| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 SFC |
|||
|
Posts: 388 (07/03/08 8:44 PM) Registered user |
ArtieeLange1 wrote: Which you have to admit would still be hard for him to do |
||
|
doc |
|||
|
Posts: 168 (07/03/08 8:57 PM) |
SFC wrote: Even if he did, no big deal, He'd have to being in the winner's half alot before He's considered a threat, So every time he's in the loser's half, he's safe. He makes F2 against someone like Ozzy, every season is like that, so how does that help ratings? |
||
|
SFC |
|||
|
Posts: 389 (07/03/08 9:27 PM) Registered user |
doc wrote: I don't think Ozzy would get anywhere near the Final 2 under Artie's system, first time he finishes in the bottom half, he would be voted out
|
||
|
ArtieeLange1 |
|||
|
Posts: 121 (07/04/08 5:13 AM) |
SFC wrote: Good. Then he will try harder and succeed, or he will fail, be vulnerable and culled, while those who tried harder successfully are safe. End result? More
entertaining.
|
||
|
ArtieeLange1 |
|||
|
Posts: 122 (07/04/08 5:21 AM) |
I don't think Ozzy would get anywhere near the Final 2 under Artie's system, first time he finishes in the bottom half, he would be voted out Thank you, another perfect example of how those who do not support my system are simply too dim to understand it. I love it. Ready? You are using Ozzy as an example, moronically, since everyone already knows Ozzy is a threat. 16 new players, you will not be able to identify a threat, since half the players will be winners each time. By the time any threat is known, it is well
into the game, where a) nearly everyone would have at least won once, making everyone a "minor threat" and b) all players will have had a chance to
strategize.
|
||
|
doc |
|||
|
Posts: 169 (07/04/08 9:00 AM) |
You're crazy if you think it would take a long time to recognize Ozzy as a threat. Maybe if he held back some in the challenges, but no way someone like
Ozzy is holding back. And this is only because he's stronger than he looks. How hard would it be to see James as a threat? Or Alicia? But it's good
you finally see how strong players will be a target when they slip to the losers group. Keep thinking that way, maybe after 30 more pages you'll
understand how much your system sucks, something everyone else got with your first post.
|
||
|
SFC |
|||
|
Posts: 390 (07/04/08 11:24 AM) Registered user |
ArtieeLange1 wrote: It just takes one bad challenge, if Ozzy gets a question wrong, trips, misses a jump, to get him in the bottom half. In your system here is how a conversation would go if both Chet and Ozzy were in the losing tribe. Person A: Want to vote off Chet? Person B: Chet? Fuck no. He can barely finish above last place. We need to vote Ozzy* off, that guy has been in the top 3 of every challenge so far. Person A: Makes sense, maybe if he goes we can get into the winners half next time? * Insert any Challenge threat. |
||
|
ArtieeLange1 |
|||
|
Posts: 123 (07/04/08 11:32 AM) |
doc wrote: Why wouldn't he hold back, dummy? He only has to get into the top half. He won't need to dominate the physical challenges by choice, and he
won't dominate the mental-type challenges, not by choice.
There will be no "threats". And even if you think there will be, they will be safe until THEY screw up, in a challenge and in socializing.
You can't even count on how many levels this beats the current system.
|
||
|
SFC |
|||
|
Posts: 391 (07/04/08 11:56 AM) Registered user |
To which people would take not of his high placings and them making him a threat. Like I said all it takes is for one mistake to land them in the bottom half, no one could ever do a perfect run in those conditions. Yes there will always be threats, and they are easily identifiable, let's play a game "IDENTIFY THE THREAT" Ozzy-Threat James-Threat Chet-Not A Threat Kathy-Not A Threat Jason-Threat Courtney-Not A Threat Let's try and count the ways your system beats the current system 1.)................. Damn, I've got nothing, anyone else have an idea? |
||
|
doc |
|||
|
Posts: 170 (07/04/08 1:55 PM) |
ArtieeLange1 wrote: I gotta spell this out for you? It's called ego. Players like Ozzy, Boston Rob, Tom and Terry never sit out challenges, will always want to do a tie break or a critical part of a challenge. They have to be the hero, in individual challenges they have to be number 1. Rob wouldn't even give the meaningless FC to Amber If there's 20 players, they only need to get into the top 10. They will always go for first. Second to them is as good as a being in the losers group. Look at the competition this season between Ozzy and Jason. Ya, if they played smart they wouldn't be seen as a threat as fast. Also it's just not how they do in challenges, but how they are around camp, climbing coconut trees like it's nothing. Ego even hits the smarter players. Look at Michele in Pearl Islands at the eating Challenge. Still none. Okay I'll give you 1, You'll Give EPMB a good laugh. Let's check out his bank account vs. yours. I think he knows what he's doing. |
||
|
ArtieeLange1 |
|||
|
Posts: 124 (07/04/08 1:55 PM) |
SFC wrote:There is no "them", dummy. 1) Challenges are not only physical. 2) Players no longer have to dominate, but simply reach the top half. SFC wrote: 1).......You just proved how the current system easily identifies threats 2) I already proved how the current system easily votes off threats. 3) My system solves both those problems. 4)The day someone of your capacity supports my system is the day I start to doubt it.
