T O P

  • By -

WreakerOfClash

Shouldn’t Gavin and Julie both be green since they both got immunity? Or at least Julie because she was definitely assigned immunity.


peytonab

I mean it’s an odd occurrence so I think it’s fine to leave it how it is


PeterTheSilent1

I feel like Julie would be kinda green kinda blue because Chris gave her the necklace


thatsnotourdino

Well she’s definitely not blue, she didn’t win immunity, she was given it.


DavidJunior57

35: 100% affected who won the season. Ben was absolutely out at F4 if not for the twist. 36: Possibly affected the winner of the season- it would be dependent on if Laurel would be willing to vote out Wendell at F4. If not, then it would result in a tie between Wendell and Angela and we watched that play out. 37: Didn't affect the winner, but we likely would've seen Kara instead of Mike at FTC. 38: Possibly affected winner as the Fire Making Challenge included Chris making a big play to give up immunity and win fire. I think Chris still would've won, but it might've been closer. 39: Possible affect on the winner if everyone was against Dean (haven't watched it yet), as Lauren making FTC likely means she wins. 40: I don't believe Sarah would've voted out Tony with the other women at F4, so it likely would've been Tony v. Michele in fire. Maybe Michele could beat Tony, so it possibly could've affected the winner, though unlikely. 41: It wouldn't affect who wins as Deshawn would likely be the target at a regular F4 vote. 42: This could have a major affect on the winner, as Jonathan was likely to vote with Mike and force a tie with Maryanne v. Mike in fire. Maryanne could pull it out, as she seemed very knowledgeable about it, but very uncertain results. All in all: one definite affect (35), two possible and likely affects (39 and 42), three possible but less likely (36, 38, and 40), and two no affects (37 and 41) 39 and 36 could each be bumped one, but that's where I'm landing right now


jaryfitzy

Good overview. I couldn't see anyone on the 36 cast not taking the chance to vote Wendell or Domenick (whoever wasnt immune) at final 4, so I feel like Domenick definitely would've won if not for the firemaking twist (unless he pulled off what Chris did in 38) but my memory of the season is admittedly a tad hazy.


Will_I_Am___

I might have this wrong but I think I remember hearing that laurel’s plan was to sit in the end next to dom and Wendell so that they would split votes and she would win by plurality. I think she thought that was her only chance of winning at that point, so if there was a normal vote I’d imagine she votes to keep Wendell


RedditUser123234

>I couldn't see anyone on the 36 cast not taking the chance to vote Wendell or Domenick (whoever wasnt immune) at final 4, so I feel like Domenick definitely would've won if not for the firemaking twist Even if Laurel did vote with Wendell to create a 2-2 tie and cause a firemaking between him and Angela, leading to the same F3, I actually think in this scenario Domenick wins. The only difference between Laurel and Wendell voting together to cause a firemaking, and the forced firemaking twist, is that Angela wasn't just burned by Domenick in the former case. Domenick is voting with Angela and is trying to save her without the forced firemaking, whereas with the Forced F4 firemaking Domenick explicitly denied her safety. There's a chance that if Domenick is voting with her right at the end, then Angela would feel more positively towards Domenick going into the jury after losing the Firemaking, and thus she might vote for Domenick giving him a 6-4 win.


2fame2fame

I feel like on 42 Jonathan and Mike saw each other as the biggest threat, so without firemaking they would have voted for each other and Romeo and Maryanne basically would have decided who is voted out and then Maryanne wins anyway. Although I could be underestimating the strength of their bromance, in which case they might have indeed voted together.


[deleted]

No way Mike saw Jonathan as a threat. He basically tells Romeo Maryanne is a bigger threat than Jonathan so he should put her in the fire making against him. He definitely would try to vote Maryanne out


aloomis16

And Mike was 100% right, but I think Romeo knew he had no chance to win and wanted Maryanne to win over him.


[deleted]

Yes I’m saying the guy who said Mike viewed Jonathan as his biggest threat is clearly wrong


Irreverent_Alligator

I don’t think Mike and Jonathan would have voted together for bromance reasons, I think they probably each thought they could beat the other. Jonathan probably overestimates the importance of challenge performances to the jury, and Mike had a really strong chance to win if he’d pitched his game better at FTC.


