The game's policy on leaving rounds early is too aggressive.

[cob709]

I don't agree.

y

[Quartzified]

Yes, I did answer your question.

Plus, "get good", what a joke. Weren't we in a simulation of a realistic gameplay scenario in a different thread that you never finished? Let's try it again. Failure to respond will be interpreted as quitting while alive for the purpose of the simulation.

Night 1 - You are the Godfather, and William Phips is the Mafioso, and your Random Mafia are a Framer and Disguiser. You decide to attack Cotton Mathers.

Day 2 - Cotton Mathers was killed by a member of the Mafia. His role was Medium. William Phips was shot by a Vigilante. His role was Mafioso. John Hathorne claims Vigilante and asks to be lynched so he can't get Witched again. The town lynches John Hathorne because nobody is counter-claiming Vigilante, so he's unlikely to be a Jester that wanted Cotton Mathers. His role was Vigilante.

Night 2 - The Jailor arbitrarily jails you because they had no reasonable leads and openly states that nothing you say will cause them to execute you tonight because if you're the Godfather then they have a deadlock. What do you do?

Yeah, no jailor will ever intentionally not execute sus people just because they might be GF and could be chain-jailed. If jailor plays like that, you can expect town to lose, especially in ranked where it is a 9v6. Even if mafioso leaves d1, if jailor is intentionally not executing in hopes of being able to chain-jail the GF, then town will lose very quickly if they are not extremely accurate with their day lynches. It is never a good play to not execute someone you think is evil just because they have a chance of being the GF and you can chain-jail them. Even if they do end up being GF, you executing them still wastes mafia a night and gets rid of an evil. Chances are, they aren't the GF and not executing them would just cause you to waste a night jailing a random evil and letting them live. If you are a solo GF and jailed, you should just claim something suspicious to encourage jailor to execute you, and there's a very low chance they won't. If they somehow believe your defense, then either you didn't do a good enough job, or the jailor is so stupid that they probably won't even realize that there being no mafia deaths the next day is correlated to you being jailed.

[SilverCruz]

I feel like you're underestimating just how terrible for the Mafia a deadlock is. If the town still has the numbers to vote, then it's the optimal strategy because once it starts, you have already won and actually wiping out the Mafia is just a formality at that point unless your target breaks it by force via quitting, plus outside of there being an Ambusher (which is a rather unsafe role), the Mafia can't do anything to press their numbers when the Mafioso is gone if the Godfather is jailed. If the numbers are bad then you need to take shots, sure, but starting a deadlock will make sure that it doesn't even get to that point if successful, and you can still collect information with jails that don't result in a deadlock. The only counter-play the Mafia has to Jailor deadlocks is to not attack when a non-Mafia is jailed to fake one, but even if they do they're giving Investigatives more time to fish them out and if the endgoal of the Jailor executing a townie manages to happen, that doesn't stop the Jailor from deadlocking.

Relating to the deadlock, my suggestion was to prevent the Jailor from jailing someone two nights in a row. I also read a concept of taking away the Jailor's roleblock ability unless they execute so that they, as well as not being able to deadlock at all, aren't objectively superior to the Escort at the one thing the Escort is supposed to do by virtue of bypassing roleblock immunity.

Speaking of, Escort is kind of a badly designed role that I feel only exists so that the Consort has a counterpart. It's way better at disrupting the town than it is the Mafia at the start of the game due to simple probability (whereas the Consort causes problems on purpose so that doesn't apply), and the role's feedback is either extremely strong or extremely weak with no in-between. You have no idea whether or not you've done anything at all because you get no direct information (with the entirety of the Neutral Evil bracket being worthless to target because they either don't do anything at night anyway or are flat out immune to you), the Mafia doesn't kill while the Mafioso is gone and you then block them again to see if it was a coincidence or if you've found the deadlock, or you get stabbed up from blocking a Serial Killer and you're now dead.

[dbpeanut]

Just saying this now. The Jailor can still jail after executing a townie solely so they can deadlock.

[SilverCruz]

Yup, so it's permanently "Escort but better."

There's a reason I started using the Jailor's face shoddily pasted over a picture of Wesley Crusher as my avatar, ya'know.

[EqsyLootz]

I don't agree.

This is why you get suspended.

[kyuss420]

I don't agree.

This is why you get suspended.

So hes the guy who fucks over my NE wins, by leaving the game cos his faction was dumb enough to get wrekt in 3 days......

[EqsyLootz]

I don't agree.

This is why you get suspended.

