
| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Thailandsurvivor |
Can we finally agree that... |
Lead | |
|
Winning immunity is not strategy. Finding a HII is not strategy.
|
|||
CrystalOwnage |
|||
|
That...wasn't agreed upon before?
|
|||
ShanesThinkingSeat |
|||
|
Yes. I mean, finding idols does require SOME thought, but should it be considered good gameplay to find one? I don't think so. How the idol holder uses it
is where the strategy aspect comes in. Winning immunity is 0% strategy based. In my opinion, if someone NEEDS to rely on immunity streaks to stay afloat in the
game, that player doesn't deserve to win.
|
|||
Thailandsurvivor |
|||
CrystalOwnage wrote: Well, now that Russell lost. |
|||
dashbrdparadise |
|||
|
Tell that to the audience at the reunion.
|
|||
CrystalOwnage |
|||
|
Well, casual fans are tards.
This is not new info. |
|||
craig |
|||
|
It depends what the jury cares about.
Didn't Matt's 6-1 loss proved that working and providing have nothing to do with strategy? Yes, it's stupid to really on that primarily. But some jurors consider it, so it can be considered part of strategy. Same with idols and ICs. Plus, failure to win immunities or find idols can cost players and tribes a chance to face the jury. |
|||
Thailandsurvivor |
|||
|
Jenna won 4 immunity challenges and had no strategy. Matt learned how to play the game as he went and outsmarted his mentor.
Jenna only won because she won challenges. That was disproven tonight.
Last Edited By: Thailandsurvivor
12/21/09 01:05 AM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||
WylDawg |
|||
|
When your back is up the wall and you win immunity to save your ass, people really fawn over that (i.e Terry, Brett etc.) I don't kmnow why, but that's
just the way it is.
I say, if you HAVE to win immunity, then clearly there are flaws in your game. |
|||
shibbysweet |
|||
ShanesThinkingSeat wrote: So, in your opinion once your allies are gone you should just accept your fate and not try for immunity and let yourself get voted out. If Colleen or Stephanie had gone gone on an immunity run to the final 2 to save themselves in Borneo & Palau, you probably would not be saying that. |
|||
Thailandsurvivor |
|||
shibbysweet wrote: It's not that you should not try. It's that there are other ways to save yourself. Colleen actually succeeded, and Kelly would have left had anyone else won immunity. For example, Fairplay proved multiple times that you don't need immunity to stay in the game when your back is against the wall. If you really want to be impressive, use your social and strategic game to make it even further than just one round. |
|||
ShanesThinkingSeat |
|||
shibbysweet wrote: Not at all (besides I rooted for Rudy S1 and Tom S10). If your allies are gone, the only way I think a player can possibly deserve to win is if they find a way to survive in the game other than an immunity streak. Such as what Chris/Danni were able to pull off. They were able to get back into the game and come out on top without NEEDING to reel off 3-4 IC wins in a row. (Granted, Chris won 3 of the last 4, but only truly need one of those). |
|||
LaLa |
|||
|
So Russell had no real strategy?
|
|||
shibbysweet |
|||
Thailandsurvivor wrote:Yes, but once Kelly was gone, there would not have been enough negotiating or playing to save herself afterwards. She would have had to rely on immunity afterwards as she had alot of allies in the jury. Terry was the same way, he had allies in the jury and was an immunity threat, there was no way he could make an alliance with anyone in Casaya. Brett had the same problem, if Russell had of helped him get to final 3, Brett would have won and Russell would have looked stupid. Sometimes immunity streaks are your only move to save yourself, Jenna won because of her Immunity streak at the end. |
|||
Mikester |
|||
|
Winning immunity isn't a "strategy," but who is to say that playing a strategic game to get yourself to the f2/f3 is more respectable than
winning your way to the f2/f3?
|
|||
shibbysweet |
|||
ShanesThinkingSeat wrote: Chris & Danni got alot of help to make it to the final 3, Danni won immunity at final 6 then got lucky because Rafe was mad at Cindy for not giving away the cars, then got lucky again because Rafe was scared of Lydia winning the final 3 immunity. Danni didn't need to do anything accept let Rafe destroy his alliance. Chris got lucky because the women turned on each other. If the dominant alliance was determined to Pagong the losing tribe, then Danni and Chris would have been voted out unless they won immunity. |
|||
DuckyLu |
|||
|
When some players are choosing to look for a HII while other players are choosing to rest/chat/build fire, the players looking for the HII are playing more
strategically.
|
|||
craig |
|||
|
Even Todd relied on Amanda beating PG to get her out.
Else she wins automatically. Your beloved Fang couldn't stop Bob winning challenge, look what happened. |
|||
Thailandsurvivor |
|||
Mikester wrote: I believe I just did. craig wrote: Holy shit, stop comparing different seasons to each other. I give Bob all the credit in the world for getting Sugar to vote with him. I believe it was more Sugar's decision, but Bob obviously played a role. He survived without needing to win immunity. That's how the game should be played. |
|||
Hippochinfat |
|||
|
Posts: 531 (12/21/09 04:25 AM) |
It can be a strategy. I could go into the game and piss people off, grope them when they sleep, push them in the fire etc, but my strategy to stay in the game
would be to win immunities and find immunity idols.
|
||
tullfan2 |
|||
Thailandsurvivor wrote:But that is not why Russell lost. Russell was very strategic and was quite perceptive and focussed on the game. Russell played too aggressively and lied too often to too many people. In order to win the jury vote, you have to get the jury to vote for you against anyone else. Most of the jury saw Russell as an inveterate liar and they did not want to award someone that they did not respect or like the million dollar prize over Natalie. |
|||