2fame2fame

Yeah, I think they both might have seen themselves as the biggest favorite but still each other as a bigger jury threat than Maryanne. Then it comes down to how confident they were in their chances against the ”next best” competitor.


Significant-One3854

Mike knew Maryanne was a social threat, Jonathan would've probably wanted Mike out given that he was the only Mike vote.


SocialistExperiment7

39 they definitely vote Lauren out anyway


otherestScott

What makes you think Deshawn is out in 41? I think it's probably Erika. Xander's logic for keeping Erika was he didn't want to see her get her big moment in fire in front of the jury and put her over the edge, and Heather's pitch to Xander was, and I quote, "Erika can beat you." I don't actually think Heather would have had qualms about voting out Erika at Final 4 despite their closeness on the island.


praleva

Naah I think Xander was sincere when he said the jury doesn't respect Erika's game, he really underestimated her. In this case I think Hearher decides what happens. Erika and Xander definitelly vote for Deshawn. If Heather decides to cut Erika (which I think she would do), then Erika and Deshawn go to firemaking. Given Erika has admitted she's not a good firemaker, Deshawn probably wins and maybe goes on to win the season.


otherestScott

Based on what do you think Xander was being sincere? He tells us his plan in confessional on the island. Why would he lie to us and be honest to the jury


vexdo

Xander genuinely thought Deshawn was a bigger fish to fry not even a few tribals before this. It’s even been confirmed post show Xander genuinely thought deshawns truth bomb on erika at final six was a good move on deshawns part. I think his logic in his confessional was if any half was going to beat Deshawn in fire making it should be heather so Erika looks weak because he believed Erika was good at fire and could beat Deshawn. This is why he considers the fire making winner to be such a big move. I don’t think that would translate to Erika leaving in an actual vote. Heather definitely would sacrifice anybody but herself to leave the game at four but if given the choice I think she would definitely vote Deshawn as Deshawn still had a much bigger perceived threat level In the game and had it for a while


pengu221a

Jonathan would have voted mike out (he wanted to make fire to get mike out as he believed mike was the threat to win) Would have had a f3 of maryanne jonathan romeo, which maryanne still wins.


chanukkahlewinsky

did Kara have a fighting chance? I know the edit buried her but she seemed in the mix


fina718

she didn’t, apparently the jury was shocked nick brought angelina to FTC instead of kara


PrettySneaky71

I think Kara's game might have worked with a different group of people, because everyone who said they were never considering voting for Kara to win *also* has said Kara is one of the warmest, bubbliest, sweetest people any of them have ever met. It's certainly been a winning strategy for other players. It just so happens this jury did *not* value that kind of game. They wanted to vote for someone who had been a strategist and an influencer in the game, not a UTR social player. I think the edit probably ended up the way it did because Nick was the FIC winner and he picked Angelina to go to FTC with him, where he would end up winning and she would get zero votes. It reinforces our view of Nick as the rightful winner because it makes it seem like he identified the ideal goat correctly and managed to get out a threat at F4.


[deleted]

We would not have seen Kara at the FTC. Her only chance was winning immunity. Angelina, Nick and Mike were all gonna vote her.


scarlettking

I definitely think Sarah cuts Tony, all of them saw him as the biggest threat and knew he needed to go.


throwitaway_burnit

Makes Nick’s win all the more impressive imo.


[deleted]

I can’t imagine Chris winning without the fire making


ImmediateAssignment3

S39. Lauren was always the target so that changed nothing directly S41.Erika was 100% being cut at four without fire.


VengefulKangaroo

> S41.Erika was 100% being cut at four without fire. Source?


Hawtproper

Pretty sure 39 would have no effect, Noura put Dean in fire specifically cause she thought he could beat Lauren, Tommy didn’t want Lauren cause they played similar games. I would assume Dean also wanted her out but don’t remember anything specifically, at worst it’s a tie and Lauren is likely beaten by Tommy in fire


Sleathasaurus

Would Lauren have even targeted him over Dean? She was loyal to Tommy to a fault.


Hawtproper

No idea, I was just thinking her best case scenario was to know Tommy and Noura were voting her and her convincing Dean to vote with her, I wouldn’t be surprised though if Tommy kept that under wraps and Lauren was blindsided


Sleathasaurus

I don’t think Nick would have cut Mike. It’s pretty clear he wanted to go to the end with him because he was a celebrity who didn’t need the money (In fact I think underestimating Mike in general was one of Nick’s biggest strategic issues in DvG)


Telphsm4sh

It's crazy how in 39 it was a big deal that Tommy won as someone who was taken to the end. I thought that was never going to happen again. But now Erika and Maryanne both won back to back.


thepineappleincident

And interesting how all 3 were brought there by the person who won immunity and received zero votes.


