Board 8 > The New Survivor Topic (Season 34: Game Changers)

(+) Yeah! (+)

The Mana Sword posted...

no more revotes after a tie in S34

they go straight to the debate and rocks

I don't like this

I feel like that's a spoiler
---

Yeah I don't like this either.
---

looks like idols are getting a major buff in patch 3.4
---

eaedwards6400 posted...

where did you read that btw?

Parade and EW both have articles about it
---

thank you for spoiler tagging that gtm

i haven't heard any twist details other than idol locations being more wonky (that could be what kleenex said for all i know, what i said is rather minor however) and would like to keep it that way until i hear it from jeff's mouth
---

it was from jeff's mouth

in the articles

http://ew.com/tv/2017/02/28/survivor-jeff-probst-game-changers-revote/
https://parade.com/551340/joshwigler/survivor-game-changers-tie-breaker-twist-no-more-revote/
---

Yeah, I really think this is kind of dumb. Probst himself in the EW article even pointed out one of the big issues with it, he just pointed it out as a positive instead of the actual negative. Now sure, it's fine in 2-2-2 situations with an alliance of 4 and a minority of 2, since the 4 can still just be united, but it really f***s things over in a 3-3-3 or 4-4-4, and essentially rewards people for being in the minority.

When I saw the bit about changes on ties and stuff, I got all excited and thought they were going to have firemaking be the tiebreaker because well, that's sensible. But...I guess not, lol.

okay interesting

i bet this will play out in some really cool ways, it'll make idols arguably more valuable but a bigger gamble
---

I'm actually okay with it buffing idols because Plan Voodoo pretty much negates the purpose of idols. They are supposed to give the minority a fighting chance, but in most cases Plan Voodoo just makes it so that the person who plays one loses an ally anyway and only extends their life in the game by a round or two.

What I'm more concerned about is that for legitimate ties with equal alliances it prevents things like Fincher or Cochran from happening.
---

Yeah, that's true. I always hated how they went all dumb and p****-like with flipping like that anyway.

That being said, I do think the MvGX situation is kind of funny since Will said the only reason he didn't flip was because he felt pretty sure one of Jessica/Adam would've, and that he didn't want to accidentally force a tie by flipping too.

Such an unnecessary change
---

i'm not gonna harp on it too much until we get to see how it plays out

initial reaction though not a fan
---

Peridiam posted...

i'm not gonna harp on it too much until we get to see how it plays out

initial reaction though not a fan

what i'm hoping is that the fan perception is that this is awful

and then it turns the season into something wonderful to SILENCE THE HATERS
---

"rock draws sure give us good ratings, how can we get more of those?"
"well, vote ties happen a lot, actually. it's just that during the revote the majority can then focus their efforts on one person."
"ok, eliminate revotes"
"b-but... that's just..."
"good job, man! genius!"
"uhh"

Idols don't need to be buffed, btw. They're fine. You can play your idol on someone else, too. Giving minorities a bigger fighting chance is just a contrived way for production to keep pelvic thrusting underdog storylines. The game is getting flipped and shuffled around just fine already.
---

This is actually going to cause fewer rock draws and disadvantage the minority even further at even numbers. Nobody's going to be willing to force a tie now. If this rule had been in effect last season, I guarantee Will would've flipped to vote out Zeke and we'd have gotten an unexciting boot instead.

Thus, I hate it, and it will cause the exact opposite effect of their intent.
---

https://www.reddit.com/r/survivor/comments/5wseqp/indepth_analysis_of_the_tiebreaker_rule_change/?st=IZQGY50I&sh=8f4a014c

read this, excellent analysis of the change from the removal of the revote
---

Chaeix posted...

https://www.reddit.com/r/survivor/comments/5wseqp/indepth_analysis_of_the_tiebreaker_rule_change/?st=IZQGY50I&sh=8f4a014c

read this, excellent analysis of the change from the removal of the revote

Read that analysis and STILL disagree strongly with the change and think it's a bad idea. Majority alliances split as they did because it was a smart thing to do. As it essentially rewards minority alliance people for being in the majority, and punishes the majority for playing better and getting said majority, I think it's just silly and it kind of lowers my hype for the season a little.

