Cost efficient blood hunting

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by Redeyes

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.

Originally Posted by Redeyes

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.