So hes the guy who fucks over my NE wins, by leaving the game cos his faction was dumb enough to get wrekt in 3 days......

This was one of my arguments earlier, him leaving doesn't just affect his own faction but every other faction as well.

[SilverCruz]

Well golly gee, if the rules weren't so draconian, you could maybe... just also leave and find another round?

There seems to be a misunderstanding that every round is hallowed and must be held to the highest order. That's not true. Some rounds go to crap for one side instantly. Sometimes half the Mafia quits before Night 1 is over. Sometimes half the town quits giving the Mafia voting majority immediately and the Jailor, for once in his stinkin' life, gets punished for "im jailor tplo on me" by being the first one to get lynched off so that the town can't put the scales back to neutral by RDMing. There will always be bad rounds even if nobody ever leaves early, that's what you get when arbitrary decision is such a significant factor to the game.

Also, Eqsy, this preachy holier-than-thou attitude isn't endearing. As well, you started ignoring the simulation, so you broke the deadlock by quitting while alive. Have a nice day.

[dolphina]

Well golly gee, if the rules weren't so draconian, you could maybe... just also leave and find another round?

There seems to be a misunderstanding that every round is hallowed and must be held to the highest order. That's not true. Some rounds go to crap for one side instantly. Sometimes half the Mafia quits before Night 1 is over. Sometimes half the town quits giving the Mafia voting majority immediately and the Jailor, for once in his stinkin' life, gets punished for "im jailor tplo on me" by being the first one to get lynched off so that the town can't put the scales back to neutral by RDMing. There will always be bad rounds even if nobody ever leaves early, that's what you get when arbitrary decision is such a significant factor to the game.

Also, Eqsy, this preachy holier-than-thou attitude isn't endearing. As well, you started ignoring the simulation, so you broke the deadlock by quitting while alive. Have a nice day.

golly gee wouldn’t preventing everyone from leaving prevent this problem instead of letting everyone leave

[SilverCruz]

Short answer - No.

So one note, you're coming off as awfully flat.

[dolphina]

Short answer - No.

So one note, you're coming off as awfully flat.

one of your arguments is you saying that the rounds are skewed in a faction’s favor because some of the team quit

how tf would letting everyone quit solve the problem no games would ever get finished because someone’s going to get a role they don’t like and everyone will follow after them

[SilverCruz]

Well, the role balance could be tweaked so that there aren't roles that are just terrible like the OG hard counter, the Framer. I'd say retool it into a Mafia Lookout so that it's actually helpful to the Mafia and a threat to the Town, but the developers don't read the forums, so why should I bother getting in depth into that?

The developers could, instead of making an overbearing punishment robot to ban everyone who's not happy with the game on the same release schedule as Duke Nukem Forever, actually use the forum and ask people why they Day 1 quit to get feedback and take that feedback into consideration.

They could add failsafes to make quitting less harmful instead of just having the game immediately give up and just declare the player dead.

They could maybe allow players to blacklist a few roles so that people aren't as prone to getting roles they don't enjoy, and have a failsafe that if everyone in the lobby has blacklisted a role and that role gets called on anyway, assign it to someone in spite of the blacklist and give them a bundle of extra Merit Points and one Scroll of their choice if they see the game through to the end, win or lose.

[dbpeanut]

Well, the role balance could be tweaked so that there aren't roles that are just terrible like the OG hard counter, the Framer. I'd say retool it into a Mafia Lookout so that it's actually helpful to the Mafia and a threat to the Town, but the developers don't read the forums, so why should I bother getting in depth into that?

The developers could, instead of making an overbearing punishment robot to ban everyone who's not happy with the game on the same release schedule as Duke Nukem Forever, actually use the forum and ask people why they Day 1 quit to get feedback and take that feedback into consideration.

They could add failsafes to make quitting less harmful instead of just having the game immediately give up and just declare the player dead.

They could maybe allow players to blacklist a few roles so that people aren't as prone to getting roles they don't enjoy, and have a failsafe that if everyone in the lobby has blacklisted a role and that role gets called on anyway, assign it to someone in spite of the blacklist and give them a bundle of extra Merit Points and one Scroll of their choice if they see the game through to the end, win or lose.

The blacklisting roles thing is actually a really good idea, it would reward players who are forced to play objectively bad roles like the exe and Jester, but simultaneously prevent role leavers en masse, as is common in both All Any and Classic.

[Quartzified]

Well, the role balance could be tweaked so that there aren't roles that are just terrible like the OG hard counter, the Framer. I'd say retool it into a Mafia Lookout so that it's actually helpful to the Mafia and a threat to the Town, but the developers don't read the forums, so why should I bother getting in depth into that?

