Posts from Mafia 100. Sylvan: Tree of Life. Auto-translated

What did she say? That you don't like the percentages? There are no surprises; Yashur's "love" for percentages has been known for a long time, and others don't really mind. At least, it doesn't stop them from signing up. And I always rely on personal preferences when creating a set, so everything is quite predictable.
And if we're talking about randomness, we should get rid of role-specific traits altogether, leaving only the double vote. Then everything will definitely be in the players' hands, maybe except for the random role assignment.

I think random role assignment isn't necessary either. And in the game, you still have to guess the roles, and what if you miscalculate and end up sabotaging a helpful town role?

You are all traitors -_-

They say that Mafia is a game based on randomness. In that case, this randomness needs to be minimized so that players can control the course of the game as much as possible. Introducing additional complications in the form of even more control is not a good idea, unless the goal is to create a fun and lighthearted game.

So, how do we determine where that line is – the boundary between a game that is too simple and lacks random events, and a setting that is overflowing with randomness? Besides, percentage-based defenses, in my opinion, are not the worst or most complicated element of the game. There are notes, redirections, indiscriminate killings, false clues, and no one is complaining about those.

In redirects and indiscriminate killings, randomness depends on the players. In 50% defense, randomness is built into the game engine.

Don't bother. You won't convince each other.

Added 1 minute ago
But if you enjoy it, feel free to continue.

I’m not trying hard; I’m just expressing my outrage that someone online is wrong.

There are all sorts of notes, redirections, untraceable murders, false clues, and yet no one complains.

When you redirect, you get, at times, very accurate results about the role of the redirected player; it's hardly random.
Untraceable murders are unnecessary. False clues are not ideal, but tolerable.

As a GM, I declare that indiscriminate killings are necessary. Otherwise, I end up having to juggle three clues for one player in a single newspaper.

Anonymous killings are only useful for lazy GMs; Aretz would give everyone anonymous killings if he dared.

Okay, I give up. You win.

In redirects and indiscriminate killings, randomness depends on the players. In 50% defense, randomness is built into the game engine.

Randomness is not equal to a small amount of information; I would say that. The second option is more appealing to me personally because it allows you to indirectly find something, restore something, or figure something out... With the first option, nothing can be done by definition.
In general, I said roughly the same thing as Kosha, but it doesn't really matter; I expressed my opinion.

At least randomness prevents the situation where, by day 4, all roles are known, especially since the players' nicknames are revealed in the newspaper. Take, for example, the previous game. If it weren't for the sleeping dragon with random redirection, after the 3rd or 4th night, the roles table would be completely filled.

If a game without randomness is to be made, then the way newspapers are written should also be changed, specifically by not explicitly listing the nicknames of those who are blocked, protected, etc.

Redirection disrupts the balance. This should only be given to a lone wolf player, not someone who relies on hundreds of defenses against everything.
If anything, in my games, the usual problem was some players ruining the experience for everyone else with their behavior.