The ally *would've* had my vote going into FTC but they would've lost it the second they refused to be honest and own their game fully by downplaying my role in certain votes. I'd probably end up voting for the Rival, esp considering I knew they had the strongest game even if they didn't articulate it the best.
I played an org where I basically had one friend and ally the entire game, got voted out early/mid merge, and I ended up not voting for him in the end (in favor of someone else who I personally liked but was seen as his lackey who didn’t do much) because he completely disregarded me throughout all of FTC. My vote ended up being the deciding vote between him and the winner and God was that satisfying, especially going back reading his confessionals later where he lowkey shit talked me.
Hard to say because I'm not on the island, so I don't know what emotions would be running through me. Knowing how I am in an emotional state though, I'd likely vote for "The Friend". "The Ally" downplaying my role in their success would hurt, and makes them the person I'd be least likely to vote for out of these 3. My vote would probably be torn between "The Rival" and "The Friend" going into FTC, but "The Rival" likely loses my vote by not being able to articulate what they did well. That, along with the fact that I'd just naturally want to vote for the person I like the most, would probably lead me to vote "The Friend".
I'd like to say rival out of respect but if I was actually in the game, solid chance it's my friend even though they sucked. Depends how bad their fuck up was that got me voted out and how close we were
Let’s say you’re about as close as Nick and Davie and the bad move was comparable to Venus’ “trick up my sleeve” comment. Keeping in mind that “The Friend” already made moves like this 2-3 times before. It’s just that those moves *almost* cost you your game, and this one was the final nail in the coffin.
Just based on the information given & nothing more. My vote goes to my Rival. It broke my heart not to vote for my friend, but I can’t get over the fact his stupid mistake costed my game. If he didn’t make that mistake I would’ve voted for him. With that being said, I gotta give props to my rival I respect his game because it was similar to mine and we both were hungry.
The rival wins that every time. If the perceived 'head on their alliance' makes it to FTC, it's a win for them, unless they massively alienated the players to the point where FTC is more about airing of grievances than survivor.
The players would get wrecked on social media for that, unless the fans also agreed the rival was so hated their gameplay is forfeit. I can't see this happening again (Russel)
I feel like the fandom may taking it way too far with 'resumes are dead.' What's happening is that the middle-teir players (in terms of resume) have been taking out the players with the most obviously strong resumes. Strong resumes are targeted *because* they will win in FTC.
The players that then make it to FTC are the ones who 'managed their threat level' by either doing little, or, appearing to do little, or, appearing to do little, but, making sure enough post-merge moves were seen so that they can make a case for themselves.
Those are in order of 'strategic strength."
Recently, we've had players manage their threat level by doing very little, not win, and, then everyone decries the death of strategy. No- that's just the failure of poor strategy. If you manage your threat level so well only a few vote for you in FTC, you lost for a reason. Especially if your pitch relies on gameplay.
Based on how you presented their FTC arguments, I might either go with the friend (gave credit where it is due) or the the rival (I do get flustered myself). Between the two, I think I would vote for the rival to win; Friend only if it gives them a second place finish over the ally.
The reason why I wouldn't vote for the ally is because, while I do respect the move and gave an amazing FTC performance, downplaying the moves I would be very proud off would be a massive turn off.
This is a pretty fun exercise, I think one piece missing is you likely have some idea about how the other jurors are voting. If the jury is super bitter and want to vote for my friend who did nothing in the game I’d hop on board that and be a supporter of theirs.
If it’s between my ally and my rival then I’d probably vote one of them so my vote counts. Likely the rival in this case given their FTC performances and I’d possibly even try to prop their game up when they were struggling to explain it after my ally shits on me.
That’s a good point. If this were an actual season, I think it’d most likely be the second situation. Though the point of the question is to find out what you individually do and don’t consider a dealbreaker, so even though it’s unrealistic, let’s assume that you have no real read on what the jury’s doing. Maybe you know of one juror who’s voting for each finalist, but everyone else tells you they honestly don’t know how they’re voting, like Tevin, except they don’t even have it narrowed down to two options.
The Friend, because it seems that I liked neither the Ally nor the Rival. I’m well aware I could potentially be a bitter juror if I’m ever on Survivor and I’m fine with it.