4) And now its time to laugh. |
||
|
ArtieeLange1 |
|||
|
Posts: 125 (07/04/08 2:05 PM) |
doc wrote: Doc? You really need to stop with these posts, its become increasingly difficult to figure out which one of you here is the dumbest. Ready?
They don't have to win to get immunity, only get in the top half. Using your pseudo-psychological terminology, any player who has "ego" and needs to "be a hero" and dominate to first place when don't have to? You don't recognize it because you're pea-brained, but that would be fucking moronic, and morons getting through in this game is just what my system is designed to prevent. And now its time laugh again at how these dopes against my system keep proving why its better. |
||
|
getting real |
|||
|
Posts: 1236 (07/04/08 5:04 PM) Registered User |
Word just in. MB has caved in. The kingdom is yours.
|
||
|
SFC |
|||
|
Posts: 392 (07/04/08 5:51 PM) Registered user |
ArtieeLange1 wrote: 1.) No, I use something called "The Power of Observation". Just by looking at a picture of them you can say "Oh, they are going to be good" or "They are going to suck in challenges" 2.) No You haven't, please show us, give examples. 3.) You can't fix it if it isn't broken. 4.) Well, you support it so there is kind of a little paradox 4.) There is supposed to be a 5 there dumbass. |
||
|
aboutbreakingrules |
|||
|
Posts: 303 (07/04/08 9:37 PM) |
Simple way to improve Survivor?
Alliance-based strategies work, it's been proven over and over and over again. What we really need is something the producers wlll never be up for: people who actually will play smart and aren't there just to mouth off, be colorful, or guarantee the result the producers want. |
||
|
TimmyTAR |
|||
|
Posts: 447 (07/06/08 10:56 PM) Registered user |
I tried to read this thread so I could reply here with an idea of what's gone down, but then I realized something; it's pages and pages of people
explaining how the system that Artie's is flawed and the many loopholes that are in it, and Artie retaliating, and saying the same thing over and over
again, never giving any evidence to disprove their opinion, just "But in my system, blah, blah, blah."
Okay, from what I gather, the concept of this is for the game to be individual when it comes to challenges, and the top half goes to the "Winner's Camp" and the bottom half goes to the "Loser's Camp" and attends Tribal Council. While that may be a great idea to make sure that "weaklings dont (BTW, it's DON'T) comprise the finals," it's still flawed in that the people from the losing Tribe will vote out the competition so they can get into the winning tribe and not return to Tribal Council. In fact, your system is actually doing the REVERSE, in that it's encouraging Castaways to vote out the strongest competitors and keeping the weaklings in the game. This was probably asked earlier, but when would the merge kick in? If so, then would all the castaways vote off one of the castaways that were in the losing half? Would only the losing half vote in a Tribal Council at the merge? Face it Joel--I mean, Artie--the motto is "Outwit, outplay, outlast," not "outmuscle, outpuzzlesolve, outwin." The players like Chet will always thrive over big oafs like you--I mean, people like Joel--because they are able to outsmart and strategize in alliances to get rid of threats and advance further in the game. Now please reply with how my opinion is stupid and wrong with an explanation as follows: "But that's not what would happen. People would vote off weak members because they were on the weaker tribe." That's not true. If I get on Survivor, you best believe that if my time in this game depended on winning those challenges, I would vote off an Ozzy, a Joel, a Terry anyday over a Chet, a Courtney, a Becky. |
||
|
ArtieeLange1 |
|||
|
Posts: 126 (07/07/08 1:36 AM) |
TimmyTAR wrote: Hey Timmy, don't bitch about me having to repeat myself, its because most of those against my system write before thinking. Like you just did.
1) The losing tribe will not be permanent, unlike the current system, making alliances more difficult 2) Winners of the most recent challenge will not be at tribal.
3) The mixed variety of losers will simply vote off the weakest loser. What remains? The best players.
TimmyTAR wrote: Haven't decided when, or if.
TimmyTAR wrote: Not if Chet, Courtney and Becky want to vote you out first. If not, under the current system you losers could vote out threats. Under my system the best players are immune. |
||
|
TW4Life |
|||
|
Posts: 314 (07/07/08 2:28 AM) |
Artiee you seem to be a very astute observer of things, but I think your free time that you like to devote to Survivor would be better served if you did edgic
ratings instead of putting that powerful brain to use by trying to change the show.
|
||
 GnarlsInCharge |
|||
|
Posts: 1782 (07/07/08 3:13 AM) Registered user |
Artie can't do edgic rating unless he read spoiler
|
||
|
SFC |
|||
|
Posts: 396 (07/07/08 3:49 AM) Registered user |
ArtieeLange1 wrote:Fixed |
||
