Cost efficient blood hunting

[WraithLord]

So currently its common knowledge that:
A. Blood hunting is most cost efficient on ~5k provinces
B. SDR on your blood hunters is well worth it (makes non blood hunters count as having blood 1 or some such)
C. Most cost efficient blood hunter are:
1. ???
2. ???

now, a list of cost (cheap) efficient (with or w/o a blood pick) commanders would be nice but I'd settle for deciding which of the following is better: your common indie scout or warlock apprentice.
Some points to consider. scout has 2g upkeep vs WA 8.66g; scout has 0 B, WA has 2 B;
Also, does SDR make any difference in that respect?

Cost efficient is naturally defined as G/BS ratio, i.e. how much gold goes for hunters upkeep (I discard provinces income from this calculation since I'm not interested in optimizing province size as well) divided by avg. blood slaves income.

I would appreciate any input on the subject.

TIA

[atul]

I thought Sanguine Dousing Rod doesn't work with commanders without blood magic? Worked during Dom1, but they changed it already then.

IIRC of course.

[Endoperez]

SDR only work on Blood mages, yes. That makes even B1 mages with the rod 90% chance of catching slaves compared to the 10% chance of scouts.

[WraithLord]

I recall something in that vain. But I also recall reading some post claiming SDR's improve results of non blood hunters. Now I'm really puzzled.

[WraithLord]

Endoperez said:
SDR only work on Blood mages, yes. That makes even B1 mages with the rod 90% chance of catching slaves compared to the 10% chance of scouts.


ok, I was under wrong impression then. So this makes obvious the answer to my question with SDR involved.

[Loren]

It seems to me the most efficient one is the vampire. No upkeep at all and immortal within your dominion--they can't be taken out by raiders.

Admittedly, you need a decent blood income to get them, they're not going to be your first blood hunters.

[MaxWilson]

Is getting taken out by raiders really a problem if you set them to Retreat from the back row?

-Max

[Loren]

MaxWilson said:
Is getting taken out by raiders really a problem if you set them to Retreat from the back row?

-Max



Unless the retreat is cut off by teleport raiders or the like.

In MP I once lost a substantial army when the commanders were taken out by assassination and a flying unit cut off the retreat.

[MaxWilson]

But do people actually bother to do that vs. simple bloodhunters? I realized when I wrote that that you *could* kill them, but is it really a problem? (The other consideration is that someone could attack you just to make your bloodhunters retreat and mess up your blood economy temporarily.)

How did that kill off your MP army? Were you in the water or something so you couldn't buy the 1 PD commander?

-Max

[WraithLord]

I also usually set my blood hunter to retreat. However this makes them susceptible to assassination, so just take this into account.

Also, vampires as blood hunters, I assume you mean vampire lords (or whatever their name). Aren't they more useful auto-summoning, or fighting or casting spells. Besides, they come into play mid to end game, by then you either have an established blood economy or you'll probably never have one.

One last Q though, what if I want to use the Hinom priests as blood hunters (IIRC they are names "Kohen" with 1B). Are they going to eat the population like Rephaim and Baal?

[WraithLord]

I do that when I can. However in most past MP games, when I was attacked by a blood nation, they were raiding me so hard I had a hard time hitting they blood economy.

[Endoperez]

WraithLord said:
One last Q though, what if I want to use the Hinom priests as blood hunters (IIRC they are names "Kohen" with 1B). Are they going to eat the population like Rephaim and Baal?



Yes, Kohen eat population.

[WraithLord]

Well, this actually prevents Hinom from efficient blood hunt with Kohens and forces them to rely on indy scouts instead (or else burn out their blood provinces quite fast).

Another weakness in this supposedly too strong nation.

[VedalkenBear]

I think most people consider the Mictlan Priest to be the most efficient Blood Hunter in the game. Now, if you want to consider the most efficient independent Blood Hunter, I _think_ it's the Garnet Priestess, should she receive a Blood pick.

[Baalz]

VedalkenBear said:
I think most people consider the Mictlan Priest to be the most efficient Blood Hunter in the game. Now, if you want to consider the most efficient independent Blood Hunter, I _think_ it's the Garnet Priestess, should she receive a Blood pick.



Heh, Mictlan also has the most effective summoned blood hunter in the Tlehpuchi <sp>. 25 blood slaves to summon, a B2 (flying, stealthy, assassin) who can summon themselves and don't even need a sanguine rod. They can be used to get MA Mictlan into blood in a huge way.

[Loren]

Baalz said:

VedalkenBear said:
I think most people consider the Mictlan Priest to be the most efficient Blood Hunter in the game. Now, if you want to consider the most efficient independent Blood Hunter, I _think_ it's the Garnet Priestess, should she receive a Blood pick.



Heh, Mictlan also has the most effective summoned blood hunter in the Tlehpuchi <sp>. 25 blood slaves to summon, a B2 (flying, stealthy, assassin) who can summon themselves and don't even need a sanguine rod. They can be used to get MA Mictlan into blood in a huge way.



Agreed--that beats the vampire. I've never done much with Mictlan, I didn't realize they had such a summons.

[MaxWilson]

And THAT's how MA Mictlan stops being nice and turns back into LA Mictlan. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

-Max

[Wrana]

No, it does so by summoning Rain Lords - who are normal summons, but have B3... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[WraithLord]

Baalz said:

VedalkenBear said:
I think most people consider the Mictlan Priest to be the most efficient Blood Hunter in the game. Now, if you want to consider the most efficient independent Blood Hunter, I _think_ it's the Garnet Priestess, should she receive a Blood pick.



Heh, Mictlan also has the most effective summoned blood hunter in the Tlehpuchi <sp>. 25 blood slaves to summon, a B2 (flying, stealthy, assassin) who can summon themselves and don't even need a sanguine rod. They can be used to get MA Mictlan into blood in a huge way.