The developers could, instead of making an overbearing punishment robot to ban everyone who's not happy with the game on the same release schedule as Duke Nukem Forever, actually use the forum and ask people why they Day 1 quit to get feedback and take that feedback into consideration.

They could add failsafes to make quitting less harmful instead of just having the game immediately give up and just declare the player dead.

They could maybe allow players to blacklist a few roles so that people aren't as prone to getting roles they don't enjoy, and have a failsafe that if everyone in the lobby has blacklisted a role and that role gets called on anyway, assign it to someone in spite of the blacklist and give them a bundle of extra Merit Points and one Scroll of their choice if they see the game through to the end, win or lose.

You just immediately assumed that every D1 leaver quits because they don't like their role just because (I'm assuming here, just like you did) that's what you do. If that was the case, admission wouldn't be necessary to punish people for leaving. Most of the time, it is more likely that people leave because they were disconnected from the game either because of their internet or the server kicking them out. In fact, you see people leave as all kinds of roles. There's just this mentality in the community that evil roles are weak and no one wants to play evil roles, so every time someone leaves as an evil role, people immediately assume they did it on purpose when that's not always the case. Maybe there is a percentage of people who leave whenever they get a role they don't like, but most leaving cases turn out to be due to an unintentional disconnection.

And even if your "failsafe" is implemented, there are still people that are going to leave because of disconnections and there are still going to be people that leave to troll, and these cases probably make up the majority of leaving cases.

However, I do agree that the leaver buster system isn't the most effective way to combat leaving on it's own. Intentional leavers make up a minority, and they can easily just leave 5 games intentionally and play 50 games legit and continue to circumvent the rules. The leaver buster system also doesn't take into account people who leave because of a disconnection, which again probably make up the majority of leaving cases.

I believe that the implementation of a reconnection system would solve this problem. People who unintentionally disconnected should be offered a chance to rejoin the game and continue to play. And instead of having leavers die from suicide, have their character stay in the game as if they were still alive but afk. In addition, if someone leaves a game while they were alive, they should have to wait until the game they were in ends before being allowed to join a new one. This would discourage people who leave to troll because they would not be able to mass leave and join new games. This would also discourage people who leave because they do not like their role, because they would have to wait out the entire round anyway before being allowed to play a new game. If these suggestions are implemented, I believe that a leaver buster system would be unnecessary and the leaver problem would be all but solved.

[dbpeanut]

Well, the role balance could be tweaked so that there aren't roles that are just terrible like the OG hard counter, the Framer. I'd say retool it into a Mafia Lookout so that it's actually helpful to the Mafia and a threat to the Town, but the developers don't read the forums, so why should I bother getting in depth into that?

The developers could, instead of making an overbearing punishment robot to ban everyone who's not happy with the game on the same release schedule as Duke Nukem Forever, actually use the forum and ask people why they Day 1 quit to get feedback and take that feedback into consideration.

They could add failsafes to make quitting less harmful instead of just having the game immediately give up and just declare the player dead.

They could maybe allow players to blacklist a few roles so that people aren't as prone to getting roles they don't enjoy, and have a failsafe that if everyone in the lobby has blacklisted a role and that role gets called on anyway, assign it to someone in spite of the blacklist and give them a bundle of extra Merit Points and one Scroll of their choice if they see the game through to the end, win or lose.

You just immediately assumed that every D1 leaver quits because they don't like their role just because (I'm assuming here, just like you did) that's what you do. If that was the case, admission wouldn't be necessary to punish people for leaving. Most of the time, it is more likely that people leave because they were disconnected from the game either because of their internet or the server kicking them out. In fact, you see people leave as all kinds of roles. There's just this mentality in the community that evil roles are weak and no one wants to play evil roles, so every time someone leaves as an evil role, people immediately assume they did it on purpose when that's not always the case. Maybe there is a percentage of people who leave whenever they get a role they don't like, but most leaving cases turn out to be due to an unintentional disconnection.

And even if your "failsafe" is implemented, there are still people that are going to leave because of disconnections and there are still going to be people that leave to troll, and these cases probably make up the majority of leaving cases.

However, I do agree that the leaver buster system isn't the most effective way to combat leaving on it's own. Intentional leavers make up a minority, and they can easily just leave 5 games intentionally and play 50 games legit and continue to circumvent the rules. The leaver buster system also doesn't take into account people who leave because of a disconnection, which again probably make up the majority of leaving cases.

