Yuku free message boards

Olmec Donald wrote:

---

token lunatic wrote:

---

The strongest goes huh. The strongest who has played a shitty social and political game goes.

Tom W, Colby, Aras, Brian H, Ethan, all went on to win.

I debunk you.

None of the contestants you mentioned played shitty social and political games. And Colby didn't win.

FAIL

Fail bonus: You call Colby a smart player, and yet he made the second-dumbest move in history, per AnomyBC.

Olmec Donald wrote:

---

lemurwrench wrote:

---

my opinion on when people need social strategy IS when people need social strategy

I'm sorry, Survivor God. I must have missed your coronation ceremony.

lolz, key words : unless you prove me wrong. SOMEONE'S opinion has to be right. so if you dont agree with my opinion, offer me a better one, otherwise i have no choice but to assume that im right

Fizzmix wrote:

---

Let me further show your why your suggestion is trash. What if the first episode challenge was completed, and the 9 players of the winning tribe made an alliance. Why not have 5 to 8 of the alliance members tank the next challenge? Hell, what if they just sat out, or immediately gave up. That's the easiest way to get to the loser camp. Have the 3 alliance members most well suited to the challenge perform well. Well they don't even have to perform that well, they just have to beat out 3 members of the "loser tribe" that episode. The alliance tanks on purpose so that they have the advantage on the loser tribe for numbers. They always make sure that at least a majority of the loser tribe consists of their alliance. They vote off one of the people not in their alliance. They continue this strategy until the 9 of them have made the Final 9.

That sounds fine in theory, but it is unlikely to work in practice. For a start, all the strong players are not necessarily going to align. They could see one another as threats. You want examples? JP got voted of in Cook Islands because Adam realised that he was a threat to his own power. Ditto for Joel and Mikey B in Micro. They also might just not get along on a personal level. Cirie refused to ally with Jonathan in Micro for both these reasons.

they could, but its the easiest way to get to the final 10, and what are they threats in? challenges? big whoop at merge only one person wins immunity, and depending on how early you form the alliance, you could dispose of any one challenge god (which by the way would be very hard to predict who it is seeing as how the challenges are going to vary) when you have a good enough majority. and also, there will be multiple opportunities to start the alliance, as i explained to artiee.

But let's say that your situation does occur, unlikely though it is, and the strong all agree to form an alliance, and tank in turn. Who determines who will tank when? You mention that the alliance members most suited to the challenge will perform well, but it has to be worked out beforehand. They don't see the challenge until they arrive for it, and by that point it's far too conspicuous (and late) to strategize. They could try to anticipate it based on treemail, but contestants have read it wrong before.

if they're smart, they will decide together. and it really doesnt matter what the challenge is, all they have to do is throw it, not that hard. and whats stopping them from deciding it before the challenge? if they can control the vote it doesnt matter how conspicuous they are.

also lolz at what you are saying, you are basically admitting that people will vote out the strong because they are threats in artiee's system. isnt that what artiee's system is supposed to prevent?

Even if they work out who will do well, some of these people might find the challenge is harder than it looks. Note the firemaking challenge Susie won. Randy noted that most of his alliance were adept at making fire, and Susie wasn't. Players not in this alliance of the strong may find the strength to beat the alliance if they know their ass is on the line. Observe Shii Ann in All-Stars. She won the endurance challenge and nearly won the firemaking challenge after that (note that nearly all of the strong alliance did even worse at this than Becky and Sundra and couldn't start a fire with matches). This requires grit and determination and makes for better TV than some shitbag being carried through the tribal stage on the backs of their better-performing tribemates.

i tonly takes one non-alliance member to fail, that will happen alot more often then none of them failing, and they will still make merge with majority.

Oh and making sure that the alliance of the strong dominates the loser tribe numerically at TC doesn't always work out. Kota had the advantage in both tribes after the second switch, and they're getting Pagonged now. Your assumption that the alliance will definitely hold through 9 TC's has been proven wrong time and time again, and is completely blown to smithereens by someone like Parvati, who is great at driving wedges into alliances, worming into them and rotting them from the inside.

same thing applies in the current system. irrelevant!!!!!!!!

Fizzmix wrote:

---

That's the thing in his version of the game. I just thought of it after reading his suggestion, why wouldn't at least one of the nine in the game think of it? I know that if I saw my surest path to victory was allying with the other 8 strongest members, I would absolutely do it because it guarantees my safety until 9.

Yeah, one of them will probably think of it. Pulling it off is a whole 'nother story. It needs incredible diplomacy to stop all of the strong people from butting heads. I can only think of one contestant who is that great at diplomacy, and that is Yul Kwon. And he needed the Hidden Immunity Idol to help him with that.

um lolz at yul having the best diplomacy of any survivor/

the same thing applies to the current system. irrelevant!!!!!!!!!!

In short, you guys don't seem to realise that every episode of Survivor reinforces Artie's theory.

reinforces its flaws maybe.

lemurwrench wrote:

---

ArtieeLange wrote:

---

That alliance would not only have to start immediately,

actually no, at any given time any given half of the players on the winning tribe can form an alliance and they'r already up one member. also, even though the winning tribe gets smaller as the game goes on, so does th losing tribe, so the winning tribe alliance need less people to control the vote.

but it would also have to start eating itself once there are 10 players left.

this is the same in the current system, irrelevant!!!!!!!!!!!!

This would be obvious to the players, not only preventing it from forming in the first place, but it would encourage players to flip since the less players trying, the easier it is get into the top half.

ZOMG!!! false assumptions!

and there are plenty of motivations for players to flip in the current system, more irrelevancy!!!!!

Also, the same players on the losing team also results in the same players on the winning team. Post-merge, you end up with two alliances; one well-fed, well-rested, strong as possible, and the other weakened to a state of near-exhaustion If that's the strategy they want, let them try it.

umz, if its the original winning tribe of ten that made the alliance in the first place, and they switch who's on the winning tribe, then when the merge comes its that same original alliance of ten that is there (if merge isnt at ten, correct me)

and if the alliance is formed later in the game, then thats still an alliance that consist of half the total player at that point in the game, so if the alliance is formed pre-merge and continue to be successful in thier strategy and vote non-alliance players out until merge, than they have majority at merge

the only exception to that being if a winning tribe of five when there are eleven people left form an alliance one round before the merge, and thats only if the winning tribe in your system is smaller than the losing tribe when there are an odd number of players (is it?)

but even if that happened, since they were the last winning tribe, THEY would be the well fed tribe

and in all other cases, the alliance has the majority assuming they are succesful pre-merge, and just as it is in the current system, 4 morons malnourished players can vote off 3 rocket-scientists well fed players.

so being well fed does nothing for you if your in the minority. except a possible immunity run, but then that player better hope all the post-merge IC's are endurance

wait, you said the challenges would be varied, scratch that, it doesnt help at all.


Under my system the players can do whatever they want,

you know you need to stop being a hypocrite artiee, because you keep on being irrelevant

and the winner will always be the best, not the luckiest.

i am currently preparing undeniable proof that your system is in fact designed so that it is easier to be lucky, lemurowage coming soon to a 100+ page thread near you soon.

although it would only being adding insult to injury, as i've owned the rest of your points already, with the exception of one loophole ive provided you with myself, but even with that after you try to use il be ready to re-own you again, so I'l be waiting.