Does that imply that SDR doesn't benefit blood mages with more than 1 blood pick?

[Micah]

It gives a B1 mage a 40% greater chance to find slaves (90 as opposed to 50) and a B2 mage a 10% greater chance (100 vs 90) so you get some serious diminishing returns, but it still helps. Also, according to the formula given in the book (which is at least partially incorrect, as I noted) every time you do find slaves each level of blood adds an extra slave before the random element, so even on a high-level mage an SDR will be worthwhile after 6 successful hunts, at least if that part of the formula is accurate.

[JimMorrison]

Micah said:
.....so even on a high-level mage an SDR will be worthwhile after 6 successful hunts, at least if that part of the formula is accurate.



Well, 6+x where x is the number of slaves you would have expected to collect the turn you forged - unless you are clever and just hunt until the first time that Unrest becomes an issue, then take a turn off to forge Rods while people calm down. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Loren]

JimMorrison said:

Micah said:
.....so even on a high-level mage an SDR will be worthwhile after 6 successful hunts, at least if that part of the formula is accurate.



Well, 6+x where x is the number of slaves you would have expected to collect the turn you forged - unless you are clever and just hunt until the first time that Unrest becomes an issue, then take a turn off to forge Rods while people calm down. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif



Speaking of unrest, does anyone know how it is *ACTUALLY* determined?

[Tmoe]

Hey all. Having played the game for awhile I decided to throw my two cents into the blood hunting economics/cost efficiency. So I made some statistics about blood hunting as was asked in the original post of this thread.

Before I start it must be said that all test were concluded with Late Age Mitclan in provinces with 10 000+ population, with growth 3 to keep the population from falling under 5 000 (very unlikely except for the rare random events that kill population), with commanders patrolling the province so that any unrest was eliminated immediately (and building a lab if needed) and the slaves were pooled every turn to prevent overload and therefore loss of slaves.

The hunters covered here were 0-level, 1st level, 2nd level and 3rd level blood hunters. 0-level test subject was your basic indy scout. 1st level test subject was Mitclan priest. 2nd level test subject was Mitclan Priest King. 3rd level test subject was Mitclan King of Rain.

There were 12 test subjects present in each test. 6 without Saiguine Dousing Rod and 6 with the Rod. Placed as seen below:

Province 1 has 1 test subject.
Province 2 has 2 test subjects.
Province 3 has 3 test subjects.
Province 4 has 1 test subject with rod
Province 5 has 2 test subjects with rod
Province 6 has 3 test subjects with rod

Each test runs for 100 turns.


Results for 0-lvl hunters
1 x 0-lvl - average of 0,54 slaves per turn - 88 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
2 x 0-lvl - average of 0,81 slaves per turn - 81 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
3 x 0-lvl - average of 1,28 slaves per turn - 74 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found

1 x 0-lvl w rod - average of 0,14 slaves per turn - 96 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
2 x 0-lvl w rod - average of 0,47 slaves per turn - 86 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
3 x 0-lvl w rod - average of 1,03 slaves per turn - 80 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found


Results for 1-lvl hunters
1 x 1-lvl - average of 2,05 slaves per turn - 55 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
2 x 1-lvl - average of 4,88 slaves per turn - 23 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
3 x 1-lvl - average of 7,45 slaves per turn - 13 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found

1 x 1-lvl w rod - average of 4,93 slaves per turn - 11 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
2 x 1-lvl w rod - average of 9,81 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
3 x 1-lvl w rod - average of 15,00 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found


Results for 2-lvl hunters
1 x 2-lvl - average of 5,07 slaves per turn - 8 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
2 x 2-lvl - average of 9,65 slaves per turn - 1 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
3 x 2-lvl - average of 14,07 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found

1 x 2-lvl w rod - average of 6,33 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
2 x 2-lvl w rod - average of 12,85 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
3 x 2-lvl w rod - average of 18,77 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found


Results for 3-lvl hunters
1 x 3-lvl - average of 6,44 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
2 x 3-lvl - average of 12,55 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
3 x 3-lvl - average of 18,79 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found

1 x 3-lvl w rod - average of 7,37 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
2 x 3-lvl w rod - average of 14,66 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found
3 x 3-lvl w rod - average of 21,67 slaves per turn - 0 turns out of 100 0 slaves were found

--------------------------

I have the cost efficiency chart for each Age but I'll post it on a later date. Hope this helps.

[Redeyes]

What Site Frequency were you using?

[JimMorrison]

So your test is showing fairly clearly that a B2 (whether natural, or B1+SDR) will average over time, 5 slaves per turn, and each additional level adds 1 slave/turn average. That's pretty consistent with my non standardized tests.

However, Site Frequency setting is supposed to modify Blood Hunt results, so I'm also curious what frequency you used.

It would be interesting to see a similar set of test numbers at different settings, say 40-50-60, though if you were doing so at default settings in EA, then that's 45, and one could assume that the average over time would simply scale with the setting.

In any case, great work! :happy:

[ano]

It was LA Mictlan, not EA.
Also, does anybody have a real proof of the fact that effectiveness of blood hunt depends on magic site frequency?

[chrispedersen]

The real interesting result from that test has nothing to do with B2's or B3's.

Level 0's with sanguine dousing rods are LESS effective.

[Redeyes]

Couldn't it be, like conventional wisdom says, that rods have no effect for 0 blood blood hunters?

Randomness would account for the entire difference in the test, then.
100 tests is ultimately a fairly small sample size.

[JimMorrison]

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.


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. ;)

[ano]

Once again, where is information that blood hunting depends on site frequency from? I also heard about it and probably it is so but is there anyone who can give a solid proof?