I believe that the implementation of a reconnection system would solve this problem. People who unintentionally disconnected should be offered a chance to rejoin the game and continue to play. And instead of having leavers die from suicide, have their character stay in the game as if they were still alive but afk. In addition, if someone leaves a game while they were alive, they should have to wait until the game they were in ends before being allowed to join a new one. This would discourage people who leave to troll because they would not be able to mass leave and join new games. This would also discourage people who leave because they do not like their role, because they would have to wait out the entire round anyway before being allowed to play a new game. If these suggestions are implemented, I believe that a leaver buster system would be unnecessary and the leaver problem would be all but solved.

This is also an excellent idea, the current system punishes people who maybe have a bad connection or just had a lag spike.

The leaver buster system has never actually been effective at busting intentional leavers anyways.

[SilverCruz]

The blacklisting roles thing is actually a really good idea, it would reward players who are forced to play objectively bad roles like the exe and Jester, but simultaneously prevent role leavers en masse, as is common in both All Any and Classic.

I mean there is some subjectivity, I like Executioner and Jester. I feel like they're often played either too passively or way, way too pushy. It's a balancing act.

You just immediately assumed that every D1 leaver quits because they don't like their role just because (I'm assuming here, just like you did) that's what you do. If that was the case, admission wouldn't be necessary to punish people for leaving. Most of the time, it is more likely that people leave because they were disconnected from the game either because of their internet or the server kicking them out. In fact, you see people leave as all kinds of roles. There's just this mentality in the community that evil roles are weak and no one wants to play evil roles, so every time someone leaves as an evil role, people immediately assume they did it on purpose when that's not always the case. Maybe there is a percentage of people who leave whenever they get a role they don't like, but most leaving cases turn out to be due to an unintentional disconnection.

And even if your "failsafe" is implemented, there are still people that are going to leave because of disconnections and there are still going to be people that leave to troll, and these cases probably make up the majority of leaving cases.

However, I do agree that the leaver buster system isn't the most effective way to combat leaving on it's own. Intentional leavers make up a minority, and they can easily just leave 5 games intentionally and play 50 games legit and continue to circumvent the rules. The leaver buster system also doesn't take into account people who leave because of a disconnection, which again probably make up the majority of leaving cases.

I believe that the implementation of a reconnection system would solve this problem. People who unintentionally disconnected should be offered a chance to rejoin the game and continue to play. And instead of having leavers die from suicide, have their character stay in the game as if they were still alive but afk. In addition, if someone leaves a game while they were alive, they should have to wait until the game they were in ends before being allowed to join a new one. This would discourage people who leave to troll because they would not be able to mass leave and join new games. This would also discourage people who leave because they do not like their role, because they would have to wait out the entire round anyway before being allowed to play a new game. If these suggestions are implemented, I believe that a leaver buster system would be unnecessary and the leaver problem would be all but solved.

It's more that I'm focusing on people who leave because they're upset with their role because they're an important demographic to poll that are just being beaten over the head for how they're expressing their dissatisfaction instead of actually being asked what the problem is. It's unfortunate that that's how they express that dissatisfaction, sure, but what else can they do other than sit through a grind of a match where they feel useless because they're a Framer, making their impression of the game even worse?

Accidental disconnects are a completely separate issue, and being able to reconnect is an aspect of what those failsafes would be, but for cases where they disconnect and don't come back the game needs an answer other than "Kill immediately". I suggested Quitbots, but for the Mafia in particular it would also be possible to just outright let the remaining Mafia control the quitters, like night falls and the Consigliere in Slot 4 has quit, so someone else punches "/q 4 12" to make them investigate Cotton Mathers in Slot 12, and the next night they'll spit out a canned response of "I checked Cotton Mathers and saw that they're a Veteran." or whatever the result was, and come daytime if the Mafia gets voting majority, punch in "/q 4 12" again to make the Consigliere vote against Cotton Maters then "/q 4 guilty" to make them vote Guilty. This is harder to figure out for the town since letting just anyone control them would get extremely messy and there wouldn't be a one-size-fits-all answer to their night behaviour since whereas an Investigator can just randomly target anyone it hasn't targeted and successfully checked before while writing the results in their Will and it'll be fine, an Escort acting similar would be a colossal liability (like, ya'know, an Escort in general before they can deadlock).