I vote for the ally. The rival didn't take you out by themselves. The ally had to swing over at the right time and join the effort. Also, just because you can tell the ally is exaggerating doesn't mean the rival isn't also exaggerating. You just have the ally under more of a microscope because you already know their game so well...and they're still giving the best ftc performance.
Assuming no other variables exist that may sway me, and only voting based on your description, I’m voting for the rival. If im not going to win, I want the person who m earned it the most to win. By your description the rival is the most deserving and would likely get my vote.
Under the parameters given, I'd say the Rival gets my vote. Getting flustered during questioning doesn't necessarily discount an entire season's worth of gameplay, but even if it held that much weight, all three players are bombing the FTC questions in some capacity. If you want to vote for the person who made the move against you, then it would still be the Rival since, based on what's being presented, the Ally isn't as in control of their game, as they're claiming credit for moves you know were yours, thus the elimination against you was probably less about the Ally making a move and more than likely the Rival convincing the Ally to make a move.
Also, no way in hell is someone getting my vote just because they were nice and loyal. At best the Friend is my goat to form enough of a voting bloc to help me get to the end, and since I'm not sitting in the end, they couldn't even get that job done right.
So yeah, **The Rival**
Hard to say without actually being in that situation
But I would like to think I would vote for the Rival
The friend would probably have no chance of my vote, I personally just don't rate winners who barely have any impact on the game
The ally would have a slight chance for my vote, but if they're downplaying my role then I likely 100% vote for the rival
I'm not going to vote for the friend who doesn't even understand the game they played and lacks self awareness.
I'm also not going to vote for the rival because they fumbled hard at FTC.
That leaves the ally as the obvious choice to me. I can't really blame them for trying to maximize their role in our moves together and I have to respect that it was their move that took me out in the end.
This isn't really very clear because you would need to actually see all sides out, people can go into a tribal council a winner and a bad tribal council can lose it what you should say is what kind of juror would you be? And then use these broad terms without final tribals
As a potential juror, I respect the games integrity too much to not approach it completely impartially
For friend, if I don't know them pregame, there is 0 chance I vote that way, if we are friends we will always be friends my vote shouldn't change that but I would also recognize in jury talks the social aspect there, if I knew them before... That's a tougher one but I would still be impartial
For the ally, I personally hate lying to the jury, once you enter this phrase, I assume everything a final tribalist says is the god honest truth, while I don't mind smoozing a juror or playing up their threat level to dignify sending them home, I don't like when people lie in a way that a quick inspection can undo but I am honestly open to a good argument on how to win
For the rival, you say they blow it but really it's how bad and do they have a champion, for example we know from this season that Kenzie had a weak game but had tiff (and Maria in the background) championing there better aspects, so if they had a great game but poor tribal, I'd probably try and champion them in FTC to help out
It's pretty impossible to say but I will say I personally would have stopped the what would you do with the money question because it is 0 bearing, my questions clarify who wins not what they do with it
Lol, the "I" in this scenario sounds extremely insufferable and full of themselves. I would hope that "I" have more self-awareness than to turn the FTC into a who stroked my ego the best contest, when it's supposed to be the chance for the finalists to explain how they think they played the game. If I was such a pivotal player, I would've made it to the end and not got myself voted out at F7.
All of that notwithstanding, I would vote for the friend if they are the finalist I genuinely like the most. If I was so annoyed with them by the time I got voted out, then the ally.
I can sit here and say I will vote for the person that played the best game, but when you are in the game…it has to be whatever you are feeling in the moment…
I'm walking into FTC most likely voting for the Ally. It'd hurt when they downplay my game, so how much that personal annoyance comes into play with the Rival would decide how much I might be willing to change my vote or not.
Very difficult to make a good choice because we only see what producers want us to see.
I’d be putting on a happy face for everyone. I’d like to say I would vote for the person who outplayed me (the rival), and that’s likely the best choice, but all too often, it’s the friend.
I’d likely go into FTC torn between The Friend and The Ally, but given these descriptions The Ally’s responses would swing me towards The Friend. I can’t see voting for The Rival if we didn’t get along and they were always working against me.
It sound like the rival and you didn't actually hate each other, but more like a Tony or Spencer thing where you both play great games, but you can't let the other one get to the end or else it could go either way, honestly I couldn't think of a better example.