[ano]

This is true, and it's funny to note the massive disparity between the 2 test groups.
Maybe it's another bug and SDR not raises but lowers bloodhunting quality for those who have no skill in Blood magic?

[vfb]

This is true, and it's funny to note the massive disparity between the 2 test groups.
Maybe it's another bug and SDR not raises but lowers bloodhunting quality for those who have no skill in Blood magic?

Or maybe 100 tests is too small a sample size to get accurate numbers for an event with an expected occurrence of 1 in 10, especially when there is a 1 in 6 chance of the event producing extraordinary results when it does occur.

[chrispedersen]

Gut tells me its statistically significant. Haven't had to do such calculations in 20 years.. but it seems so.

[Tmoe]

Hello again! Unfortunately I was unable to edit my previous post so I have to write a new one. First off with the questions and notes.

Site frequency used was the Late Age standard of 35

As JimM stated earlier, B1+SDR or B2 will give you an average slave income per turn of 5 with roughly 10% of the time coming up short (rounding up). There after it's pretty much 1 slave per level of blood so the clear benefactor of the SDR is B1 hunter.

Indeed the stats show that using a SDR with 0-level blood hunters seems to backfire the results. As for the reason I have no clue.

As you all seem to love stas, here some more results :)

Next we have the blood slaves found/upkeep cost calculations. the first number after each entry refers to cost without the rod and the second with the rod. The entries listed here are more or less available when playing the game but I decided not to list subjects that have a 10% of getting the first or subsequent level of blood. Keeping in mind that the site frequency for testing was 35.

Early Age

Mitclan
Mitclan Priest 1,0 - 2,5
Priest King 0,9 - 1,1
Rain Priest 1,0 - 1,2
Moon Priest 1,0 - 1,2
High Priest of Sun 0,6 - 0,7

Sauromantia
Witch King (1lvl) 0,2 - 0,5
Witch King (2lvl) 0,5 - 0,6
Warrior Sorceress 0,4 - 0,9

Abysia
Warlock Apprentice 0,4 - 0,9
Warlock 0,5 - 0,7

Pangaea
Pan (1lvl) 0,1 - 0,2
Pan (2lvl) 0,2 - 0,3

Vanheim
Vanjarl 0,2 - 0,5
Vanadrott (1lvl) 0,2 - 0,4
Vanadrott (2lvl) 0,4 - 0,5

Helheim
Vanjarl 0,2 - 0,5
Hangadrott (1lvl) 0,2 - 0,4

Niefelheim
Jotun Skratti (2lvl) 0,3 - 0,4
Jotun Skratti (3lvl) 0,4 - 0,4
Gygja (1lvl) 0,1 - 0,3
Gygja (2lvl) 0,3 - 0,4
Gygja (3lvl) 0,4 - 0,4

Hinnom
Kohen 0,4 - 1,0
Melqart 0,4 - 0,5
Ba'al 0,3 - 0,4

Lanka
Raktapata 0,7 - 1,6
Yogini 0,3 - 0,7
Kala-Mukha (1lvl) 0,4 - 0,9
Kala-Mukha (2lvl) 1,0 - 1,2
Rakshasi (1lvl) 0,2 - 0,4
Rakshasi (2lvl) 0,4 - 0,5
Rakshasi (3lvl) 0,6 - 0,6
Raksharaja (2lvl) 0,6 - 0,7


Middle Age

Abysia
Warlock Apprentice 0,6 - 0,7
Warlock 0,4 - 0,4
Deamonbred 0,6 - 0,7

Pangaea
Pan 0,1 - 0,2
Pandemoniac 0,2 - 0,3

Vanheim
Vanjarl 0,2 - 0,5
Vanadrott (1lvl) 0,2 - 0,4
Vanadrott (2lvl) 0,4 - 0,5

Jotuinheim
Vaetti Hag 0,6 - 1,3
Jotun Skratti (2lvl) 0,3 - 0,4
Jotun Skratti (3lvl) 0,4 - 0,4
Gygja (1lvl) 0,1 - 0,3
Gygja (2lvl) 0,3 - 0,4
Gygja (3lvl) 0,4 - 0,4


Late Age

Ulm
Membr of the Second Tier 0,2 - 0,5
Fortune Teller 0,3 - 0,8

Marignon
Diabolist 0,4 - 0,9
Goetic Master (2lvl) 0,8 - 1,0
Goetic Master (3lvl) 1,0 - 1,2

Mitclan
Mitclan Priest 1,0 - 2,5
Priest King 0,9 - 1,1
Moon Priest 1,0 - 1,2
Sun Priest 1,0 - 1,2
Rain Priest 0,4 - 1,1
King of Rain 0,6 - 0,6

Abysia
Sanguine Acolyte 0,6 - 1,5
Sanguine Anathemant 0,8 - 1,1
Slayer Sanguine 0,8 - 0,9
Warlock Apprentice 0,6 - 0,7
Warlock 0,4 - 0,4

Midgård
Galderman (1lvl) 0,1 - 0,4
Galderman (2lvl) 0,4 - 0,5
Vanjarl 0,2 - 0,5

Utgård
Jotun Skratti (2lvl) 0,3 - 0,4
Jotun Skratti (3lvl) 0,4 - 0,4
Norna 0,1 - 0,3

Gath
Kohen 0,4 - 1,0
Kohen Gadol 0,4 - 0,5

Bogarus
Fivefold Angel 0,8 - 1,1
Occultist 0,3 - 0,7
Master of Names 0,2 - 0,5
Starets (1lvl) 0,1 - 0,3
Starets (2lvl) 0,3 - 0,4

----------------

This is just to give you an idea of how useful each entry is in blood hunting. However keep in mind that certain characters have issues that cant be taken into account. Good example would be Late Age Mitclan Moon or Sun Priests which suffer from old age.