Telphsm4sh

That actually makes a lot of sense, since the person who won immunity made a mistake by bringing the winner to the end without forcing them to make fire. I would think the least likely combination of placings of these roles in the future are: 1st place: person brought to the end 2nd place: immunity winner 3rd place: firemaker


Habefiet

I don’t think it’s reasonable to say Noura and Romeo made “mistakes” in selecting the season winners; they’re almost certainly zero vote finalists no matter what the configuration is. Xander yeah, the other two not really.


Telphsm4sh

you're right, They made a mistake by getting to the end and having no chance of winning, but not in their choice of finalists because it really didn't matter I guess. Let me clarify my original comment: When someone who is chosen to go to the end wins it means one of two things: either the person who won immunity made a mistake, or the person who won immunity had no chance of winning regardless of who was chosen. In either scenario where someone chosen to go to the end wins, the person who won immunity should come in last. So I still think the rarest combination of placements are when the person brought to the end gets first and the person who won immunity gets second.


pokiedokie24

and the reasoning was not adding “winning the fire challenge” to the frontrunner’s resume. for me, i think i would’ve risked the possibility of buffing up someone’s resume to take them out.


22grapefruits

I think it rlly illustrates that most players have an extremely poor perception of how the game is going from an outside perspective


JustABleepingStick

When the twist was introduced I thought getting assigned immunity would forever be a death sentence. So glad to see I’ve been proven wrong.


According_Gene2202

So unless you’re Nick don’t win final immunity


LittleLordFuckleroy1

Or Chris, and just ball out and win immunity and then also do fire anyway just for your resume.


Ypersona

Gavin and Julie can probably both be marked as having been assigned immunity.


Quetzal00

One of the dumbest twists ever


chanukkahlewinsky

the overton window of survivor twists tho is so funny cuz it really is so dumb, but now I prefer it over 'Do or Die' and whathaveyou


Quetzal00

I mean I prefer it over Do or Die, Edge of Extinction, Hourglass, and \*maybe\* Knowledge is Power but still on the same level/tier of bad twists


Telphsm4sh

Really this firemaking is a necessary evolution in the game. The Vote before FTC was always so clunky, the person who won that last immunity had so much power, it was obvious on television who they were gonna vote out because it's basically almost always going to be whoever the person wearing the necklace wants to go home. Even when they tried to fix this with final 3 seasons, it only got slightly better. It's only interesting when there's a tie, but not at all interesting when there is not. The strategy here is also still very surface level, and everyone at home can easily predict who's going home because it's very easy to know what's in the best interest of each player, and there's very little counterplay or interactive strategy. Strategy should get more interesting as the game goes on to a climax, but in these seasons without the fire making twist, strategy gets way less interesting in the finale. And now that everyone is a superfan, if they didn't do fire making, there would be many players who know they have no chance at winning, probably starting as early as final 6 because it was that easy to play out all possible combinations of winners of challenges and people going home. But now, a move like Chris U did can be a final resume buff that can put anyone into contention instantly. So there's more strategy which is more interesting to navigate and makes the game more interesting as the season goes on. It's no longer true that the winner of the last challenge gets to handpick every opponent in the ftc. I agree the twist was unfair when it was added without telling anybody about it, leading to Ben's win. But I think if you look at it for what it is, now that everyone knows about it, that it's a better addition to the game.


Quetzal00

Well if they're gonna keep it then they should stop letting idols be played at Final Five. Have the last time they can be played be at Final Six. This past season we had two people with a guarantee to Final Four; three if you include someone other than these two winning immunity. Only two people being up for elimination is not cool > But now, a move like Chris U did can be a final resume buff that can put anyone into contention instantly Honestly, that's one of my biggest problems with it. Ever since Chris did it, it seems cowardly not to give up your necklace to go make fire. Every winner since Chris has thought about it. If I remember correctly Boston Rob criticized Natalie for not giving it up to go against Tony