What, do leaving suspensions roll off if you do 50 games without doing it again? I legitimately don't know. I'm also cool with having to wait until your last game is over to rejoin a new one for live leaving (or at least until you character is dead since sometimes people will leave when they're at the gallows and there's no universe that exists in which they have a defense that the town will buy/the Mafia has majority and it's Kangaroo Court time so their defense literally doesn't matter), really, since I advocate for live leaving being okay when the situation is hopeless, and if the situation is hopeless then it's not going to last a whole lot longer anyway whether you stick around or not.

[EqsyLootz]

Hey Hey. Maybe if we ignore him. He'll go away since this discussion went on long enough.

[SilverCruz]

You're a rude little thing.

[kyuss420]

blacklisting roles isnt a thing for the same reason anti roles arent a thing. (scrolls that reduce the chance of you getting a role) Theres threads and threads explaining the problems created by making such things exist. (no db, im not linking them, idc enough to go searching for things i have no problem with)

so 9/10 players have blacklisted (or are using anti-scrolls for) exe.
I didnt blacklist exe.
Im 90% more likely to get exe.
After queueing for 5 games, everyone in match assumes Im exe.

cost of (anti)scrolls vs burning one, every time you DONT get that role.....

But thats not the point I came here to argue.
I play VIP mode a lot, so I see a lot of noobs that quit because town found them day 2 or 3.
after they quit, town lynches one of their team mates, which usually costs the match, because instead of the coven losing 1 member, they lose 2, which means they lose 2 nights to achieve win conditions instead of 1.
I have also seen coven go on to win after the above scenario occured - so just because some noob assumes they have no chance of winning, doesnt mean theyre correct in their assumption.

Now there are also 2 nuetral players in the game in the above scenario. So some noob quitting because *insert crybaby reason here* means they now have less time to achieve their win cons, if not no time at all....which causes them to lose also.

I mean, do you quit in real life when things arent going the way you planned? Or do you try and stick it to the guys giving you a hard time? Guess thats what separates the boys from the men....

[dbpeanut]

blacklisting roles isnt a thing for the same reason anti roles arent a thing. (scrolls that reduce the chance of you getting a role) Theres threads and threads explaining the problems created by making such things exist. (no db, im not linking them, idc enough to go searching for things i have no problem with)

so 9/10 players have blacklisted (or are using anti-scrolls for) exe.
I didnt blacklist exe.
Im 90% more likely to get exe.
After queueing for 5 games, everyone in match assumes Im exe.

cost of (anti)scrolls vs burning one, every time you DONT get that role.....

But thats not the point I came here to argue.
I play VIP mode a lot, so I see a lot of noobs that quit because town found them day 2 or 3.
after they quit, town lynches one of their team mates, which usually costs the match, because instead of the coven losing 1 member, they lose 2, which means they lose 2 nights to achieve win conditions instead of 1.
I have also seen coven go on to win after the above scenario occured - so just because some noob assumes they have no chance of winning, doesnt mean theyre correct in their assumption.

Now there are also 2 nuetral players in the game in the above scenario. So some noob quitting because *insert crybaby reason here* means they now have less time to achieve their win cons, if not no time at all....which causes them to lose also.

I mean, do you quit in real life when things arent going the way you planned? Or do you try and stick it to the guys giving you a hard time? Guess thats what separates the boys from the men....

Ever play Friday the 13th? Yeah no blacklisting roles is similar to listing a preference.
Let's be honest though, you literally only listed scenarios that are unlikely to happen, and then compared a game to real life. This isn't real life, and even though I tough out every role I get, I don't blame anybody at all for not wanting to play exe.

[Quartzified]

You shouldn't leave the game just because you don't like the role you got. You should at least still try to play the game, because straight up leaving would ruin it for your other teammates and the other players as well.

[dbpeanut]

You shouldn't leave the game just because you don't like the role you got. You should at least still try to play the game, because straight up leaving would ruin it for your other teammates and the other players as well.

Realistically, it doesn't ruin that much if an exe or a Jester quits. Often times they die by Mafia or Coven anyways.
In fact, if you're anything but Arso, PB, GA, WW or Jugg you hardly impact anything except in specific circumstances. I'd even argue that PB and GA can sometimes just have no effect depending on the level of intelligence in the town.
I'm not saying I leave, I explicitly avoid leaving, but I don't blame people who leave if they dislike a role- even if they have teammates. It either means something is fundamentally wrong with the role or they feel as if they have no chance anyways.
Don't villify people for leaving, recognize why they leave instead.

[mdntranger]

Realistically, it doesn't ruin that much if an exe or a Jester quits. Often times they die by Mafia or Coven anyways.
In fact, if you're anything but Arso, PB, GA, WW or Jugg you hardly impact anything except in specific circumstances.

