active time.


Your effective HPS, or HPS(e), is a measure of healing done divided by encounter duration (see Cheddya's post... or Kaels post). Your HPS is a measure of healing done divided by activity time.

Raising your active time may not do much of anything to increase your effective HPS. It might make the gap between your HPS/HPS(e) smaller though. Lowering this gap in such a situation wouldn't be because your effective HPS was increasing. It would be because your HPS was decreasing. The only way I could see raising your active time resulting in higher effective HPS is if the increased activity time was translating to more healing.

If you want to know what I mean... Let's say you do 15 million healing on encounter X, your active time is 300 seconds and the encounter lasts for 400 seconds. In this case your HPS ends up being 50k and your HPS(e) ends up being 37.5k. Now let's say you do 15 million healing on encounter X, your active time is 390 seconds and the encounter lasts for 400 seconds. In this case your HPS ends up at 38.46k and your HPS(e) is still 37.5k. The only way to raise your effective HPS in the above situation is to do more than 15 million healing over 400 seconds.

In the case of your linked logs.... Your HPS(e) in the second log was lower because you did less healing over a similar period of time. I suppose you could argue activity played a role here, as in the first log you had higher activity time and more healing. In other words, in the time you weren't active in the second log you could have been, in which case you might have been capable of doing more healing. Whether or not this additional healing would have been useful is a different matter. I'm guessing on LFR Stoneguards it wouldn't have mattered.

As an edit, that last paragraph above depends on how activity time is measured. Which is odd for absorbs based on Kaels post :).
Edited by Volios on 5/3/2013 10:27 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
16765
If I recall correctly, DA was changed to convert 100% of your Crit Healing into Absorbs? Just from an educated guess, I assume DA will not contribute to active time, then.

Active Time literally only detects TYPE_HEAL events. Shields are SPELL_AURA_APPLIED events.

Sorry if I'm not addressing your concern still.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Priest
5045
If I recall correctly, DA was changed to convert 100% of your Crit Healing into Absorbs? Just from an educated guess, I assume DA will not contribute to active time, then.

Active Time literally only detects TYPE_HEAL events. Shields are SPELL_AURA_APPLIED events.

Sorry if I'm not addressing your concern still.


You did address my question, thank you. Inherently this is problematic for activity time, yes? On one hand we have all of these absorbs being registered, but from a purely on paper standpoint, they "appeared" out of nowhere.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
16765
For HPS(e) and thereby rankings, it's irrelevant.

For HPS and Activity Time, yes it's problematic for means of comparison. Although, should it somehow be perfected, healing analysis is still a cautious endeavor that HPS alone can't model that healer's worth, as I'm sure you're aware.

There's a benefit to having it modeled this way: it shows your HPS output precisely when damage is being taken. In many ways this is an appropriate model, and having your active time skewed because of a HoT overhealing a random dude won't illustrate your performance when damage was actually happening.

Yet there's still a benefit to casting HoTs on people, even if they overheal. You're still doing something, and to that effect you're preparing for damage perhaps.

The easiest way would be to just create two metrics: one that accounts for both shield casts and HoT overheals and the like; another that ignores them. I assume their combat log detection doesn't allow for such a simple division though.

At the end of the day, all of this concerns HPS from t_0 to t_f which isn't a very interesting metric. You can just zero in on the parts of the encounter that matter and WoL will tally up your HPS at those segments, which likely won't be muddled by activity time.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Priest
5045
For HPS(e) and thereby rankings, it's irrelevant.

For HPS and Activity Time, yes it's problematic for means of comparison. Although, should it somehow be perfected, healing analysis is still a cautious endeavor that HPS alone can't model that healer's worth, as I'm sure you're aware.

There's a benefit to having it modeled this way: it shows your HPS output precisely when damage is being taken. In many ways this is an appropriate model, and having your active time skewed because of a HoT overhealing a random dude won't illustrate your performance when damage was actually happening.

Yet there's still a benefit to casting HoTs on people, even if they overheal. You're still doing something, and to that effect you're preparing for damage perhaps.

The easiest way would be to just create two metrics: one that accounts for both shield casts and HoT overheals and the like; another that ignores them. I assume their combat log detection doesn't allow for such a simple division though.

At the end of the day, all of this concerns HPS from t_0 to t_f which isn't a very interesting metric. You can just zero in on the parts of the encounter that matter and WoL will tally up your HPS at those segments, which likely won't be muddled by activity time.


Interesting. It probably is "the best" way of representing the data then. Even if a tiny bit skewed. We're likely limited not only by WoL but by the original combat files themselves too-- though I'd have to delve a bit deeper into the combat texts to really say if that's a valid statement or not.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
16765
I'd lean more towards that type of "skew" than the other way, but it's still messy. =(

Analyze total HPS at your own risk!
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Priest
5045
I'd lean more towards that type of "skew" than the other way, but it's still messy. =(

Analyze total HPS at your own risk!


ITT: We clearly conclude why analyzing a healer based on their HPS is not conclusive, and other means of performance analysis are needed.
Reply Quote
90 Pandaren Priest
10765
05/03/2013 07:21 AMPosted by Taelaus
Its still demoralizing to see


Is your paladin Marelle bothered he didn't get 235,265.9hps ? Now he has something to gripe about.

But seriously, it's not that big of a deal.


since he is the tank i would be worried if he did.

The tricky thing for Disc is that any significant chunks of time you spend exclusively casting absorbs don't count either; absorbs get added into your healing done, but the time you spent casting them doesn't get added into your active time unless you're also generating healing events in some other way (e.g. Renews are ticking or something).