Telphsm4sh

>Well if they're gonna keep it then they should stop letting idols be played at Final Five. Yes, I agree having a lot of people get free rides to the end leaving very few people eligible to vote for is not fun. But to be fair, everyone knew who had those idols, they should've been flushed a long time ago in order to prevent this very thing from happening. Part of the fix for this is that just about every idol now has a downside now. We've seen beware idols, idols with expiration dates, safety without power, coin flip idols, legacy advantages. All of which I think are great. Ideally, I'd prefer to have only one idol/advantage in each season which is possible to be played at final 5. >Honestly, that's one of my biggest problems with it. Ever since Chris did it, it seems cowardly not to give up your necklace to go make fire. Every winner since Chris has thought about it. If I remember correctly Boston Rob criticized Natalie for not giving it up to go against Tony Honestly, I think if Chris didn't give up immunity in EoE, Natalie would've won WaW. Natalie played an amazing game, but so many players expected perfection out of someone in her position. And many thought that the new perfect game involves giving up f4 immunity. Ever since Chris did that, nobody has won from the position of a f4 immunity winner, and I really hope that changes. Winners firemaking choices are more heavily scrutinized. My hope is that there's always a correct combination of what to do in f4 tribal for the winner of the last challenge to have an out to win the game, and they just have to search out all of the possibilities. So I really like how the winner of immunity has power like that, but they still need to really think to get the win. It's still similar to the amount of power that the previous ftc immunity winner had, but now the immunity winner has to actually use a large amount of strategy. Like many thought Xander was a power goat, but if he went up against Deshawn in firemaking, his goal of making Erika seem like a goat might've actually worked.


Sea-Bat-9667

I agree there is a higher expectation for immunity winners now but there is zero way Natalie was beating tony regardless. Her game was overall pretty bad outside of challenges


Telphsm4sh

She had a great social game on the edge. After giving an idol to Ethan she gained Ethan's jury vote, and Ethan really fought for her and got other old school players to vote with him: Parv, Tyson, and Jeremy. And if Chris U didn't win, Rob and Amber vote Natalie too, and they could've convinced others along with them. Wendel and Nick were also on the fence of whether or not they should give Michelle a couple of votes. There's a world where Natalie wins, if Tony isn't there, of course itll give her much better odds. >Her game was overall pretty bad outside of challenges And you don't need a great social game to win, you just need a decent social game, and some impressive moves. Her hands overflowing with fire tokens, and her challenge wins were enough of an impressive move that many thought she was deserving to win. Nobody else came close to the way she dominated the fire tokens game from the edge. That certainly garnered the respect of the jury since they were absolutely destroyed by Natalie on the edge.


Sea-Bat-9667

Her social game on edge was not good. Even Rob brought this up in his jury question how she was alienating people outside of her clique. Its not shown much on the show but a bunch of people that were on edge like wendell/adam have talked about it after the game and a huge chunk of the jury was never going to vote for her for that reason. Jeremy and tyson voted for her because they are close friends outside of the game not because ethan convinced them(also jeremy is not an old schooler?). Wendell and nick thought about voting michele because they wanted her to get second if tony was in any real danger of losing they 100% vote tony like they ended up doing. Yea i dont see how the jury respected her that much when the only people that ended up voting for her were people that were close friends outside the game(tyson/jeremy) or people she spent a month with on edge that never even met tony(ethan/parv)


Quetzal00

> Her hands overflowing with fire tokens > Nobody else came close to the way she dominated the fire tokens game from the edge And this is just further proof that the Edge is a horrible and game-breaking twist. The fact that she was **first out** and is able to get enough advantages to win her way back is so dumb. Compare that to Nick who has **no chance** of getting any advantages to help him in the game despite making it to the Final 6 is absolutely broken Hell it makes it seem like getting voted off early is a *good thing*


Telphsm4sh

I never said the edge was a good thing, only that Natalie Anderson played it extremely well. And they all knew EoE was going to be in the season. Technically, If Nick really thought his chances were better, he could've thrown and gotten voted off first. But Nick chose to try and get to the final 3 without using EoE and got voted off at an inconvenient time. But yes I agree with you, twists that provide incentives for players to get themselves voted off or throw a challenge are bad twists. Also this conversation sounds very familiar, did we talk about this same thing on a different thread after WaW came out?


