Vote Mathematics
Author: Vitaly - mr. Koteo (Brisbane Mafia Club)
Vote Mathematics
Voting is the only fully deterministic public event in Sports Mafia.
Speeches may mislead. Votes create structural consequences.
Every vote:
Changes survival probability.
Moves the game toward or away from parity.
Reveals alignment under pressure.
This chapter explains how to read votes correctly and make structurally safe decisions.
Control and Critical Rounds
In FIIM, elimination is plurality-based:
The player with the most votes leaves.
Majority is not required. Coordination is.
Player Count and Structural Meaning
10
7 Red / 3 Dark
Red control
Stable
9
6 Red / 3 Dark
Red control
Stable
8
5 Red / 3 Dark
Critical
Wrong elimination → 7 → 6
7
4 Red / 3 Dark
Hard critical
Wrong elimination → 6
6
4 Red / 2 Dark
Critical
Wrong elimination → 5 → 4
5
3 Red / 2 Dark
Hard critical
Wrong elimination → 4
4
2 Red / 2 Dark
Parity
Dark wins
Definitions:
Red control – Red structurally safe.
Critical – One wrong elimination creates parity next cycle.
Hard critical – One wrong elimination likely ends the game.
Parity – Red cannot win the vote.
The structurally dangerous rounds are:
8 → 7 → 6 and 6 → 5 → 4
“Free Voting” at 9 Players
At 9 players (6 Red / 3 Dark), the game is in Red control and not yet critical.
This is the best moment for what is often called an invitation to “free voting”.
A Red player may suggest:
Nominate more players. Let’s see who votes where.
Why this works at 9:
A wrong elimination does not immediately collapse into parity.
Red still has structural cushion.
The table can afford information gathering.
When only two candidates are nominated, voting often becomes polarized and predictable. But when three or more players are nominated, voting spreads.
This reveals:
Who is willing to nominate whom.
Who avoids nominating certain players.
Who votes decisively.
Who hesitates.
Who follows.
Who protects.
At 9 players, encouraging broader nominations increases informational value without immediate structural risk.
It allows Red to observe:
Natural alliances,
Early coordination,
Hidden protection patterns.
This would be dangerous at 7 or 5. But at 9, it is optimal information play.
Free voting is not chaos.
It is controlled information extraction during a structurally safe round.
Coordination vs Fragmentation
At low player counts, coordination decides the game.
At 7 players (4 Red / 3 Dark):
If Red vote:
2 → Player #3
1 → Player #6
1 → Player #9
Dark vote:
3 → Player #7
Result: 3–2–1–1
Player #7 leaves.
Dark controlled elimination without majority.
The lesson is not about numbers.
The lesson is:
At 7 and 5, Red must act as a unit.
If Red players separate their votes across multiple candidates, Dark can win by simple coordination.
Fragmentation is more dangerous than being slightly wrong.
For how this causes collapse in practice, see section How Red Actually Loses at Critical Rounds.
Parity Mechanics
Parity means equal number of Red and Dark players still alive at the table.
At parity, Dark controls the vote and wins.
Critical collapse transitions:
7 → 6
6 → 5 → 4
5 → 4
Parity from 8 Players — The Hidden Trap
At 8 players (5 Red / 3 Dark), the game is already critical.
If Red eliminate a Red player at 8:
7 players remain (4 Red / 3 Dark).
Night comes.
Dark eliminate one more Red.
6 players remain (3 Red / 3 Dark).
Parity is achieved.
Dark wins.
Notice what happened:
Red did not lose at 6. Red lost at 8.
The elimination at 8 determines whether the game survives the next cycle.
Many players misread 8 as “still safe” because Red still has numerical advantage. But structurally, 8 is the last moment to prevent collapse.
If Red fail at 8, the game often ends two phases later.
That is why 8 must be treated with the same discipline as 7 and 5.
Parity from 7 Players — One Wrong Vote
At 7 players (4 Red / 3 Dark), the game is in a hard critical state.
If Red eliminate a Red player:
6 players remain (3 Red / 3 Dark).
Parity is reached immediately after the night phase.
