View Single Post
  #29  
Old February 7th, 2009, 05:04 PM
JimMorrison's Avatar

JimMorrison JimMorrison is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Utopia, Oregon
Posts: 2,676
Thanks: 83
Thanked 143 Times in 108 Posts
JimMorrison is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Cost efficient blood hunting

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redeyes View Post
Couldn't it be, like conventional wisdom says, that rods have no effect for 0 blood blood hunters?
This is true, and it's funny to note the massive disparity between the 2 test groups.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Redeyes View Post
Randomness would account for the entire difference in the test, then.
100 tests is ultimately a fairly small sample size.
Well somewhat, but bear in mind, in a way it's really 600 tests, compiled in batches of 100, 200, and 300 at a time. The fact that the tests with B1/B2/B3 all show fairly small levels of deviation, and a clear trend simply implies that using B0's is in fact just sporadic and unreliable at best, whereas we can come to expect a certain level of performance from real blood hunters, assuming Pop>5000 and Unrest<1.


And I missed the part where this was LA. Anyway my point was that if it is default SiteFreq, then we can extrapolate from there, and as long as we estimate cautiously, we shouldn't be too disappointed.
Reply With Quote