Yuku free message boards

Kitty Pryde1 wrote:

---

Then what the fuck is the point of seperating people into groupings of weak and strong if the challenges vary so as to have different people win all the time?

Now you want to eliminate challenges....because they are fair and unbiased lol

Kitty Pryde1 wrote:

---

If anyone can win a challenge and anyone can lose a challenge, then no one is weak or strong

Again, the point you keep missing is to give all players an equal chance to get to the top half of a challenge and immunity, and then send the losers to tribal and loser-camp. The ones voted off will be the "weak" because they failed twice, not because they are "unlucky".

Kitty Pryde1 wrote:

---

Currently, it's just like that in that a strong tribe wins challenges and a weak tribe votes out their weaker members.

I told you to pay attention last time, obviously you didnt. Or you cant lol.

Pay closer attention: What the current game does is run a team-based competition at first, and then an individual competition.

Since the team-players are AWARE of this, they will not focus on winning as a team.

The weak will target the better players to vote off, because they are thinking of the merge and the individual challenge.

If the game remained team-based throughout, they would keep their better players.

If the game was always an individual based game, as my system illustrates, the better players would have the chance to save themselves.

But having it both ways favors the mobbed up weaklings, and results in a final of weaklings, which you have in every single season, including this one.

It has nothing to do with "outplay, outwit, outlast", it is simply "outluck, outnumber".

Notice in nine pages the only person to have figured this out is Kitty Frog. Everyone else is just oblivious. Still.

survivorisdabest wrote:

---

survivorisdabest wrote:

---

The huge flaw in your system is that the moment ANY smart player comes along (and there will be one every season), they will make an alliance of 6 weak people. This alliance of 6 will throw every challenge

An alliance of six challenge-throwers? LOL That alliance will have to start voting eachother off as soon as there are 12 people left in the game, what moron would want that besides you? They would have to trust eachother and throw challenges before the very first challange, what moron would want that besides you? They would suffer at loser-camp, what moron would want that besides you? They would know challenge-throwers never win a million, what moron would want that beisdes you? They could easily get immunity not by winning but only being in the top half, what moron would not want that except you?

There are four versions (original, 1, 2a, 2b) of my system, all better then the current one. I just dismissed your only argument against one them, and you have no argument against the other three:

1) Keep the winning half immune but allow them to vote.

2a ) Have the one player who just misses the top half be immune (like the winners) but go to tribal and to the loser camp (to suffer like the losers).

2b ) Have the one player who just misses getting on the winning team go to exile island and avoid everything.

"Problem" (unlikely as it is [if it even is a problem at all]) solved. Again.

phoenixtobootcamp wrote:

---

How about stop casting the Chets?

Casting can only do so much, but the main problem with Chet is that he remained while voting better players out, and that can be solved by eliminating teams.