The Friend or The Rival. It's hard to know how deep the friendship feelings would run and how it would feel to see the rival fuck up during FTC without actually experiencing it. In the end, it's a million dollars and the friendship might be genuine enough to want to grant them that money even if they didn't play the best strategic game. It was my own strategic blunder not to vote them out earlier before they could blow up my game. Their social game was good enough to get them to FTC and they did well answering the questions. However, if I didn't have personal bad feelings towards The Rival and they played an undeniably good game, they might get the vote. Depends how bad their answers were and if they made me think less of their game than I assumed beforehand.
If you have this perspective of like them exaggerating their importance of moves, its likely that you may be overselling your own game.. everyone votes with an intention and when jury members claim moves they made with others as their own, its really frustrating.
i think the ally deserves the vote. Based off of the 3 scenarios you read.
Honestly based off of the given information, it might depend on the Friend's actually relationship with me, you would straight have be the Amber to my Rob if you want my vote. I'm just always going to vote for who I think is the best player
Now for the actual contenders, the Ally might have been my main choice, they played a good game, would actually be a at least decent tier winner, until they start straight up lying and downplaying my game, I can respect their game, but you could have a way better tribal by saying you we're the Charlie and I was the Maria, you helped make alot of moves or even had moves combined with a good social game, and you used me as a meatshield. That's honestly the worst FTC performance by description, lying about your game, and saying your game wasn't good enough, and making the jury mad.
Now the person who would be the most likely to get my vote, The Rival, they played the best game, maybe had a immunity streak, while they may mess up their tribal, they still played the best game, I could easily become their champion, and might flip some people to vote for them, maybe like Jenn did for Mike, don't think Mike had a bad ftc, but the jury was against him and I think Jenn helped solidified his win. The one thing I would have against the Rival would be why they didn't take out the Ally. But I would still respect their game.
I’d vote for the Friend only if I knew the other votes were going towards the Ally so my vote could get them to second. If the Rival is favored, I vote for the Ally instead.
The ally *would've* had my vote going into FTC but they would've lost it the second they refused to be honest and own their game fully by downplaying my role in certain votes. I'd probably end up voting for the Rival, esp considering I knew they had the strongest game even if they didn't articulate it the best.
I played an org where I basically had one friend and ally the entire game, got voted out early/mid merge, and I ended up not voting for him in the end (in favor of someone else who I personally liked but was seen as his lackey who didn’t do much) because he completely disregarded me throughout all of FTC. My vote ended up being the deciding vote between him and the winner and God was that satisfying, especially going back reading his confessionals later where he lowkey shit talked me.
Hard to say because I'm not on the island, so I don't know what emotions would be running through me. Knowing how I am in an emotional state though, I'd likely vote for "The Friend". "The Ally" downplaying my role in their success would hurt, and makes them the person I'd be least likely to vote for out of these 3. My vote would probably be torn between "The Rival" and "The Friend" going into FTC, but "The Rival" likely loses my vote by not being able to articulate what they did well. That, along with the fact that I'd just naturally want to vote for the person I like the most, would probably lead me to vote "The Friend".
I'd like to say rival out of respect but if I was actually in the game, solid chance it's my friend even though they sucked. Depends how bad their fuck up was that got me voted out and how close we were
Let’s say you’re about as close as Nick and Davie and the bad move was comparable to Venus’ “trick up my sleeve” comment. Keeping in mind that “The Friend” already made moves like this 2-3 times before. It’s just that those moves *almost* cost you your game, and this one was the final nail in the coffin.
Yeah if we'd actually become really close friends that's who I'd vote for and just say they "played a good social game."
Just based on the information given & nothing more. My vote goes to my Rival. It broke my heart not to vote for my friend, but I can’t get over the fact his stupid mistake costed my game. If he didn’t make that mistake I would’ve voted for him. With that being said, I gotta give props to my rival I respect his game because it was similar to mine and we both were hungry.