Dark wins.
There is no recovery round. There is no second chance.
At 7, only one incorrect elimination is required for the Dark team to reach parity.
Unlike 8 players — where collapse happens over two phases — at 7 the vote itself determines survival.
That is why fragmentation at 7 is so dangerous.
Three coordinated Dark votes are always present. If Red do not consolidate, they risk handing control to the minority.
At 7 players, discipline is not optional. It is survival.
Parity at 6 players (4 Red / 2 Dark)
If Red eliminate Red: 5 players remain (3R / 2D) Night kill → 4 players (2R / 2D) Parity → Dark wins.
This is why 6 is also critical.
At 5 players (3R / 2D):
If Red eliminate Red: 4 players remain (2R / 2D) Parity → Dark wins.
This is why 5 is also hard critical.
Near these numbers, structure matters more than emotion.
Sheriff vs Sheriff — Structural Probability Logic
7 players alive.
Two Sheriffs revealed:
Player #2 claims Sheriff.
Player #8 claims Sheriff.
Each calls the other Dark.
All red checks are dead.
One of them is 100% Dark.
Correct structural play:
Vote between Player #2 and Player #8.
Voting outside them risks eliminating an unrelated Red and collapsing the game.
Extended Case — Sheriff with Dark Check Alive
Suppose:
Player #2 claims Sheriff.
Player #8 claims Sheriff.
Player #2 gives a Dark check on Player #5.
Correct structural play:
Vote between:
Player #2
Player #5
Two possibilities exist:
If Player #2 is real Sheriff:
Player #5 is real Dark.
If Player #8 is real Sheriff:
Player #2 is fake → Dark.
In both branches, elimination remains inside Dark structure.
This reduces the risk of eliminating an unrelated Red and increases the chance of keeping a real Sheriff alive.
It also produces more information for the next round.
This concept is frequently misunderstood.
Players think they must choose between the two Sheriffs.
But when a Dark check exists, eliminating inside the Sheriff–Dark-check pair is often the safer structural move.
How Red Actually Loses at Critical Rounds
Red usually loses not because they misread speeches.
Red loses because they vote separately.
At 7 players:
Red votes:
2 → Player #4
1 → Player #7
1 → Player #9
Dark votes:
3 → Player #1
Plurality wins.
Red separation gives Dark control.
Procedural Collapse
A player becomes confused about voting order. Misses the vote. The vote goes to the last nominated player.
At 7 or 5, that can decide the entire game.
Near critical rounds:
Every vote is structural power.
Reading Votes Correctly
Red players do not know whether the elimination was correct at voting time.
So instead of thinking in terms of “mis-elimination” during the vote, focus on structural behavior.
After the vote, evaluate:
Who voted together?
Who pushed separation when coordination was required?
Who changed vote late?
Whose speech strongly opposed a target but voted elsewhere?
Voting alignment under pressure is stronger than speech.
Vote Suspicion Adjustment Rule
After each vote, adjust suspicion weights.
Speech strongly opposed a target but voted differently
+20%
Encouraged vote separation on critical round
+15%
Voted with a coordinated minority that benefits structurally
+15%
Voted separately when consolidation was clearly needed
+10%
Consistent speech and structurally safe vote
−5%
Voted against structurally risky elimination
−5%
Notes:
Voting separately at critical rounds often indicates Red personality, but it is structurally dangerous.
Speech–vote mismatch is the strongest indicator.
Slight negative adjustments should remain modest, because Dark can bus teammates.
This system forces disciplined probability updating instead of emotional reaction.
Red Protocol at 8-7 Players
Consolidate.
Do not isolate your vote.
Eliminate inside confirmed conflict structures.
Avoid ego decisions.
Think in terms of survival first, certainty second.
Red Protocol at 6-5 Players
Act as a unified 3-player block.
Do not distribute votes across multiple targets.
Eliminate inside the highest-probability conflict.
Avoid emotional stands.
Remember: wrong elimination ends the game next cycle.
Core Principle
Voting is structural control.
On critical rounds if Red behaves like individuals and Dark behaves like a team, the outcome becomes predictable.
Last updated