This model is better for balancing even though it's based on a suboptimal strategy because it mimics the way people actually play. As you add mechanics to this it's going to model real gameplay better than random lynches. For instance, in a theoretical setup where players could grant bulletproof and tracker to a player day 1, the random lynching model sometimes has the town change their mind and lynch that player and drop EV, while this model acknowledges that it's more likely than not that player continues to get townread and that tracks continue to get fired and increase town EV. You can change the random lynching model to say "uh town never lynches the guy that got bulletproof", but then at that point you're partially adopting this model because you know it's better.In post 23, Kagami wrote:You shouldn't balance to 50%, imo, but that aside, you should balance to random EV or greater.In post 20, OkaPoka wrote:the important thing is how should setups be balanced right
with random lynching gen consensus was ev ~40% because we assume town can be big brain to help out wrs
do we start balancing @50% using this model or ... ?
This metric is just describing a phenomenon that is somewhat prevalent and the OP demonstrates that it's wildly suboptimal.
It's trivially possible to perform at random EV levels, so any balancing exercise should treat that as the lower bound even if poorer strategies exist.
Mostly-static-sorting
You should definitely ignore percentages though.