| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 cluckingcody |
|||
|
Posts: 80 (02/18/09 7:44 PM) |
I'm in shock they haven't done a merge of 3 tribes yet. That would cause complete chaos & make it incredibly unpredictable, no matter which tribe
has the numbers. One tribe may have numbers, but the other 2 could gain up, then when close to a pagonging, gain up with the other tribe that has low
numbers... and on and on and on.... And in such a case, a final 3 wouldn't really be the reason for a boring post-merge.
...or something. 
|
||
|
Quiddity |
|||
|
Posts: 4830 (02/18/09 9:36 PM) Registered User |
Definately. Wish they hadn't merged them into two tribes in ASS, a three tribe would have been interesting. Of course waiting til F9 to merge is probably
far too late if its gonna be a three tribe thing, they'd have to do it a lot earlier.
|
||
|
Todesco10 |
|||
|
Posts: 119 (02/19/09 11:22 AM) |
We need more 3 tribes!
|
||
 Thailandsurvivor |
|||
|
Posts: 5126 (02/19/09 12:09 PM) |
cluckingcody wrote:The final three would still make it a boring post merge. Since three people can be sitting together in the end, the majority group can pagong the others and ride it out. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who likes the final three as a full time twist is not a true fan of the game. Every single season, even the sub par ones, has had an exciting end game scramble to see who will be sitting in the final two. Alliances are forced to turn on each other, resulting in entertainment and drama. All that was lost when the final three was implemented. |
||
|
Kirblar |
|||
|
Posts: 7624 (02/19/09 1:35 PM) Registered user |
Thailandsurvivor wrote:Yeah, because knowing who's going to win half-way through the finale is so much fun.
|
||
|
Thailandsurvivor |
|||
|
Posts: 5128 (02/19/09 3:27 PM) |
I know. It was soooooooooooo shocking when Earl barely edged out a win. It was such a surprise to see Bob somehow pick up all 4 Kota votes. And who could have
ever guessed Todd would stay in control in the final episode?
Amanda did look like she had a chance, but if it was a final two in China, it would have been Amanda vs. Todd anyways. Actually, scratch that. If everyone knew it was a final two, it probably wouldn't have been a Pagonging in the first place. I will give you Ethan, Sandra, Tom, and maybe Aras, but every other final 2 TC was up in the air. Either finalist could have pulled out a win. |
||
|
cluckingcody |
|||
|
Posts: 82 (02/19/09 3:27 PM) |
I see the point, and BELIEVE me, I'm much more pro-final 2 than final-fucking-3 (sans Cirie season)... I just truly feel we will never see a final 2 again.
Alas, a 3-tribe merge, especially at 11/12 people would at least make up for that a little.
|
||
|
Kirblar |
|||
|
Posts: 7625 (02/19/09 3:56 PM) Registered user |
Thailandsurvivor wrote:Jenna, Danni, Chris? I mean, after S5, the only season to have a 4-3 vote was All-Stars, with the next 1-vote margin being Cook Islands. Jenna was only shocking because the goat was hidden. |
||
|
Thailandsurvivor |
|||
|
Posts: 5129 (02/19/09 4:00 PM) |
Halfway through the episode, you really thought Chris was an obvious winner? After the jury questioning, I'll give you that, but with all the girl power
and amount of people Chris screwed over, it could have gone either way.
Jenna was the least obvious winner ever... After Danni voted out Rafe, you are right. Although edgic would beg to differ. |
||
|
Quiddity |
|||
|
Posts: 4838 (02/19/09 4:16 PM) Registered User |
TS, would have to disagree with you on China. Many, myself included were quite shocked at the fact that Todd beat Amanda. Many people fully thought Amanda was
gonna pull off the win, then were flabbergasted when she actually started talking to the jury and fucked everything up, and surprised that Todd was able to do
stuff as good as he ended up doing, like convincing JR to vote for him. :P Agree on Fiji and Gabon though. A F3 season in Fiji gave us the most predictable
finish in Survivor history by far. Before the jury even started talking to them I think it was apparant that not only would Earl win, he'd win unanimously.