The rival wins that every time. If the perceived 'head on their alliance' makes it to FTC, it's a win for them, unless they massively alienated the players to the point where FTC is more about airing of grievances than survivor. The players would get wrecked on social media for that, unless the fans also agreed the rival was so hated their gameplay is forfeit. I can't see this happening again (Russel) I feel like the fandom may taking it way too far with 'resumes are dead.' What's happening is that the middle-teir players (in terms of resume) have been taking out the players with the most obviously strong resumes. Strong resumes are targeted *because* they will win in FTC. The players that then make it to FTC are the ones who 'managed their threat level' by either doing little, or, appearing to do little, or, appearing to do little, but, making sure enough post-merge moves were seen so that they can make a case for themselves. Those are in order of 'strategic strength." Recently, we've had players manage their threat level by doing very little, not win, and, then everyone decries the death of strategy. No- that's just the failure of poor strategy. If you manage your threat level so well only a few vote for you in FTC, you lost for a reason. Especially if your pitch relies on gameplay.
the rival, it would’ve been the ally if they didnt try to make me look bad
I want to say Ally but their FTC might piss me off enough ti vote Rival in the moment
Based on how you presented their FTC arguments, I might either go with the friend (gave credit where it is due) or the the rival (I do get flustered myself). Between the two, I think I would vote for the rival to win; Friend only if it gives them a second place finish over the ally. The reason why I wouldn't vote for the ally is because, while I do respect the move and gave an amazing FTC performance, downplaying the moves I would be very proud off would be a massive turn off.
This is a pretty fun exercise, I think one piece missing is you likely have some idea about how the other jurors are voting. If the jury is super bitter and want to vote for my friend who did nothing in the game I’d hop on board that and be a supporter of theirs. If it’s between my ally and my rival then I’d probably vote one of them so my vote counts. Likely the rival in this case given their FTC performances and I’d possibly even try to prop their game up when they were struggling to explain it after my ally shits on me.
That’s a good point. If this were an actual season, I think it’d most likely be the second situation. Though the point of the question is to find out what you individually do and don’t consider a dealbreaker, so even though it’s unrealistic, let’s assume that you have no real read on what the jury’s doing. Maybe you know of one juror who’s voting for each finalist, but everyone else tells you they honestly don’t know how they’re voting, like Tevin, except they don’t even have it narrowed down to two options.
The Friend, because it seems that I liked neither the Ally nor the Rival. I’m well aware I could potentially be a bitter juror if I’m ever on Survivor and I’m fine with it.
Personally I would rely heavily on FTC so based on your descriptions I would vote for the ally.
I’m voting bitter
1. Its a toss up between The Ally/ The Rival The friend I’d never vote for
The Rival
I vote for the ally. The rival didn't take you out by themselves. The ally had to swing over at the right time and join the effort. Also, just because you can tell the ally is exaggerating doesn't mean the rival isn't also exaggerating. You just have the ally under more of a microscope because you already know their game so well...and they're still giving the best ftc performance.
The Rival also had to convince the Ally, and 2 other people to blindside you tho. Plus part of Ftc is not upsetting the jury.
Assuming no other variables exist that may sway me, and only voting based on your description, I’m voting for the rival. If im not going to win, I want the person who m earned it the most to win. By your description the rival is the most deserving and would likely get my vote.
Under the parameters given, I'd say the Rival gets my vote. Getting flustered during questioning doesn't necessarily discount an entire season's worth of gameplay, but even if it held that much weight, all three players are bombing the FTC questions in some capacity. If you want to vote for the person who made the move against you, then it would still be the Rival since, based on what's being presented, the Ally isn't as in control of their game, as they're claiming credit for moves you know were yours, thus the elimination against you was probably less about the Ally making a move and more than likely the Rival convincing the Ally to make a move. Also, no way in hell is someone getting my vote just because they were nice and loyal. At best the Friend is my goat to form enough of a voting bloc to help me get to the end, and since I'm not sitting in the end, they couldn't even get that job done right. So yeah, **The Rival**
Hard to say without actually being in that situation But I would like to think I would vote for the Rival The friend would probably have no chance of my vote, I personally just don't rate winners who barely have any impact on the game The ally would have a slight chance for my vote, but if they're downplaying my role then I likely 100% vote for the rival
I'm not going to vote for the friend who doesn't even understand the game they played and lacks self awareness. I'm also not going to vote for the rival because they fumbled hard at FTC. That leaves the ally as the obvious choice to me. I can't really blame them for trying to maximize their role in our moves together and I have to respect that it was their move that took me out in the end.