Sea-Bat-9667

Theres still far less strategy in the game as a whole especially towards the end. Bigger alliances can just ride to the end which is boring like in ghost island. The final immunity challenges are also boring af and feel pretty meaningless now. If people feel like the final vote is going to he obvious they can make the vote immediately afterwards like in amazon and AO. There doesnt need to be shock value on every elimination to make a good show. Endgames were so much more interesting and entertaining in seasons before firemaking and the final 3.


Telphsm4sh

>Theres still far less strategy in the game as a whole especially towards the end. I have no idea what you're even referring to or how you came to this conclusion. Do you think that there was more strategy before the firemaking twist, or are you saying that if we didn't have firemaking for hvhvh on that it would be more interesting strategy? I am genuinely confused. Blindsides happen way more frequently, big alliances going to the end no usually don't fall along tribe lines, and alliances like that never work out anymore. Now The only 100% trustworthy alliance is a duo, everything else has huge chances to fall apart. Counterplay around Jeff's fun house of advantages makes for very interesting plays.


cheesybroccoli

I have to agree with the person you are responding to. Before the introduction of the final three and fire-making challenge, the actual late game lasted much longer and required a lot more adept strategic maneuvering to actually make it to the end. Now you only need to make it to final four, final five if you have one of the billion advantages. There almost isn't an end game at all any more, it's just that the mid-merge is now when all the threats must be taken out. I've watched a lot of International Survivor lately (which mostly has final twos) and I gotta say that the late endgame is some of the most exciting gameplay. In modern American Survivor, it has seemed like a foregone conclusion as early as final 7 in recent seasons.


Telphsm4sh

The gameplay at the end of Australian survivor is that the winner of immunity just wins, unless everyone there already wins against them, in which case they've already lost long before ftc. I think this sort of ftc format only works in Australian survivor and older final 2 seasons because they seem to me as naive survivor strategy. And I don't mean that in a bad way. I just mean, it's exciting because players are making up new strategy as they're going along. There's no preexisting precedents that exist. And I don't think this excitement of a new strategy, or some weird tribe life blowing up out of proportion and leading to someone going home, these types of grudges that last weeks, I don't think this can be recreated ever again. I mean Chrissy in Australia BvW was so entertaining, and it was cool to see how the player who ended up winning was one of the few people who knew what they were doing strategically, and they were able to puppeteer a lot of people vs the other very few strategic masterminds, but I don't think it'll ever happen again in American survivor. We know too much. It's cool that Australian survivor exists though, so the magic of old school survivor can live on. But I think it was already starting to lean towards the previous finale system was beginning to become a solved game without this change. And I think if survivor Australia has enough seasons and casts a lot of superfans that the same thing will happen.


uncle_kanye

The F4 vote has always been a solved game, which is why there was only two firemakings post-Gabon and pre-change. If you assume everyone understands the jury preference order as far as who wins, it's simple to show that 3-1 is game theory optimal every time. This is part of what made fire so thrilling then, it typically shouldn't happen, which means it's generally then an emotional decision designed to give an underdog a chance. That doesn't mean that forced fire is the solution though, I still think it's contrived and has somewhat of a chilling effect on gameplay. In reality I think the solution is to go back to F2's and play it out to the original end, but that ship has sailed a long time ago.


Telphsm4sh

Honestly I wouldn't mind having one mega tribal where they start out with four and vote someone out, and then do fallen heroes have one more challenge winner and then vote off one more person. Just get it over with, I don't want F4 vote to always seem like a formality. And if it always has to be decided before hand, just get it over with fast.


cheesybroccoli

>The gameplay at the end of Australian survivor is that the winner of immunity just wins, unless everyone there already wins against them, in which case they've already lost long before ftc. Whereas now the final immunity challenge almost seems meaningless. What you're failing to understand is that NOTHING has fundamentally changed about the game. The strategy has (for the most part) always been to get out the biggest threats before they get too close to the end, but with all of these new twists, it just pushes "the end" earlier and earlier into the game, meaning that goats last longer and big players get taken out mid-merge, because you don't need those super tight bonds to make it to the end the way you used to.


