An idea to improve Survivor so that weaklings dont comprise the finals

0 Kudo

Started By	Comment
Fizzmix		#2201	[-]
Posts: 197 (12/04/08 3:28 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Fizzmix wrote: Instead of just talking about your theoretical system and incessantly repeating the same tired stuff, post a scenario. Like, how would the first challenge go, how would the first vote go, and set out how you would get down to a Final 4 of the 4 overall strongest players. Just pick a season of players so we can all relate to it well (instead of having to write "Strong Player 1" you would just write Tom Westman, for example if you were using Palau players for your scenario) and show all of us how you get from the first day at the beach to the end. Maybe in the challenge description, include some brief description like, "Swimming/puzzle challenge that rewards strong swimmers and people who can think" or even just "combination of physical and mental". You may say, "That's a waste of time, I don't have time to do all of that" but that's shit because you post in this thread many times per day, and have spent literally hours defending your system. It would actually save you time in the long run. If you are in this thread to actually make a case for your system, then you'll accept my challenge. If not, you'll have been proven to be trolling, and hopefully no one else will argue with you.
ArtieeLange		#2202	[-]
Posts: 442 (12/04/08 3:50 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Fizzmix wrote: Fizzmix wrote: Instead of just talking about your theoretical system and incessantly repeating the same tired stuff, post a scenario. Like, how would the first challenge go, how would the first vote go, and set out how you would get down to a Final 4 of the 4 overall strongest players. Just pick a season of players so we can all relate to it well (instead of having to write "Strong Player 1" you would just write Tom Westman, for example if you were using Palau players for your scenario) and show all of us how you get from the first day at the beach to the end. Maybe in the challenge description, include some brief description like, "Swimming/puzzle challenge that rewards strong swimmers and people who can think" or even just "combination of physical and mental". You may say, "That's a waste of time, I don't have time to do all of that" but that's shit because you post in this thread many times per day, and have spent literally hours defending your system. It would actually save you time in the long run. If you are in this thread to actually make a case for your system, then you'll accept my challenge. If not, you'll have been proven to be trolling, and hopefully no one else will argue with you. I already proved the current system introduces luck via artificially forced teams. For my system, why don't you post any scenario where anyone who achieves in the previous challenge gets voted out? Post a scenario where anyone who fails at a challenge but who succeeds at strategizing gets voted out? Post it, otherwise you are admitting my system is flawless.
SuperJude		#2203	[-]
Posts: 11991 (12/04/08 4:10 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Well, he clearly doesn't believe in his "system". That was all I needed to know pretty much. Claiming somebody unwilling to discuss the "system" means they believe in it is the final indication that he's just a troll, especially since I suggested the only valid method with which to test out his system. Those of you debating your points with this guy, please step back for a second and consider, you're just being wound up by a troll. Stop embarrasing yourselves, this is a huge joke on you suckers and Artiee just proved it. -SJ™
Fizzmix		#2204	[-]
Posts: 198 (12/04/08 4:10 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Fizzmix wrote: Fizzmix wrote: Instead of just talking about your theoretical system and incessantly repeating the same tired stuff, post a scenario. Like, how would the first challenge go, how would the first vote go, and set out how you would get down to a Final 4 of the 4 overall strongest players. Just pick a season of players so we can all relate to it well (instead of having to write "Strong Player 1" you would just write Tom Westman, for example if you were using Palau players for your scenario) and show all of us how you get from the first day at the beach to the end. Maybe in the challenge description, include some brief description like, "Swimming/puzzle challenge that rewards strong swimmers and people who can think" or even just "combination of physical and mental". You may say, "That's a waste of time, I don't have time to do all of that" but that's shit because you post in this thread many times per day, and have spent literally hours defending your system. It would actually save you time in the long run. If you are in this thread to actually make a case for your system, then you'll accept my challenge. If not, you'll have been proven to be trolling, and hopefully no one else will argue with you.
