  In an epsilon-approximate Nash equilibrium, a player can gain at most epsilon
in expectation by unilateral deviation. An epsilon well-supported approximate
Nash equilibrium has the stronger requirement that every pure strategy used
with positive probability must have payoff within epsilon of the best response
payoff. Daskalakis, Mehta and Papadimitriou conjectured that every win-lose
bimatrix game has a 2/3-well-supported Nash equilibrium that uses supports of
cardinality at most three. Indeed, they showed that such an equilibrium will
exist subject to the correctness of a graph-theoretic conjecture. Regardless of
the correctness of this conjecture, we show that the barrier of a 2/3 payoff
guarantee cannot be broken with constant size supports; we construct win-lose
games that require supports of cardinality at least Omega((log n)^(1/3)) in any
epsilon-well supported equilibrium with epsilon < 2/3. The key tool in showing
the validity of the construction is a proof of a bipartite digraph variant of
the well-known Caccetta-Haggkvist conjecture. A probabilistic argument shows
that there exist epsilon-well-supported equilibria with supports of cardinality
O(log n/(epsilon^2)), for any epsilon> 0; thus, the polylogarithmic cardinality
bound presented cannot be greatly improved. We also show that for any delta >
0, there exist win-lose games for which no pair of strategies with support
sizes at most two is a (1-delta)-well-supported Nash equilibrium. In contrast,
every bimatrix game with payoffs in [0,1] has a 1/2-approximate Nash
equilibrium where the supports of the players have cardinality at most two.

Computer Science and Game Theory