The problem with leaving (especially early leavers) is that you have reduced claim space *AND* verified a role in one fell swoop. Those with good deduction skills can use this 'gift' to find the opposing faction quicker. I believe the early leavers do affect the game more than people think...although it may not affect you personally, you will have affected someone else's game.

Unrelated - Developers *do* read the forums. They just don't necessarily post here all that often to let you know they're being read. I've seen many suggestions implemented in the game that were a direct result of a forum conversation that no developer ever made a post in.

[SilverCruz]

blacklisting roles isnt a thing for the same reason anti roles arent a thing. (scrolls that reduce the chance of you getting a role) Theres threads and threads explaining the problems created by making such things exist. (no db, im not linking them, idc enough to go searching for things i have no problem with)

so 9/10 players have blacklisted (or are using anti-scrolls for) exe.
I didnt blacklist exe.
Im 90% more likely to get exe.
After queueing for 5 games, everyone in match assumes Im exe.

cost of (anti)scrolls vs burning one, every time you DONT get that role.....

But thats not the point I came here to argue.
I play VIP mode a lot, so I see a lot of noobs that quit because town found them day 2 or 3.
after they quit, town lynches one of their team mates, which usually costs the match, because instead of the coven losing 1 member, they lose 2, which means they lose 2 nights to achieve win conditions instead of 1.
I have also seen coven go on to win after the above scenario occured - so just because some noob assumes they have no chance of winning, doesnt mean theyre correct in their assumption.

Now there are also 2 nuetral players in the game in the above scenario. So some noob quitting because *insert crybaby reason here* means they now have less time to achieve their win cons, if not no time at all....which causes them to lose also.

I mean, do you quit in real life when things arent going the way you planned? Or do you try and stick it to the guys giving you a hard time? Guess thats what separates the boys from the men....

So stop using the same name and break up your typing habits if it's genuinely becoming that much of a problem? Plus, I wasn't thinking "anti-scrolls". I was just thinking you can blacklist a few roles period. No cost, ya'know.

No comment on the other, I don't have the Coven and I have no plans of fetching it.

You shouldn't leave the game just because you don't like the role you got. You should at least still try to play the game, because straight up leaving would ruin it for your other teammates and the other players as well.

"Shouldn't" is a meaningless word. People leave, or they don't. Instead of trying to ban everyone who leaves, it would be better to ask them why they did it and maybe consider making the game more comfortable for them so they don't feel like leaving is the better option for their time. But in a world where the developers don't care about feedback, that's hopeless.

Realistically, it doesn't ruin that much if an exe or a Jester quits. Often times they die by Mafia or Coven anyways.
In fact, if you're anything but Arso, PB, GA, WW or Jugg you hardly impact anything except in specific circumstances.

The problem with leaving (especially early leavers) is that you have reduced claim space *AND* verified a role in one fell swoop. Those with good deduction skills can use this 'gift' to find the opposing faction quicker. I believe the early leavers do affect the game more than people think...although it may not affect you personally, you will have affected someone else's game.

Unrelated - Developers *do* read the forums. They just don't necessarily post here all that often to let you know they're being read. I've seen many suggestions implemented in the game that were a direct result of a forum conversation that no developer ever made a post in.

And I may or may not have been explicitly told otherwise because the forums may or may not be "too toxic", which is a pittance of an excuse if you ask me. Maybe that "toxicity" has to do with the unhappy playerbase, which has to do with the negligence employed because of the "toxicity"? It's an Ouroboros of negative feedback, problems don't get solved by not listening to what they are.

Plus, like I've said elsewhere, Janitors and Forgers should be able to target the Mafia at will. It wouldn't be a perfect solution because there's not always a Janitor or Forger and doing something to force one of them into every game would be too rough on the town, probably, but for the cases where there is one or the other, it would help when the Godfather or Mafioso quits because they'd be able to conceal the fact that the Mafia instantly decapitated itself (nevermind the Mafioso should probably be removed to just let anyone commit the attack at the expense of doing their normal thing that night, TMK I think they call it). One of my favorite plays that relies on someone quitting is to forge a quitter as being the Godfather because everyone takes the Godfather quitting Day 1 at face value (and you don't even need to bother with a phony Will since it'd be weirder if there were one). I understand that if the game were running ideally, whether by nobody quitting or just having a fallback plan that isn't instantly offing the quitter's guy, that play would never be possible, but sometimes you have to make the best of a bad situation.