ArtieeLange		#2205	[-]
Posts: 443 (12/04/08 7:37 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Fizzmix wrote: Fizzmix wrote: Fizzmix wrote: Instead of just talking about your theoretical system and incessantly repeating the same tired stuff, post a scenario. Like, how would the first challenge go, how would the first vote go, and set out how you would get down to a Final 4 of the 4 overall strongest players. Just pick a season of players so we can all relate to it well (instead of having to write "Strong Player 1" you would just write Tom Westman, for example if you were using Palau players for your scenario) and show all of us how you get from the first day at the beach to the end. Maybe in the challenge description, include some brief description like, "Swimming/puzzle challenge that rewards strong swimmers and people who can think" or even just "combination of physical and mental". You may say, "That's a waste of time, I don't have time to do all of that" but that's shit because you post in this thread many times per day, and have spent literally hours defending your system. It would actually save you time in the long run. If you are in this thread to actually make a case for your system, then you'll accept my challenge. If not, you'll have been proven to be trolling, and hopefully no one else will argue with you. I already proved the current system introduces luck via artificially forced teams. I already explained how my system is designed, and why. For my system, why don't you post any scenario where anyone who achieves in the previous challenge gets voted out? Post any scenario where anyone who fails at a challenge but who succeeds at strategizing gets voted out? Post it, otherwise you are admitting my system is flawless.
Wuming Shi		#2206	[-]
Posts: 1261 (12/04/08 7:51 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	lol what a twat.
ArtieeLange		#2207	[-]
Posts: 444 (12/04/08 8:04 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Winner camp of winners: 1) Kitty Pryde1 Loser camp of losers: 1) PeachessandCreeams 2) SuperJude 3) Wuming Shi Next.
Wuming Shi		#2208	[-]
Posts: 1264 (12/04/08 8:11 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Uh huh. Look who's talking.
SuperJude		#2209	[-]
Posts: 11995 (12/04/08 8:41 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	ArtieeLange wrote: Loser camp of losers: 1) PeachessandCreeams 2) SuperJude 3) Wuming Shi Hmmm, I rather like my fellow losers, this is awesome! I got called a loser by an internet troll! ON NOES! STFU and run an ORG, stop being such a pussy about this. -SJ™
Big Gangster Veto		#2210	[-]
Posts: 219 (12/04/08 9:00 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Artiee is a genius
PrettyGoodYear1988		#2211	[-]
Posts: 1294 (12/04/08 10:06 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Let's see... It's Day 15. There are 12 Survivors left. A "loser's alliance" of Denise, Chet, Courtney, Kathy, Sandra, and Susie has consistently placed in the bottom of every challenge, voting out the more physical threats among the weaker half of the Survivors. Marcus, on the other hand, has consistently placed in the top of each challenge, and thus has been Immune for the entire game. In the fifth challenge, however, Susie remarkably is the sixth Survivor to make a fire, and thus goes to the "strong camp", bumping Marcus into the bottom half where he is now facing a strong alliance of five. Unable to crack an alliance of five which has been together since Day 1, and unable to use his physical strength as any sort of bargaining chip to keep him around (which would happen in the current system), Marcus is eliminated unanimously. It's a situation similar to what happened to Michelle in Fiji, and no one here thought that was fair. He failed the challenge, yes, but by doing so he was put in a situation in which he would have virtually no strategic options, which only happens rarely in the current system when there are uneven tribe swaps (and I think most fans agree that those are unfair). He didn't fail strategically. He just didn't have a chance to be strategic, because remember, there are usually only about 3 hours between an Immunity Challenge and Tribal Council.
ArtieeLange		#2212	[-]
Posts: 445 (12/04/08 1:01 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	PrettyGoodYear1988 wrote: He failed the challenge, yes Yes. And for 15 days it seems he never made any friends (alliances). Bye, Marcus. You were a really mediocre player. PrettyGoodYear1988 I appreciate the effort, and the attention to the subject. By refuting your arguments I continually improve my system. Welcome the winners awesome camp of luxury, buddy! Winner camp of winners: 1) Kitty Pryde1 2) PrettyGoodYear1988 Loser camp of losers: 1) PeachessandCreeams 2) SuperJude 3) Wuming Shi
petenale		#2213	[-]
Posts: 523 (12/04/08 3:37 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	ArtieeLange wrote: Fizzmix wrote: I already proved the current system introduces luck via artificially forced teams. For my system, why don't you post any scenario where anyone who achieves in the previous challenge gets voted out? Post a scenario where anyone who fails at a challenge but who succeeds at strategizing gets voted out? Post it, otherwise you are admitting my system is flawless. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Again so what? LUCK is one of the most important parts the the game. Remove or reduce it as you want to and you ruin the game. Simple enough for you? Removing luck, random(or planned) screwing of players and unfairness would ruin the game for most people Address this simple point otherwise you are admitting you have an idea for a different game. Actually even if you do address this it doesn't change the fact you have an idea for a different game. So you lose either way. Loser. All you do is repeat yourself. We enjoy laughing at you. I truly hope you are a troll because I don't want to believe you are as stupid and dense as you character Artie is.