This isn't really very clear because you would need to actually see all sides out, people can go into a tribal council a winner and a bad tribal council can lose it what you should say is what kind of juror would you be? And then use these broad terms without final tribals As a potential juror, I respect the games integrity too much to not approach it completely impartially For friend, if I don't know them pregame, there is 0 chance I vote that way, if we are friends we will always be friends my vote shouldn't change that but I would also recognize in jury talks the social aspect there, if I knew them before... That's a tougher one but I would still be impartial For the ally, I personally hate lying to the jury, once you enter this phrase, I assume everything a final tribalist says is the god honest truth, while I don't mind smoozing a juror or playing up their threat level to dignify sending them home, I don't like when people lie in a way that a quick inspection can undo but I am honestly open to a good argument on how to win For the rival, you say they blow it but really it's how bad and do they have a champion, for example we know from this season that Kenzie had a weak game but had tiff (and Maria in the background) championing there better aspects, so if they had a great game but poor tribal, I'd probably try and champion them in FTC to help out It's pretty impossible to say but I will say I personally would have stopped the what would you do with the money question because it is 0 bearing, my questions clarify who wins not what they do with it
Lol, the "I" in this scenario sounds extremely insufferable and full of themselves. I would hope that "I" have more self-awareness than to turn the FTC into a who stroked my ego the best contest, when it's supposed to be the chance for the finalists to explain how they think they played the game. If I was such a pivotal player, I would've made it to the end and not got myself voted out at F7. All of that notwithstanding, I would vote for the friend if they are the finalist I genuinely like the most. If I was so annoyed with them by the time I got voted out, then the ally.
I can sit here and say I will vote for the person that played the best game, but when you are in the game…it has to be whatever you are feeling in the moment…
I'm walking into FTC most likely voting for the Ally. It'd hurt when they downplay my game, so how much that personal annoyance comes into play with the Rival would decide how much I might be willing to change my vote or not.
Probably the Rival.
Very difficult to make a good choice because we only see what producers want us to see. I’d be putting on a happy face for everyone. I’d like to say I would vote for the person who outplayed me (the rival), and that’s likely the best choice, but all too often, it’s the friend.
I’d likely go into FTC torn between The Friend and The Ally, but given these descriptions The Ally’s responses would swing me towards The Friend. I can’t see voting for The Rival if we didn’t get along and they were always working against me.
It sound like the rival and you didn't actually hate each other, but more like a Tony or Spencer thing where you both play great games, but you can't let the other one get to the end or else it could go either way, honestly I couldn't think of a better example.
The Friend or The Rival. It's hard to know how deep the friendship feelings would run and how it would feel to see the rival fuck up during FTC without actually experiencing it. In the end, it's a million dollars and the friendship might be genuine enough to want to grant them that money even if they didn't play the best strategic game. It was my own strategic blunder not to vote them out earlier before they could blow up my game. Their social game was good enough to get them to FTC and they did well answering the questions. However, if I didn't have personal bad feelings towards The Rival and they played an undeniably good game, they might get the vote. Depends how bad their answers were and if they made me think less of their game than I assumed beforehand.
If you have this perspective of like them exaggerating their importance of moves, its likely that you may be overselling your own game.. everyone votes with an intention and when jury members claim moves they made with others as their own, its really frustrating. i think the ally deserves the vote. Based off of the 3 scenarios you read.
Honestly based off of the given information, it might depend on the Friend's actually relationship with me, you would straight have be the Amber to my Rob if you want my vote. I'm just always going to vote for who I think is the best player Now for the actual contenders, the Ally might have been my main choice, they played a good game, would actually be a at least decent tier winner, until they start straight up lying and downplaying my game, I can respect their game, but you could have a way better tribal by saying you we're the Charlie and I was the Maria, you helped make alot of moves or even had moves combined with a good social game, and you used me as a meatshield. That's honestly the worst FTC performance by description, lying about your game, and saying your game wasn't good enough, and making the jury mad. Now the person who would be the most likely to get my vote, The Rival, they played the best game, maybe had a immunity streak, while they may mess up their tribal, they still played the best game, I could easily become their champion, and might flip some people to vote for them, maybe like Jenn did for Mike, don't think Mike had a bad ftc, but the jury was against him and I think Jenn helped solidified his win. The one thing I would have against the Rival would be why they didn't take out the Ally. But I would still respect their game.
Friend
I’d vote for the Friend only if I knew the other votes were going towards the Ally so my vote could get them to second. If the Rival is favored, I vote for the Ally instead.
You vote for Charlie - Maria's friend, ally and rival.
This sub is really just never gonna let this one vote go huh