Cheers

[Redeyes]

Once again, where is information that blood hunting depends on site frequency from? I also heard about it and probably it is so but is there anyone who can give a solid proof?I would suggest that you enter two games, one with site frequency at 0 and one with site frequency 75. The difference in blood hunting results is easily evident that way.

Gut tells me its statistically significant. Haven't had to do such calculations in 20 years.. but it seems so.
http://web.archive.org/web/20011027002011/http://dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive/images/dilbert2001182781025.gif

From the series given, you can't meaningfully calculate standard deviation.

If you accept blood hunting at level 0 as occurring at a 10% succes rate, it isn't statistically significant (the results occur within two standard deviations).


And finally, to add to Tmoe's list:

Independents

Scout 0,3

[archaeolept]

It was LA Mictlan, not EA.
Also, does anybody have a real proof of the fact that effectiveness of blood hunt depends on magic site frequency?Yes
Originally Posted by chrispedersen
Gut tells me its statistically significant. Haven't had to do such calculations in 20 years.. but it seems so.
No

edit: also, nice tests there Tmoe!

[JimMorrison]

This is really an excellent resource! Always knew Pans were pricey for Blood, but wow, poor Pangaea. :p

It's funny, with Lanka, I always use Kala-Mukhas for my hunters, as there are so many uses for the 75% that don't get their Blood pick.

It's a fun list, shows why EA+LA Mictlan are the "kings of blood", and there are several others who get around 1/1 sufficiency in their hunting, and most others with Blood access are really paying for it.

(Oh and one note for beginners who read this list - the Bogarus Five-Fold Angel looks like a great Blood Hunter, but they cause additional Unrest in any province they are in, so unless you have Patrollers, which cost more upkeep and kill more pop, you will have troubles.)

[chrispedersen]

Prophetize your blood hunter = )

[chrispedersen]

It was LA Mictlan, not EA.
Also, does anybody have a real proof of the fact that effectiveness of blood hunt depends on magic site frequency?Yes
Originally Posted by chrispedersen
Gut tells me its statistically significant. Haven't had to do such calculations in 20 years.. but it seems so.
No

edit: also, nice tests there Tmoe!

Rather than just saying no - you wanna provide a calculation?

[archaeolept]

a calculation as to your gut feeling? No.

it's pretty clear looking at the numbers for 1 lvl 0 hunter, there were 12 successes w/out the rod (out of 100) and ony 4 successes w/ the rod - when one would expect 10 hits, both of those are quite w/in normal expectations. The rod should not be affecting the chance of getting a result in the first place, and there has been no real reason to question this from these numbers.

the results w/ 2 sdr wielding lvl 0's were unlucky, and the results w/ 3 were about what one would expect.

but, if you wish to believe that giving level 0 blood hunters a useless item is harmful, feel free to not give them the useless item :D

[Tmoe]

This is really an excellent resource! Always knew Pans were pricey for Blood, but wow, poor Pangaea.

It's funny, with Lanka, I always use Kala-Mukhas for my hunters, as there are so many uses for the 75% that don't get their Blood pick.

Yeah Pangaea got it pretty bad when you consider that even the independent scout has better blood slave/upkeep cost ratio :).

I didn't quite understand what you meant with the term Blood pick and why Kala-mukhas would be better? I would assume Raktapata is the natural blood hunter choice for Lanka since they get the most out of the SDR and have the best slave/upkeep ratio.

And to add some more data, here's the list for the most slaves captured in a single turn by the test groups.

Results for 0-lvl hunters
1 x 0-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 13
2 x 0-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 9
3 x 0-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 16

1 x 0-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 9
2 x 0-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 9
3 x 0-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 20


Results for 1-lvl hunters
1 x 1-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 10
2 x 1-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 18
3 x 1-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 24

1 x 1-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 17
2 x 1-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 21
3 x 1-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 39


Results for 2-lvl hunters
1 x 2-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 15
2 x 2-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 24
3 x 2-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 29

1 x 2-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 15
2 x 2-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 24
3 x 2-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 36


Results for 3-lvl hunters
1 x 3-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 17
2 x 3-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 29
3 x 3-lvl - Most slaves found in single turn: 31

1 x 3-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 13
2 x 3-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 32
3 x 3-lvl w rod - Most slaves found in single turn: 37

------------------

Unfortunately I cant attach the open office calc document where all the raw data and results are but if somebody wants it they can throw me a message and i can email it to you

[VedalkenBear]

If you want, a statistical analysis on if there is a significant difference in any of these numbers can be done.

[JimMorrison]

It's funny, with Lanka, I always use Kala-Mukhas for my hunters, as there are so many uses for the 75% that don't get their Blood pick.

I didn't quite understand what you meant with the term Blood pick and why Kala-mukhas would be better? I would assume Raktapata is the natural blood hunter choice for Lanka since they get the most out of the SDR and have the best slave/upkeep ratio.

Because the Kala-Mukha is 1B + 1NDB. I like the 2B as Blood Hunters, because then I can use them freely, without reliance on the SDR. Since they can reanimate, they can remote search Death, they Preach well as H2, and they get useful minor forging options (always need Bags of Wine!), I feel they are worth the investment. And I forgot it's 33% that get B2, so really they're a good option, depending on how you like to use them.

Also, you can shift to 2 B2+SDR per province, or do a little patrolling, and really start to milk your efficiency. At a certain point, Lanka is happy with enough gold to buy 1 Raksharaja and X Palankashas per turn, as long as you can pull in enough slaves to destroy your foe.

[archaeolept]

one point to make about efficiency, is that even unsuccessful lvl 0 bloodhunters cause unrest, so all in all you will be getting rather less blood per province set aside for hunting. There is a greater monetary opportunity cost per blood slave gathered w/ scouts than w/ actual blood mage blood hunters.