PrettyGoodYear1988		#2214	[-]
Posts: 1310 (12/04/08 3:49 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Yes. And for 15 days it seems he never made any friends (alliances). Bye, Marcus. You were a really mediocre player. He could have made all the alliances in the world amongst the stronger players, but in this situation under your system he would have never had a chance to bond with the consistently weak players until a few hours before Tribal Council, where they would have done the natural thing and booted him. Like I said, at the very best, your system is no better than the current one, and at the worst, it puts people in inescapable strategic situations, making the game about little more than challenge performance.
MonkeeSpanker		#2215	[-]
Posts: 79 (12/04/08 3:59 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	PrettyGoodYear1988 wrote: What? I want to see the stronger competitors go further, not the weak ones. Chet, Crystal and Courtney sucked at challenges. The got lucky hanging on the coat tails of stronger players. I think we should reward strong players like Ozzy, James etc.. yes they are knuckleheads but they are more fun to watch than someone who can't do shit in the challenges - the most exciting part of the game. If I wanted to hear a bunch of bitches talk I would watch Big Brother. This is supposed to be Survivor - none of those fools would last a day without strong players like James and Ozzy. Challenges only lasted about five minutes in the first few seasons, and I think most people here would want to go back to that. The show is and always has been primarily about social dynamics and strategy under extreme conditions. If you don't like that, then find another show to watch. I just might have to find another show to watch. It bothers the hell out of me seeing people like Courtney - who couldn't even swing a sword she was so weak, make it so far in the game. I disagree with your statement saying most people would like to do away with physical challenges, I believe most people find that to be the best part of the show. It has become more apparent to me that most of the people around here were the nonatheletes who were picked last in gym class and they root for the weaker competitors because they can relate. The problem is that TV is full of people like that. I want a more dangerous show where challenges are really that. Remember this is SURVIVOR, not a group of people out for a weekend camping trip - lets hope the producers realize this and stop casting weaklings.
Kitty Pryde1		#2216	[-]
Posts: 6904 (12/04/08 4:27 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	MonkeeSpanker wrote: PrettyGoodYear1988 wrote: What? I want to see the stronger competitors go further, not the weak ones. Chet, Crystal and Courtney sucked at challenges. The got lucky hanging on the coat tails of stronger players. I think we should reward strong players like Ozzy, James etc.. yes they are knuckleheads but they are more fun to watch than someone who can't do shit in the challenges - the most exciting part of the game. If I wanted to hear a bunch of bitches talk I would watch Big Brother. This is supposed to be Survivor - none of those fools would last a day without strong players like James and Ozzy. Challenges only lasted about five minutes in the first few seasons, and I think most people here would want to go back to that. The show is and always has been primarily about social dynamics and strategy under extreme conditions. If you don't like that, then find another show to watch. I just might have to find another show to watch. It bothers the hell out of me seeing people like Courtney - who couldn't even swing a sword she was so weak, make it so far in the game. I disagree with your statement saying most people would like to do away with physical challenges, I believe most people find that to be the best part of the show. It has become more apparent to me that most of the people around here were the nonatheletes who were picked last in gym class and they root for the weaker competitors because they can relate. The problem is that TV is full of people like that. I want a more dangerous show where challenges are really that. Remember this is SURVIVOR, not a group of people out for a weekend camping trip - lets hope the producers realize this and stop casting weaklings. If you got rid of weaklings and filled your cast with all strong players, you're typically going to have a boring cast. Look at the four strongest players from this season: Marcus (boring), Dan (boring), Matty (boring), Ace (douchebag). The problem is that about 70-80% of the strong players on Survivor are either boring in personality and rely solely on looks, or they're complete assholes that the casual viewer won't like. That's why they cast the weak, because weaker players tend to have more interesting personalities. Amanda was the strongest player in the final 4 two seasons in a row, but she was also the most uninteresting player both times. You see, challenges take up about 5 minutes of the show (10 minutes for reward and immunity), which means for 10 minutes you have an interesting and competitive show. However, Survivor isn't all about the challenges. There's still about 35 minutes left to fill in the episode, and if you have only a group of people with crappy personality, you're either going to have a completely dull season, or the entire show will revolve around the one or two players who do show a personality until they're voted out. That's not a fun show, and people would stop watching it.
