I understand what you're saying. And I no longer am advocating actual randomness. I'm advocating arbitrariness.In post 494, MathBlade wrote:Another application of the law of averages is a belief that a sample's behaviour must line up with the expected value based on population statistics. For example, suppose a fair coin is flipped 100 times. Using the law of averages, one might predict that there will be 50 heads and 50 tails. While this is the single most likely outcome, there is only an 8% chance of it occurring. Predictions based on the law of averages are even less useful if the sample does not reflect the population.
So expecting this scenario to match a win because randomness says the most likely thing is a win is bad.
There's a good sociological/psychological backup argument I have as well. Most setups have the actual town winrate significantly encompass the theoretical random-lynch town winrate. The fact that this setup is an exception is highly suspect.
1. We only have 2 lynches and most (almost every one in this setup) early lynches are on town due to mafia manipulation.
2. Mafia has easy ways to nullify apparent interactions between each other. Scumhunting is ridiculously hard in this setup if mafia have an ounce of competence.
3. Once everyone is pretty much null, mafia can easily push through a mislynch based on bad logic.
4. The high volume of mafia in this setup combined with the small amount of time we have to actually nail them (notice that we need the entire town in order to get mafia) very easily screws over reads and discussion.