So for Disc, HPS is artificially inflated. It's giving you credit for all of your absorbs, but not accounting for the time you spent casting them


thats sort of why i posted the logs i did. The two stone guard encounters. Both in lfr both had the same face roll strat. Yet the 1st log i posted i had high over healing with SS and higher over healing in general.

Yet even with this extra " wasted SS casts " i had much closer representation between hps and ehps. Both had high hps yet only one had high ehps. The fight didnt change the method of healing did not change.
the only change i could tell was active time.

Raising your active time may not do much of anything to increase your effective HPS


But that happened in both lfr logs i posted. That is the confusing part the same fight same face roll strat. Similar spread of spells across the board. Yet one had 97% up time with minimal difference between hps and e hps the other had 83% up time and there was a 12k difference.
Edited by Loratabb on 5/3/2013 1:55 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
16765
05/03/2013 01:50 PMPosted by Loratabb
But that happened in both lfr logs i posted.


Let's define some variables.

H = Healing done
X = Active Time
Y = Fight Length

Notice the only constant is Y for purposes of "simulating" the same encounter.

Percent Active = X / Y
HPS = H / X
HPS(e) = HPS * Percent Active = (H / X) * (X / Y) = H / Y

Notice the X disappears. Increasing or decreasing X, the amount of time you are spent active, will not change HPS(e). If you want a better rank you gotta have a bigger H.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
18235
Its bound to happen especially in 25 man. If you guys want to rank because that would be the only reason you are concerned about that, just go 4 heals :P
Reply Quote
90 Pandaren Priest
12820
If you want a better rank you gotta have a bigger H.


Haha, quote of the day for sure....
Reply Quote
90 Pandaren Priest
10765
Its bound to happen especially in 25 man. If you guys want to rank because that would be the only reason you are concerned about that, just go 4 heals :P


05/03/2013 02:47 PMPosted by Volios
If you want a better rank you gotta have a bigger H.


Haha, quote of the day for sure....


Its not about ranking its about the inconsistent numbers. Yes i do like to look and see where other healers are and how we compare i think we all do that. I posted two lfr logs highlighting this issue of how off the data can be. The same fight about the same hps and time to kill him yet both had widely different ehps. The only logical conclusion is active time.

Alot of people keep saying that when you are pre stacking absorbs that wol is not recording your data correctly.

Like i pointed out in this log
http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt-dxd6ua6d2qgkwgq1/sum/healingDone/?s=186&e=413

SS was my best heal. A heal i have to stop and precast for it to be effective especially on dogs. On this fight i still had a 96% up time and very close hps and ehps. Stacking absorbs on 25 people takes alot of time having to do it 3 times should not have left me with 96% up time. I even had SS in over healing even more wasted casts.

http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt-dxd6ua6d2qgkwgq1/sum/healingDone/?s=186&e=413

^^ same fight moments later SS is still my best heal. My top 3 heals are still the same yet this log has 12k less in ehps.

Again the only conclusion i can think of is active time.
Edited by Loratabb on 5/3/2013 3:33 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Priest
10645
thats sort of why i posted the logs i did. The two stone guard encounters. Both in lfr both had the same face roll strat. Yet the 1st log i posted i had high over healing with SS and higher over healing in general.

Yet even with this extra " wasted SS casts " i had much closer representation between hps and ehps. Both had high hps yet only one had high ehps. The fight didnt change the method of healing did not change.
the only change i could tell was active time.

Increasing your active time, by itself, will do absolutely nothing to increase your effective HPS.

The formula for effective HPS is very, very simple: it's your effective healing divided by the length of the encounter. There's nothing more to it than that. You can verify it yourself with a calculator app:

First log:
16,474,544 healing / 228 seconds = 72,257 HPS(e)
Second log:
13,607,514 healing / 207 seconds = 65,736 HPS(e)

That's all it is. Your active time doesn't factor into it in any way. Active time only matters directly for the HPS metric. The only 'time' that goes into the HPS(e) calculation is the encounter duration, which you don't control.

If, however, in the process of increasing your active time, you happen to do more healing, that will increase your effective HPS.

There's usually a quite good correlation between active time and effective HPS when you're comparing logs of the same spec. The reason is that good play generally correlates with high active time.

Even for Disc, good play will usually drive your active time up compared to mediocre play. If you're keeping Solace on CD and keeping PoM bouncing, those are constantly generating healing events and extending your active time even when you're Spirit Shelling or spamming PWS. As long as they're effective, they're also going to increase your healing and thus your HPS(e).

But that's an indirect effect, not a direct effect. And it's the same effect you'd get from anything that caused you to do more healing. It's very simple: more effective healing in the same amount of time-> higher effective HPS.
Reply Quote
90 Human Priest
5860
The only conclusion is that eHPS = Total Healing / Fight Length. Active time measurement doesn't affect this nor does it affect rankings and epeenbots. Want higher eHPS? Do more healing during the encounter.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
16765
It would have helped if you uploaded both of them to your premium WoL account, but no worries.

Just looking at the data, in your first log you did 21.07% more healing, but the encounter lasted only 9.709% longer than the shorter one. So the HPS(e) should increase by:

1.2107/1.09709 = 10.3556%

Sure enough: 65737.1 * 1.103556 = 72544.6 HPS(e)

This isn't the value exactly shown--it's off by 0.4%. This is due to intermediate rounding, the biggest offender being the fight length. WoL shows fight length data to the thousandths place in the expression editor, but I suspect it probably goes even further than that behind the scenes. In my math I used just 226s and 206s.

Check this image out: http://imgur.com/SLNaZxg

This image is a segment of combat from your low activity, "skewed" HPS(e) log. The graph on top is all of your non absorbed healing. The graph on bottom is the same segment with just absorbs. The big spike is Spirit Shell.

You had a 17 second gap where active time didn't register, just for this segment alone.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]