Survivor 24 : One World

[Ottmeister X]

I think they need to move the number more so they players can't count on it. Something like 15 to 13 players for the swap and 9 to 11 players for the merge. Also I think they need to make it 2 to 3 finalist with no one knowing until the final three.

I agree. It's stagnated because the players have become to accustomed to viewing previous seasons on when merges occur and how many go to the finals.

On the flipside, players may think the randomness is staged to give some of them a disadvantage if their gaming methods are not to the liking of the producers.

[o1pickleboy]

I agree. It's stagnated because the players have become to accustomed to viewing previous seasons on when merges occur and how many go to the finals.

On the flipside, players may think the randomness is staged to give some of them a disadvantage if their gaming methods are not to the liking of the producers.

If they predetermine when the swap and merge is before the start of the season the players have no bitch.

[DonC]

They can't bitch anyway. The contract they sign before going on the show stipulates that the producers can change the rules at any time.

[Siddon]

I think they need to move the number more so they players can't count on it. Something like 15 to 13 players for the swap and 9 to 11 players for the merge. Also I think they need to make it 2 to 3 finalist with no one knowing until the final three.

The problem they've had lately is tribes voting as a unit to decide winners, Sandra, Natalie,and Sophie were all picked by the tribe that was pagonged. I think they need to shake up the Jury system either cutting the Jury down to 7 from 9 or maybe mixing the jury so say the final three is Jonas/Tarzan/Leif - Kat, Kim, Chelsea and Sabrina wouldn't be on the jury.

[Ottmeister X]

Didn't the earlier seasons have a smaller jury size of 7 players? I don't like the larger jury although the intent is probably to prolong the showing of votes to try and entice more excitement. It still bugs me that 9 jury members could potentially even the votes at 3 apiece for the finalists. I don't think there should even be an opportunity for a tie in the final voting. And I still prefer two finalists over three.

[J. Robb]

The problem they've had lately is tribes voting as a unit to decide winners, Sandra, Natalie,and Sophie were all picked by the tribe that was pagonged.

I don't see a problem there- booting people out and still getting their votes is what Survivor is all about. I agree a seven member jury is better than nine, though.

[Siddon]

I don't see a problem there- booting people out and still getting their votes is what Survivor is all about. I agree a seven member jury is better than nine, though.

Booting people out and getting their votes is the game, what we're seeing though is that it's moving from a game to a pageant, where it becomes about personality and less on accomplishment. Tina who won the game in the second season made this case in her speech, this is a game of luck and you don't vote based on hurt feelings.

Did you know that Zapatera and Matt was going to vote for Phillip and if he went to TC dressed normally and claiming everything was an act he would have won over Boston Rob? As a fan of survivor how does that make you feel?

[J. Robb]

Booting people out and getting their votes is the game, what we're seeing though is that it's moving from a game to a pageant, where it becomes about personality and less on accomplishment.

It's a social game, personality is important. That was the difference between All-Star Boston Rob and Redemption Idol Boston Rob, he realized you have to be nice to the jury, they have the last laugh.

Did you know that Zapatera and Matt was going to vote for Phillip and if he went to TC dressed normally and claiming everything was an act he would have won over Boston Rob? As a fan of survivor how does that make you feel?

That would have been great.

[Siddon]

It's a social game, personality is important. That was the difference between All-Star Boston Rob and Redemption Idol Boston Rob, he realized you have to be nice to the jury, they have the last laugh.

The social aspect is part of the game, having a tribe that lives with you for 2-10 days deciding the winner of the game over people who played the game with you for 40 days is a flaw in the game. When their are seven people on the jury that flaw is mitigated when their are nine it's major and it undermines the show.

And by the way RI Boston Rob tried to have as little contact with the other tribe as possible, the entire tribe had to agree to not socialize with that other tribe.

[J. Robb]

The social aspect is part of the game, having a tribe that lives with you for 2-10 days deciding the winner of the game over people who played the game with you for 40 days is a flaw in the game. When their are seven people on the jury that flaw is mitigated when their are nine it's major and it undermines the show.

The merge is generally around the 19th day, the middle of the game. Sure, the first person voted out may not have a lot of time to get to know the other players, but everyone else does. These people are stuck together 24 hours a day.

I don't agree with the jury starting before the merge, though (like in Heroes Vs. Villains).

And by the way RI Boston Rob tried to have as little contact with the other tribe as possible, the entire tribe had to agree to not socialize with that other tribe.

Yes, but he was civil. Which for him is being nice.

[Chachi]

I don't see a problem there- booting people out and still getting their votes is what Survivor is all about. I agree a seven member jury is better than nine, though.

7 jury members voting for the final 2 is a lot better. There always seems to be a floater when its the final 3.

[marshal99]

Booting people out and getting their votes is the game, what we're seeing though is that it's moving from a game to a pageant, where it becomes about personality and less on accomplishment. Tina who won the game in the second season made this case in her speech, this is a game of luck and you don't vote based on hurt feelings.

Did you know that Zapatera and Matt was going to vote for Phillip and if he went to TC dressed normally and claiming everything was an act he would have won over Boston Rob? As a fan of survivor how does that make you feel?

Despite what they might have said , Phillip was never going to beat Rob in that final jury even if he played the whole "i am normal and i'm only playing crazy" act , the jury would have ripped him to shreds nevertheless because Phillip went a bit too far overboard in his dealings with Zapatera on that island. You can forgive but you can never forget , the jury wasn't going to get a bout of amnesia just because of what Phillip said in FTC.
And Phillip cannot deal with criticism , he just simply has to respond so any jury attacking him , he would have open his big mouth to attack them back and it would have gone the same way.

[o1pickleboy]

Didn't the earlier seasons have a smaller jury size of 7 players? I don't like the larger jury although the intent is probably to prolong the showing of votes to try and entice more excitement. It still bugs me that 9 jury members could potentially even the votes at 3 apiece for the finalists. I don't think there should even be an opportunity for a tie in the final voting. And I still prefer two finalists over three.

They could alway let the final three strike a jury member like they do in court. They could let them strike them thinking they are about to face the jury then make them vote someone out.

[J. Robb]

7 jury members voting for the final 2 is a lot better. There always seems to be a floater when its the final 3.

There's floaters with the final two, as well. Ian, Tom and Katie would have been more interesting than just Tom and Katie were. And the flipside- Yul, Ozzy and Becky were a much better final than Yul and Becky or Ozzy and Becky would have been.

[o1pickleboy]

There's floaters with the final two, as well. Ian, Tom and Katie would have been more interesting than just Tom and Katie were. And the flipside- Yul, Ozzy and Becky were a much better final than Yul and Becky or Ozzy and Becky would have been.

The big problem before the final three is the person that everyone thought should win got third. It was villain and the quiet person. Now its the quiet person the villain and the nutjob.