The criticism of a predictable F2 is stated mostly using hindsight. I'd say the only truly predictable F2 results were Pearl Islands, Palau and Guatemala (although like TS said, a great many edgic people and Stephennie fans were convinced she was winning). Things were up in the air for every other season. You can say it it was predictable now, but you can only say that because you know what happened. Simply using the "OMG the vote difference wasn't by 1 vote! OMG!" argument is foolish and invalid. And regardless, I'd much rather have a predictable hour or so in the final episode then have very predictable boots at F5 and F4. |
||
|
Kirblar |
|||
|
Posts: 7626 (02/19/09 4:22 PM) Registered user |
Every winner from S9 to S12 was known the instant the F2 was official.
|
||
|
Quiddity |
|||
|
Posts: 4839 (02/19/09 4:26 PM) Registered User |
Kirblar wrote:You're only saying that now because you know the turnout and because it fits your argument. Can you present us with documented evidence? Until then, its hindsight, nothing more. After the brutal way Chris acted towards Julie and Eliza when they were voted out, you're telling me you knew for a fact that he would get their vote? You knew for a fact that Leann was gonna vote for Chris? You knew for a fact that Sally and Austin were gonna vote for Aras instead of Danielle? Danielle had the original Bayoneta connection with Sally and had her EI time with Austin. Watching the show live, I certainly thought there was a possibility that she could get those two votes. Those two seasons were in no way on the same level as Palau and Guatemala, where I would agree that you knew the winner the second the third place finisher's vote was revealed. |
||
|
srvivrfreakevelrich |
|||
|
Posts: 323 (02/19/09 4:30 PM) Admin |
Quiddity wrote: But what about Allstars? did you honestly think boston rob was gonna win with so many people hating him at the final tribal council, or did that season just suck so bad that nobody has a opinion about it? And did you really think more than 1 person would vote for Lill? Come on, be realistic. |
||
|
Thailandsurvivor |
|||
|
Posts: 5130 (02/19/09 4:53 PM) |
Quiddity wrote:I agree, but I also pointed out that Amanda and Todd would have been the final two anyways unless Courtney came up with a big challenge win. The same people would be shocked. And regardless, I'd much rather have a predictable hour or so in the final episode then have very predictable boots at F5 and F4.You mean than have very predictable boots from the merge onwards, right? I mean you don't need an unpredictible boot order to have a good season. Look at Gabon...although I don't think anyone expected Bob and Susie to be the final two. I'm just saying that every season with a final 2 has had a more exciting end game, other than Micronesia for the obvious reason that they thought it was a final three, than seasons with a final three. Also, we're much less likely to watch a full Pagonging play out if everyone is jockying for position. For example, I think Denise would have sided with Erik and PG at 6 had they thought it was a final two. |
||
|
lemurwrench |
|||
|
Posts: 575 (02/19/09 4:55 PM) |
I tend to agree with the notion that the bring a goat to the end strategy eventually would be counteracted against to the point where a goat in the final 3
would be not common.
|
||
|
Thailandsurvivor |
|||
|
Posts: 5131 (02/19/09 4:55 PM) |
srvivrfreakevelrich wrote:Ethan, Sandra, and Tom are the only exceptions. That's three out of 13 final twos. But yes, I did think Rob had a chance. Look at who he was up against. |
||
|
Quiddity |
|||
|
Posts: 4841 (02/19/09 5:38 PM) Registered User |
srvivrfreakevelrich wrote: I personally can't comment on All Stars or Pearl Islands real time. The first episode of Survivor I ever watched live was during Vanuatu. I knew beforehand who won those two seasons. I can only go by what other people have said. If you want to play the Kirblar game, it was a close, unpredictable, great finish, as it was a one vote differential. Had I watched real time, probably would have expected Rob to win. TS wrote: Oh, okay. Yeah, I agree with you on that one. F2/F3 wouldn't have made a difference, the only difference would be Amanda would be second instead of Courtney. :P TS wrote: I agree with the notion completely that says that the end game is made more boring, as early as F5 due to the F3, when in earlier seasons that would have been more exciting due to an alliance of roughly that size breaking up. I agree that unpredictable boot order doesn't necessarily dictate how good a season is, nor even whether the winner is predictable or not. Borneo and Guatemala are my two favorite seasons, the first was one I watched where I knew the winner beforehand and there was the purest pagonging we've ever seen. The second was the sole season in which I read spoilers the entire way, and even though the F2 spoilers were dead wrong (the spoilers said Steph beat Danni, which is likely a big reason why edgic fucked up so badly with their final picks) that Danni would beat Stephenie was as obvious as it could be. I think though that the F3 does damper strategy a bit and that may not ruin a season, but it could potentially harm how entertaining it is towards the end in some people's eyes.