[Baalz]

And another angle to consider is the loss in income from the province, not just the upkeep of the mage. Particularly because the more blood hunting provinces you use, the less and less ideal they are - as you start wanting more bloodslaves you start bloodhunting in higher and higher population provinces. The more concentrated your bloodhunters are, the cheaper the bloodslaves (not even taking into account defensive considerations)

For instance, consider two different ways to go using LA Abyssia as an example. Lets say I'm bloodhunting with 2 B4 Abysian warlocks. Lets also say for the sake of argument, that not only do they have SDRs, but they each also have one blood booster which was forged for summonings/forgings and is not being used this turn, so they're effectively bloodhunting at B6. Extrapolating the trend shown in the graph (and that each blood level is supposed to gain you +1 slave) those two bloodhunters are going to pull in 14.6 + 6 = about 21 slaves per turn.

Alternatively you're using sanguine acolytes with SDRs because they seem on the surface to be more cost effective. Nice, cheap, holy blood hunters. Thing is, to get 22 slaves per turn you need 4 of them (plus the same boosters and an extra rod). Problem is, you can't put 4 B2 bloodhunters in one province or the unrest skyrockets. How's that upkeep difference looking as you switch extra provinces over to bloodhunting? This can be an enormous difference if you (for example) have a bunch of wastelands with a few high pop farmlands. You bloodhunting yet another 10k population province, or would you rather have your hunters spinning their wheels in a 3k mountain?

BTW, this is also the real cost in bloodhunting with scouts. Their upkeep is usually cheap compared to the lost income from the province they're bumbling around to eek out a handful of blood slaves.

Oh, also those two extra castle turns to crank out two extra bloodhunters (Warlocks vs acolytes) are not worthless resources.

[JimMorrison]

one point to make about efficiency, is that even unsuccessful lvl 0 bloodhunters cause unrest, so all in all you will be getting rather less blood per province set aside for hunting. There is a greater monetary opportunity cost per blood slave gathered w/ scouts than w/ actual blood mage blood hunters.

However, using Pangaea as an example, it's probably a worthy strat to start a couple typical hunting provinces with Pans, and roll all of those slaves directly into Empowering cheap indies to B1 and having them forge their own SDR. Done right you will need to be more aggressive about hunting to get a really solid income out of it (because of the cost of 53 slaves per hunter), but your gold/slave will be low, and once the machine is in place your blood income will be great, and all of your Pans will be free to do more exciting things.

I had never thought to treat a Blood nation as a non-Blood nation in such a way, I think it has the potential to reach a better middle ground than that of spending 70g/province in upkeep for the 3 Pans in it. :p Compare to the 2g/province upkeep for 3 Scouts with SDR.....

[chrispedersen]

If you want, a statistical analysis on if there is a significant difference in any of these numbers can be done.

Would you.. I would really appreciate it!

[VedalkenBear]

CP: I don't think I'll be able to do it this week, as I have quite a bit of work plus a conference to attend, but I've just now had to review all of the statistical analytical techniques for hypothesis testing.

However, to do any of these, I need the variance of the samples, as well as the means.

[chrispedersen]

it's pretty clear looking at the numbers for 1 lvl 0 hunter, there were 12 successes w/out the rod (out of 100) and ony 4 successes w/ the rod - when one would expect 10 hits, both of those are quite w/in normal expectations. The rod should not be affecting the chance of getting a result in the first place, and there has been no real reason to question this from these numbers.


Well, seeing as the rod *says* it requires skill in blood to use - AND the results to date support that conclusion...

I think its pretty clear that SDR inhibit your chances of success. But if you wish to continue giving these rods to people that can't use them - feel free.

Pending a larger sample size, of course.

[Huzurdaddi]

And another angle to consider is the loss in income from the province, not just the upkeep of the mage.

This is actually the most important point about bloodhunting in Dom3 and is one of the big changes in bloodhunting from Dom2.

The increase in gold/province is a large boost (relative) to less elite blood hunting nations as the majority of the cost of blood hunting is the lost gold from taxes (assuming you blood hunt in stable state by setting taxes to zero, if you patrol it is difficult to compare).

Just for comparison consider two blood hunters:

Mitclan Priest (upkeep 2.66) average blood ~7
Jotun Skratti (upkeep 16.66) average blood ~8

It seems like the Mitclan Priest is far superior. Indeed from the chart above you are getting 2.5 slaves / gold with the Mitclan Priest and only 0.4 slaves / gold with the Jotun Skratti.

However if you blood hunt with 2 per province, in a 5000k pop province (~70 income) the numbers turn out quite different:

Mitclan Priest ~5.3 gold / slave
Jotun Skratti ~6.5 gold / slave

Mitclan still wins, but they are much closer.

PS: the increase in gold / province is actually a rather large nerf to all blood hunting nations, which was noted when Dom3 was released (there were actually multiple nerfs to blood in Dom3 vs. Dom2, most relegated to devils). Given that blood is still considered very powerful in Dom3 this was almost certainly a good thing (along with the nerf to life drain which was excellent).

[VedalkenBear]

CP: Actually, regarding the information we have on 0-Blood hunters using SDR, I tend to agree with Archaeolept. We can't say that it hurts the chances of gaining Blood Slaves. I think we can say that it doesn't help.

I'll look into collecting my own data and give some results, with analysis. I'll look at both SDR usage and also the effect of the magic site frequency of the game. (I believe that this also affects the gems you get from random events.)