ArtieeLange		#2217	[-]
Posts: 446 (12/04/08 11:33 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	PrettyGoodYear1988 wrote: He could have made all the alliances in the world amongst the stronger players, but in this situation under your system he would have never had a chance to bond with the consistently weak players Like Olmec Donald tried to explain to you, your situation is not likely, since the challenges will vary and the camps will vary. Also you are assuming not only a loser-alliance exists, but that there is no dissension. Either way, Marcus had a chance to get immunity, and failed. That defines a fair system, just like what happens post-merge is always fair** Compare your Marcus to the current Steph, Jacqui, Michelle (etc), and its clear that only my system gives all players a chance. (actually two chances).
PrettyGoodYear1988		#2218	[-]
Posts: 1333 (12/05/08 12:14 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	PrettyGoodYear1988 wrote: He could have made all the alliances in the world amongst the stronger players, but in this situation under your system he would have never had a chance to bond with the consistently weak players Like Olmec Donald tried to explain to you, your situation is not likely, since the challenges will vary and the camps will vary. Also you are assuming not only a loser-alliance exists, but that there is no dissension. Either way, Marcus had a chance to get immunity, and failed. That defines a fair system, just like what happens post-merge is always fair** Compare your Marcus to the current Steph, Jacqui, Michelle (etc), and its clear that only my system gives all players a chance. (actually two chances). I'll admit Jacquie got screwed. I don't mind switches but I'd rather them be even (like the ones in Fiji and Micronesia). I have no sympathy for Michelle, though. She was a bitch who whined the entire time she was out there, barely did work, isolated herself from the tribe and was pretty much mean to everyone. She failed miserably at the social game. I would have voted her off first as well, because even though Gillian may have been weak, a bad attitude and unwillingness to work around camp can be just as devastating to a team as physical weakness in challenges. I also have no sympathy for Steph and the majority of Ulong. They were physically the stronger team and perhaps in individual challenges they would have fared better, but they consistently failed to work together as a team and thus deserved to lose. I mean, if James, Ibrehem, Steph, and Bobby Jon are beaten by Ian, Katie, Janu, and Jenn in a challenge (and they were in Episode 6), then they deserve it. Badly. Again, your system fails to reward teamwork and leadership. I understand those are both subjective things, which is why people can question whether or not a person "deserved to go," but I'd rather they still be a part of the game.
micronesia		#2219	[-]
Posts: 149 (12/05/08 2:22 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	The only way to make sure weaklings are not in the finals is not casting any... period I want just one season without a bunch of fuckin losers. Their only purpose of being there is for the audieance to feel superior to them cause they`re retards. We laugh about their dumb moves, that`s it. Sometimes I wish survivor wasnt that successful and didnt need the millions of tards who cant be hooked by superior strategic moves, but only by Erik-esque behaviour cause that`s all they`re able to process. Bring 18 - highly intelligent - ruthless - in at least normal physical shape contestants, and you`ll get the ULTIMATE SURVIVOR SEASON for a non-yokel audience.
Everything is Eventual		#2220	[-]
Posts: 4243 (12/05/08 2:36 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	ArtieeLange wrote: PrettyGoodYear1988 wrote: He could have made all the alliances in the world amongst the stronger players, but in this situation under your system he would have never had a chance to bond with the consistently weak players Like Olmec Donald tried to explain to you, your situation is not likely, since the challenges will vary and the camps will vary. Also you are assuming not only a loser-alliance exists, but that there is no dissension. Either way, Marcus had a chance to get immunity, and failed. That defines a fair system, just like what happens post-merge is always fair** Compare your Marcus to the current Steph, Jacqui, Michelle (etc), and its clear that only my system gives all players a chance. (actually two chances). uh...step away from the Survivor, son. Me and your mother have something to talk to you about in the shed.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

An idea to improve Survivor so that weaklings dont comprise the finals

Quick Reply