Don't mean to double post, but Caleb once again proves himself to be a dumbass by, on top of earlier stating Sandra wasn't a game changer, saying that he doesn't think Tony should be there/wasn't a game changer either.

http://ew.com/tv/2017/03/01/survivor-game-changers-cast-surprises/?xid=entertainment-weekly_socialflow_twitter

I disagree with the change still, too. It's going to completely eliminate rock draws because people operate out of fear. It's going to increase the "Let's pile all our votes on the target that won't have an idol played on them." thing that started with Edgardo (criteria, of course, would constantly change). A 3-3-3 split vote will no longer happen, removing the chance one person flipping can completely upend the game. Like Storm is saying, this completely disincentivizes being strategic.

This makes me want to play Survivor even less, after Kaoh Rong already made me question that considerably.

Also, Caleb is hilarious. It's going to be delightful to watch him get blindsided out of his cluelessness, but still that's not what an "all-star" season should focus on. How is this moron a three-time player over people who learned from their ineptitude?
---

Tony taking jabs at Caleb is so awesome, lol.

https://twitter.com/tony_vlachos/status/837038283720916993

Split votes predated the Edgardo strategy, it should be noted.

And an Edgardo-type TC is a lot more exciting than a straight-up split vote.
---

Splitting votes has always been a risk? The majority has to be comfortable enough with each other when splitting votes. What we saw in Cambodia when Kelley played her idol was the majority not splitting because everything was so volatile. Then they did split and it ended with a part of the majority going rogue and booting Wiglesworth. Both times the players in the majority made wrong reads that ended with exciting tribals and the possibility of a blindside. This aspect of the game has always been there. I don't see scrapping revotes as a re-focus on relationships as that gigantic reddit post seems to conclude, it's literally just a way to boost the chances of successful idol play from the minority because it makes for what production sees as exciting TV.
---

bwburke94 posted...

Split votes predated the Edgardo strategy, it should be noted.

And an Edgardo-type TC is a lot more exciting than a straight-up split vote.

A lot of people tend to forget that, even though it never came to fruition, of all people it was Cao Boi who first brought up the idea of splitting votes to flush out an idol.
---

I've been rewatching Cook Islands as of late. Yes, it is quite surprising that Cao Boi was the one to come up with it... and in such a Cao Boi way, too.

And yes, if we didn't have any revotes, the fantastic Wentworth idol play would still happen, but the flip to take out Wiglesworth and then Spencer's flip to blindside Fishbach were far less likely to have happened. Those flips happened because of the split. Now, people are going to be paranoid about both a snake in the grass AND drawing rocks. It's going to take away one of the fundamental parts of Survivor strategy and just turn each vote into a game of Survivor Russian Roulette. It's going to get old fast.
---

AdmiralZephyr posted...

bwburke94 posted...

Split votes predated the Edgardo strategy, it should be noted.

And an Edgardo-type TC is a lot more exciting than a straight-up split vote.

A lot of people tend to forget that, even though it never came to fruition, of all people it was Cao Boi who first brought up the idea of splitting votes to flush out an idol.

Yeah, and even before that, the idea of trying to get people to split votes around was first thought of by Brian Corridan at the Final 12 of Guatemala with the whole 3-2-1 thing.

I needed this
---

Spoiler on the first episode.

Probst said it will be a more of Cagayan with two episodes in the first episode not just an hour long episode.
---

pretty sure the premiere is just episode 1 & 2 in two hours
---

Yeah that's what I was getting at
---

Gabon's premier was like that too. Frankly I like that.
---

AdmiralZephyr posted...

Gabon's premier was like that too. Frankly I like that.

It cuts down the overall length of the season, though...
---

bwburke94 posted...

AdmiralZephyr posted...

Gabon's premier was like that too. Frankly I like that.

It cuts down the overall length of the season, though...

Only in number of weeks that the show runs for, and not number of episodes.

Also every season since Cagayan except Kaoh-Rong has had at least one "two episodes in one night" type deal, just not all on the premier night.
---

im overhyped this season is going to be a disappointment :(
---

That's how I felt for Cambodia but I believe Cambodia delivered or at least it's premiere did.
---

Right now, my expectations are just set at "at least be better than Worlds Apart and Kaoh Rong", lol.

kaoh rong was really good though
---

Peridiam posted...

kaoh rong was really good though

Meh, I don't know. I never got into it and it felt like a bit of a letdown and a kinda 'meh' season overall. And none of that has anything to do with Michele winning, either.