[Tmoe]

Just for comparison consider two blood hunters:

Mitclan Priest (upkeep 2.66) average blood ~7
Jotun Skratti (upkeep 16.66) average blood ~8

It seems like the Mitclan Priest is far superior. Indeed from the chart above you are getting 2.5 slaves / gold with the Mitclan Priest and only 0.4 slaves / gold with the Jotun Skratti.

However if you blood hunt with 2 per province, in a 5000k pop province (~70 income) the numbers turn out quite different:

Mitclan Priest ~5.3 gold / slave
Jotun Skratti ~6.5 gold / slave


I do agreed about the lost tax gold being a significant factor when comparing different hunters but I didn't quite understand how did you come up the above mentioned new upkeep costs. I know it has to do with the income of the province but just couldn't find the formula for it. If you wouldn't mind sharing :).

Good points by Baalz also. Cheers

[JimMorrison]

I'm actually also curious why that 5k pop province is generating 70 income. Either there is an Arena there, or you have very high scales, because it should be ~50 income with even scales.

It's true that we have so far been only focusing on the cost of the hunters, but I thought that was what this thread was for, because regardless of your scales, the cost of removing taxation will always be fairly static. That is to say, within any given layout, 5k pop will represent X% of your income no matter what. Since that cannot be directly influenced in game, the only thing that can be influenced, is what type and how many Blood Hunters are used.

To put it another way, think of your tax loss as "overhead" and your Blood Hunter upkeep as "operating costs". You can directly influence your operating costs by hiring poorly trained migrant laborers (ie- scouts), but overhead is the cost of doing business - you either pay it, or you do not do business. :p

I think the only time that tax loss becomes a major consideration is, when (this happens to me too often) all of your provinces are either <3k or >8k in pop, forcing you to choose between the less effective, or the higher cost options. Also sometimes I get so "lucky" and most of my ~5k provinces have Arenas and Gold Mines and such on them. Gee, thanks. :re:


Of course, it cannot be said enough - the use of Blood, where applicable, is essentially (nearly always) cost effective. That is, you can almost always do more with the slaves than with the gold, regardless of other factors. The trick is, how easily can you generate the gold that you DO need, relative to your other Blood competitors? The upkeep on your Blood Hunters is a very large factor in that equation, and is magnified by your scales, which cannot be mitigated in-game, and which it must be assumed you had adequate reasoning for. ;)

[vfb]

The Hidden Gold Mine or Gem provinces should be blood hunted IMO, but tax at 100% and patrol down to 3000 pop, then stop hunting there, but crank taxes to 200% and patrol down to zero population. That's how you can generate the gold you need.

[Huzurdaddi]

I'm actually also curious why that 5k pop province is generating 70 income. Either there is an Arena there, or you have very high scales, because it should be ~50 income with even scales.


Quite right, I was going by memory how much a 5k population province yield, and since I generally have good scales it comes out around 70 (maybe a touch less). You are totally correct that scales really change the costs.


It's true that we have so far been only focusing on the cost of the hunters, but I thought that was what this thread was for, because regardless of your scales, the cost of removing taxation will always be fairly static. That is to say, within any given layout, 5k pop will represent X% of your income no matter what. Since that cannot be directly influenced in game, the only thing that can be influenced, is what type and how many Blood Hunters are used.


Agreed. However I just wanted to show that depending upon how one hunts blood, the difference is not nearly as pronounced as one would think based upon a comparison of blood hunter upkeep costs. Actually, the lost taxes dominate the costs blood hunting in many cases.


I know it has to do with the income of the province but just couldn't find the formula for it. If you wouldn't mind sharing.


I could have made a booboo ...

Jotun Skratti (16.66*2 + 70)/16 ~= 6.5
Mitclan Priest (2.66*2 + 70)/14 ~= 5.4

But as was noted above some of the assumptions (like good scales) may be incorrect. Actually it looks like scales matter more than how efficient your blood hunters are, assuming you want steady state blood hunting.

[archaeolept]

"Actually, the lost taxes dominate the costs blood hunting in many cases."

yes, exactly, and why scouts are such poor replacements for real bloodhunters. Also why the patch was such a serious nerf to Hinnom's blood power.

[BigDaddy]

Empower costs ~35 blood slaves. 25 slave booster costs ~32 before forging bonus (if any). The increase between B2 and B3 (effective) is about 1.4 blood slaves. 25 turns for empower. ~23 for brazen vessel. Now, boosting further could be done in a cost conscious way with a blood thorn, even to B4 effect or just 1 more B for any B3+ blood hunter. In those case the RoR is equal to the forge cost of the booster. Armor of souls with a 50% forge bonus takes only 25 (adding the cost of the forger's turn) turns to pay off for even your b6 souped up warlock.

Even a modest 25% forge bonus makes the bloodthorn and brazen vessel attractive, especially for low level blood hunters, especially earlier in the game, if you're in a good position.

Also, saving can be achieved if you only forge on turns you've been unlucky and caused an unhealthy rise in unrest.

[Benjamin]

Ah but the limitation on blood hunting is unrest... so it doesn't really matter whether you are hunting with b2 or b10.

I'd also point out that another big cost of blood hunting, at least early on is the commander slot it takes to produce the blood hunter.

Right so if you are having to keep 2 fort lab temple provinces occupied for 15 turns making blood hunters that is a cost.

[BigDaddy]

I have successfully necroed this thread. I think, and it seems to me, that each blood hunter, regardless of success, creates some unrest, so, what you want is a few high level blood hunters. With a blood font drawing 25 slaves a turn you can almost count on unrest even at 0% tax... yes, but the FoB is awesome at blood hunting... Also, this should make it so that you either need less turns to recruit blood hunters (less likely) or will be able to field blood hunters in more locations (more likely). You can use scouts to ferry blood slaves around, which can be really important in combat situations.