The goat thing is never going away, ever. We saw that it only took one season for the F3 to have a person standing there with two goats next to him. That resulted in the most predictable outcome of all time. In a F3 season! If you had to come up with the purest Survivor strategies, what would they be? Win challenges. Form an alliance. Go to the end with someone less liked than you. This notion that the F2 shouldn't have goats is pure absurdity. Goats are a part of the game, whether deluded F3 fans want to admit it or not. To not want to go to the end with a goat is bad strategy. Why do you think people have bashed Colby for years for voting out Keith? You can't have it both ways. F3 supporters want there to be no goats at the end, but unless you're someone like Cirie who is gonna get voted out because you're not a goat, its a very good strategy to have. The sheer fact that you're gonna have two people there at the end means that one is going to be liked more than the other no matter what. The only way to solve that is to have an even number jury member and cross your fingers and hope that there's a 4-4 tie. |
||
|
lemurwrench |
|||
|
Posts: 576 (02/19/09 6:10 PM) |
Quiddity wrote: ums, that was a statement in favor of the final 2. I was saying that eventually more people like cirie would figure out that if they want to stay in the game they need to get rid of the goat before they are voted out instead of the goat. goats are dominantly at the alliances that control the gamel, the only people benefit from the goats are the non-goats set to make the final 2 so its in everyone elses best interest to get rid of the goats so they have a better chance of making the final 2 example: there is a six member dominant who has just finished pagonging the post-merge minority. one of the six is exteremly disliked and at the core of the alliance (aka a goat) there is also a player who seems to be the controlling figure of the alliance and therefore a final 2 threat, you are a third member of this alliance and realise the alliance "leader" is likely trying to take the disliked player to the finals base don your observations. now, if i were you i would not get the other three with you to take out the threat yet. why? because other people would then want to a goat to the end as they've probably figured what you have figured out and if they havent its likely you bringing the subject up will get them to. thus, at the final five your chanc of making final 2 is really 1/4. since3 no one is going to go after the goat so he is basicallya lock. instead i would go after the goat. why? because the threat, though likely skilled in fenagling his way back into the majority, will be easier to take out now that you know you can stage successful overthrow. also, since there is no one who is definately making the final 2, your chances have already inproved to 2/5. |
||
|
beatles20147 |
|||
|
Posts: 12198 (02/19/09 11:09 PM) Registered User |
Kirblar wrote:By that logic, so was S6--no way Matt was gonna lose that. Oh wait... Predictable finishes (and let's not pretend that Earl and Bob were unpredictable) are much better than dull, bunched-up final TCs. I'd much rather know that Tom has the game in the bag while watching 20 entertaining minutes of the jury finally giving it to Katie than the horrendously forgettable CI final TC with 30 seconds of suspense as Jeff reads the votes. I was saying that eventually more people like cirie would figure out that if they want to stay in the game they need to get rid of the goat before they are voted out instead of the goat. goats are dominantly at the alliances that control the gamel, the only people benefit from the goats are the non-goats set to make the final 2 so its in everyone elses best interest to get rid of the goats so they have a better chance of making the final 2 Great point--and why on earth would they put an end to F2 just as this strategy got unearthed? I would've hated it at the time, but damn, looking back, I wish Terry had won S12 just so we could've avoided this F3 bullshit entirely. (And also, Terry > Aras so yeah, I wish he had won) |
||
|
Ambient Nite |
|||
|
Posts: 953 (02/22/09 2:09 PM) |
I'm going to guess that this will be a final 2 this time.
|
||