Josh Wigler and Jordan Parhar did an alternate universe Gamechangers using some of the same rules of the current game changers cast without using any one they used. For those that don't want to listen or look it up the castaways are here in spoilers:


Hatch
Yul
Michelle Fitzgerald
Penner
Stephnie
Jay
Mari
PeteBro
Francesqua
Julia
Sydney
Alicia
Hayden Moss
Wentworth
Andrew Savage
T-Bird
Jim Rice
Greg Buis
Neleh Dennis
Cao Boi


For fun, I put the season through brantsteele using Cambodia set up and here are the results on a viewable google doc:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zN-30iBBPBYqA7ARPOLyNNBKXhNq_PemS5zj7X4B76M/edit?usp=sharing

It was real surprising but the winner was satisfying.
---

StormTR posted...

I never got into it and it felt like a bit of a letdown and a kinda 'meh' season overall. And none of that has anything to do with Michele winning, either.

sounds like a bunch of malarkey to me
---

michele is one of my favorite winners just cause of all the malarkey post-season
---

Amazingly there are no concrete spoilers out yet for this season.

From what I understand the first boot has been pinpointed via promo analysis, but that literally happens almost every season. And no I don't know who it is so I'm free to speculate.
---

It won't so much be spoiler, but when the intro comes out, we'll know 2 people from the cast that AREN'T winning if 33 seasons of history is anything to go off of. And that's not taking into account things like potential challenge things.

For instance, the intro credits in Heroes vs Villains, had clips of challenges as deep in the season as Episode 5, so (if you were somehow unspoiled), and someone was in danger without a challenge their intro shot showed happening...then you could tell they were going to survive the round.

StormTR posted...

It won't so much be spoiler, but when the intro comes out, we'll know 2 people from the cast that AREN'T winning if 33 seasons of history is anything to go off of. And that's not taking into account things like potential challenge things.

The intro curse has been broken on both ends. Adam was first in the MvGX intro. Can't remember who broke the last person curse but I'm almost positive it was broken.
---

AdmiralZephyr posted...

StormTR posted...

It won't so much be spoiler, but when the intro comes out, we'll know 2 people from the cast that AREN'T winning if 33 seasons of history is anything to go off of. And that's not taking into account things like potential challenge things.

The intro curse has been broken on both ends. Adam was first in the MvGX intro. Can't remember who broke the last person curse but I'm almost positive it was broken.

I actually don't even remember if I saw the MvGX one being out, so I genuinely didn't know if Adam was first. However, if he WAS then that means it broke with him. The only other potential instances of first being broken would have been during Gabon or Redemption Island where the Intro kept changing since they kept removing people from them and switching around the order, which I'd hardly count. The Redemption Island situation is a rather odd one that isn't counted since the curse has always applied to the original intro put out, and that one didn't even HAVE Rob and Russell in it, so by the time Rob was in, Francesca's position had already changed around.

As for the "last person" curse thing being broken, I just checked through the seasons 1-32 intros to be sure, but nope, nobody who's been last in the intro has won. The closest was Parvati in Micronesia who was 2nd from last in the intro.

Also, in case people don't know, the Intro for this season is out now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGTBZvQFGSs

So based off the intro. I am concerned for anyone who's highlight is something around camp or from the marooning.
---

eaedwards6400 posted...

So based off the intro. I am concerned for anyone who's highlight is something around camp or from the marooning.

Fun fact - the first winner to get a challenge shot in the intro was Natalie W. So that means the first 18 winners all go camp highlights. Don't overthink this.

Really the biggest spoiler you can gather from the intro is if there is the anyone covered in mud, and even that will only be relevant for a few episodes.
---

XD

All the other opening confessionals are about all the awesome stuff the characters did their first time/s around. Then Brad gets a throwaway confessional about the theme at the end.
---

Jeff should just get it over with and start calling Ciera "Eastin" to avoid confusion.
---

Inviso posted...

Jeff should just get it over with and start calling Ciera "Eastin" to avoid confusion.

I like this idea
---