Also, the best blood hunters are ussually decent mages you want to have. And buffing their capacity to cast makes them even better, AND at some point the PD plus them might well be enough to consider the province defended (especially because they probably have blood slaves).

and remember:
"Undisciplined jailers have defiled some of your blood slaves."

[Maerlande]

What's a blood font? Gothic hand with a bit of drip?

[Gregstrom]

Empower costs ~35 blood slaves. 25 slave booster costs ~32 before forging bonus (if any). .
?????
Empower does not cost ~35 slaves. Blood boosters cost 25 before forge bonus.


The increase between B2 and B3 (effective) is about 1.4 blood slaves. 25 turns for empower. ~23 for brazen vessel.

Waiting #20 turns for a return on investment is rarely worthwhile in MP. If you're talking about equipping, say, 20 blood hunters with thorns or skulls, the 500 slaves (~375 with hammers) you just burned could probably have been used to summon a demon army and conquer another player (or to prevent an invasion).


Now, boosting further could be done in a cost conscious way with a blood thorn, even to B4 effect or just 1 more B for any B3+ blood hunter. In those case the RoR is equal to the forge cost of the booster. Armor of souls with a 50% forge bonus takes only 25 (adding the cost of the forger's turn) turns to pay off for even your b6 souped up warlock.

See above. And if you have a B6 warlock, why isn't he doing something like making Soul Contracts rather than blood hunting? If you've boosted all your warlocks to B6, why haven't you won the game yet?


Even a modest 25% forge bonus makes the bloodthorn and brazen vessel attractive, especially for low level blood hunters, especially earlier in the game, if you're in a good position.

They're vastly less attractive than dowsing rods, whatever you do. If for some reason you have an extremely limited supply of blood hunters, then maybe you can afford to blow your slave reserves into boosters for hunting use. Otherwise, the spend is less effective, especially in terms of return on investment, than having more hunters and only using rods.

[BigDaddy]

Empower costs ~35 blood slaves. 25 slave booster costs ~32 before forging bonus (if any). .
?????
Empower does not cost ~35 slaves. Blood boosters cost 25 before forge bonus.


The increase between B2 and B3 (effective) is about 1.4 blood slaves. 25 turns for empower. ~23 for brazen vessel.

Waiting #20 turns for a return on investment is rarely worthwhile in MP. If you're talking about equipping, say, 20 blood hunters with thorns or skulls, the 500 slaves (~375 with hammers) you just burned could probably have been used to summon a demon army and conquer another player (or to prevent an invasion).


Now, boosting further could be done in a cost conscious way with a blood thorn, even to B4 effect or just 1 more B for any B3+ blood hunter. In those case the RoR is equal to the forge cost of the booster. Armor of souls with a 50% forge bonus takes only 25 (adding the cost of the forger's turn) turns to pay off for even your b6 souped up warlock.

See above. And if you have a B6 warlock, why isn't he doing something like making Soul Contracts rather than blood hunting? If you've boosted all your warlocks to B6, why haven't you won the game yet?


Even a modest 25% forge bonus makes the bloodthorn and brazen vessel attractive, especially for low level blood hunters, especially earlier in the game, if you're in a good position.

They're vastly less attractive than dowsing rods, whatever you do. If for some reason you have an extremely limited supply of blood hunters, then maybe you can afford to blow your slave reserves into boosters for hunting use. Otherwise, the spend is less effective, especially in terms of return on investment, than having more hunters and only using rods.

Ya, whatever, I'm not going to deal with this whole thing you typed out, but just mention that empowering a guy who is a blood hunter costs the blood slaves he would have found that turn, so it costs ~35 slaves.

Yada, yada, yada...

[Gregstrom]

So you're ignoring the slaves spent in the empowerment? That seems odd. And how many blood hunters get 35 slaves/turn?

[BigDaddy]

It costs 30 slaves to empower a B1, say, Mictlan priest. He probably could have gotten 4-5 blood slaves with a dousing rod.

[Gregstrom]

That makes more sense. Why not compare the return on investment from spending the same number of slaves on dowsing rods for new blood hunters (again, assume Mictlan Priests)?

[BigDaddy]

That probably pays for itself the next 2 turns. 50% * 5 = 2.5/turn

The first turn pays for most of the SDR, and the next one pays more than it off, unless, as occasionally happens, they don't find any, in which cast it takes 3 turns. The probability of it taking 3 turns, for any specific priest is ~ (1 - ((.9)^3))

If he used a forging assist, it would likely be paid back the first turn. ~10% of the time it would not.

If you roll the numbers into an aggregate you'd endup with a ror of just over 2 turns without a hammer, and just over 1 with one.

The RoR is much longer with a B2 or B3 forger and lower if you use Forge of the Ancients and a forging item on a non-blood mage to make the item.

[thejeff]

Because it gets harder to compare. You have to figure in the costs of buying the priests, of having more provinces being hunted and thus producing less gold. The opportunity cost of using those castle slots to buy blood hunters instead of researchers or combat mages.
I agree in general, especially with nations like Mictlan who have cheap blood hunters, the other costs are generally low.
I can see two cases where you might want to empower hunters: Where you only have expensive B1 mages, like Vanjarls. Or capital only ones - Warlocks? Then the cost of getting more blood hunters is much higher.

Or when you are low on provinces to hunt. Few higher level blood mages seem to generate less unrest/slave than more low level hunters, so you might want to concentrate.

[BigDaddy]

Just keep in mind that you can "slave hoarde" by increasing the blood level of your mages, if you are in a position that makes it prudent to do so. There is a real RoR on each level you boost them. That third point of effective blood pays off fairly fast, especially with a decent forging discount.

Also, your slaves aren't doing you any good sitting in the dungeon, at some point you need to work harder to keep them working for you.

It isn't so much how many gems you have, as how fast and which ones you can spend.

[Aleph]

Also, vampires as blood hunters, I assume you mean vampire lords (or whatever their name). Aren't they more useful auto-summoning, or fighting or casting spells. Besides, they come into play mid to end game, by then you either have an established blood economy or you'll probably never have one.

Realize this is a deep resurrection of a post in a topic that was already necroed, but just getting back into Dominions after some time away and wanted to comment on this.

LA Ulm's Vampire Counts are the vampires I think of as blood hunters - 44 blood slaves for a B2 hunter, or 49 blood slaves for the equivalent of a B3 via an SDR. Granted, from a pure blood economy perspective they are notably less efficient than Mictlan's Tlahuelpuchi, however:

a. Mictlan's comes at Blood 6 while LA Ulm's comes at Blood 0, which makes them available at very different points in the game.
b. Vampire Counts are a spammable unit that can take on many roles throughout the game, while Tlahuelpuchi are likely only worth their cost as bloodhunters and in rare cases assassins (as they compete against Infernal Disease at the same blood level). In particular, on top of the advantages of immortality, regeneration, and slightly superior stats across the board, Vampire Counts make significantly better demon leaders than do Tlahuelpuchi.
c. the freespawn of the Counts plays an integral role in LA Ulm armies as chaff for Ulm's excellent Rangers. (However: does someone who knows the game better than I do know if thralls have gold upkeep? Used to have EDI's database bookmarked, can't find it now)
d. Vampire Counts are likely the best that LA Ulm can do for a bloodhunter, while the extreme efficiency of the Mictlan Priest makes him quite difficult to out-do (save for MA Mictlan, as mentioned elsewhere).

All that said, anyone better at math than I am want to throw in on efficiency of maintenance-free summons as bloodhunters? As more recent posts are looking at opportunity costs of bloodhunting, we should be able to calculate an average initial gold expenditure per bloodslave, then multiply that by number of bloodslaves spent to summon the creature. That will give us the total "lifetime" gold cost of the summons, which can then be used comparatively to see how long it takes a particular summon to surpass a non-summoned hunter, both in terms of his initial gold cost AND upkeep (earlier comparisons seemed to bypass the former, which does matter). How long, for example, would it take for a Vampire Count to out-efficient a Mictlan Priest? A decade? A century?

[Stavis_L]

(However: does someone who knows the game better than I do know if thralls have gold upkeep? Used to have EDI's database bookmarked, can't find it now)

They have a gold cost of 1, which would, in huge numbers, lead to some upkeep.

Also, Edi's database is here: http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=42819.

It's also linked in his .sig, so if you find any posts by Edi, you can find the db, assuming you don't have signature display disabled.

[BigDaddy]

Utimately determining a sound aggregate equavelence between gems, gold, blood slaves, RP turns, castle turns, etc, is going to require both a short, mid, long term prospectus (much of which is educated guessing and diplomatic specualtion), and a good executive determination.

For instance, if you have growth scales, but are penned in, then biding your time might make sense, whereas if you had death scales and were penned in, upping your blood levels would make no sense at all, probably regardless of your forging costs.

[Trumanator]

Really, as a general rule, don't empower bloodhunters beyond B1 or give them boosters. B1 noncap hunters w/SDRs are perfectly viable for most nations. If you are hunting with scouts, go ahead and empower a few to B1, but no further except on those you want to forge/cast rituals with. Boosters almost always have a better use than as hunt assists.

[BigDaddy]

They are worth ~1.5 slaves for an effectively B2 hunter (a B1 hunder with a SDR or just a B2 hunter) and ~1 for an effectively B3 hunter. With a mad forge bonus, early in the game, or if your need for a higher level caster/forger is on the margin, it might make sense. Note that I just assume a SDR. It might be useful to figure out the other booster that come earlier...

In practice I've never used blood slaves in this way, but I have at times had a somewhat large excess of them. Also, it goes to show that you should really have your blood booster equipped on someone all the time. Finally, I've never had a forge bonus mad high enough bring this down below 10 turns. If you have the proper magic site, plus some items, and maybe even forge of the ancients, this could make sense, especially if it isn't deep into the game and you're in good position.

Also, because I mostly play 2-player, and the games are really very aggressive... so much so that even clam hoarding can be harmful.

....


Armor of souls is lvl 2 and increases b1 hunters harvest by ~((2+3.5)*.9)-(1+3.5)*.5)=2.7slave/turn It takes a B5 hunter 1 turn to forge, at a cost of (probably a pretender turn + oppurtunity of most of a soul contract) and 5+3.5=8.5slave, for a total of 48.5 w/o the dwarven hammer and 38.5 with the dwarven hammer.

48.5/2.7=17.9 which is slower than a soul contract.

38.5/2.7=14.25 turns = now, this begins to pay off somewhat before a soul contract would - whatever benefit you get from the devils in the mean time, but really, that sould contract would not yet have produce a squad really viable squad (15+).

Now, if you couldn't get dousing rods, but could forge the lvl4 booster with a dwarven hammer for 17 slaves + 4+3.5 = 24.5 slaves/2.7 = 9 turns to pay off.

[thejeff]

I don't empower scouts anyway. Once you've got enough to empower, it's almost always better to empower a mage who'll give you a useful path combination. Then they can hunt/forge/cast as needed.

[Trumanator]

talking about anything over a 25% forge bonus is really just outside the realm of normality. Also, there's no reason that you HAVE to use those slaves you've got stocked up. You could easily just spam some RoT/HFH/3RS or whatever, since you'll almost certainly not have that big a stock if you're not a blood power.

[BigDaddy]

In one game, I spammed HFH and lesser horrors, but it wasn't effective, and we left the game at a draw, because I had gotten sloppy with my provicial money and slave management and squandered my lead.