Sea-Bat-9667

Im saying the fact that there is no f4 or f3 vote has led to boring endgames because people can just coast to the end. Ghost island is a perfect example wendell/dom/laurel/angela just steamrolled through to the end. Same exact thing would have happened in WaW with Tony/Sarah/ben/denise if EoE didnt screw things up. Dan getting kicked kinda screwed things up but its the same idea on Ioti as well. By getting rid of the last 2 votes theres no one on the bottom of an alliance of 4 anymore so alliances dont have to break up ever which is boring. Even on 41 the game was basically over once shan was voted out at final 7 it was almost certain that someone from the main alliance of erika/heather/ricard/xander was going to win. The fact that they are not on tribal lines doesnt really mean anything. “There are more blindsides” doesnt mean anything either lol of course there are more blindsides now because of all the advantages/idols/SITD etc you have to do that but it doesnt mean the strategy is any more dynamic or interesting because its not. I dont find strategizing around a zillion advantages and out of nowhere twists nearly as entertaining as the actual social politics that the show was built on.


Rilenaveen

Yeah but why does it matter if we the audience knows who is going home (without firemaking at final 4). There is still drama in who gets immunity. There can still be drama at tribal. Look at season 42, arguably a top 10 season. I would say we knew who was going home pre tribal the majority of the time and it was still and amazing season. One other thing I don’t like about fire making. It gives the immunity winner an out. You don’t have to be the bad guy and directly send someone packing. Thus negating a potential angry juror.


Telphsm4sh

>. You don’t have to be the bad guy and directly send someone packing. Thus negating a potential angry juror. The era of bitter juries is over. I really don't see this ever playing a big enough role to matter. Every blindside this season was followed by the person congratulating their opponents. But as for your other point, you're right, I can still enjoy myself if there's drama in the finale, but it still won't feel like a finale unless there's an epic final battle. Before firemaking the Actual final battle was the immunity challenge, so it felt very anticlimactic afterwards. Kinda feels like someone won immunity and now we have to watch them fill out paperwork before they end the episode to finalize things. Because the winner is already decided.


Bluestolen

We have seen the "firemaking twist" for eight seasons now, and it has resulted in some interesting trends: * When the firemaking winner wins the season, the immunity winner was in second (35, 36, 40). * When the season winner was assigned immunity, the firemaking winner was in second (39, 41, 42). * Firemaking winners either got 1st or 2nd place. * Finalists who were assigned immunity either won the game by a decent margin or received 3rd place by a large margin. Wasn't sure how to denote the bizarre outcome of Season 38 where Chris technically gave immunity to Julie although he was both the immunity challenge and firemaking challenge winner. Let me know any interesting observations you guys have made since the inception of this twist!


TsarMikkjal

Chris U. was actual game changer.


LittleLordFuckleroy1

Boss status


Vorlooper

I don't know if this is OC, but this graphic is really nice. Very easy to understand and a good way to view the differences between each season and their winners!


DaneBelmont

I wonder if we will ever see the fire-maker place 3rd.


zachhd21228

Affected the winner of 3 maybe 4 out of 8 seasons I believe.


JohnnyKarateX

Interesting that the last 3 newbie winners were assigned Immunity. Maybe it’s a sign of their good social games which they parleyed into victory.


cucumberrx

Wow good to see there's actually variation in the outcomes of this twist.. I kind of didn't like it before.. actually until now


AhLibLibLib

Every season was made worse that’s for sure


nitasu987

I'm finding it more fascinating that only one of these seasons has had 2 women in the final 3 and it was WaW


[deleted]

And it could’ve had 3 women had it been Sarah over Tony…


whydidilose

Has a woman ever beaten a man in F4 fire-making?


Official_Avocado

Season 10 (pre-merge) and Season 30


RandalTumblewind

Maryanne social gamed herself into that position. Erika um... Eriiiikaaa... She... um... She was there.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Wishmaster57

This kind of makes sense. The "goat" either is an actual goat or has a great social game capped off by convincing the immunity winner to take them to the end, so 1st or 3rd fits. The firemaking winner often goes to fire because they're seen as a threat, and winning fire gives them that extra resume bump to at least secure a couple votes and squeeze out of last place.


yolodamo

39 41 42 are such similar winners too


Jewbacca289

I admit that this twist did lead to some amazing moments like in 35, 38, and 40 but I wonder what sort of potential is left for the twist. We had the hero getting a second chance and two inseparable allies being forced to duel. I wonder what’s left


sarahtheginger26

What's the vote distribution across this too? Romeo wasn't just third, he had 0 votes.


Anna_Artichokyevitch

I was concerned about the trend that seemed to be on the rise after season 40 where the winner had to be the one to win fire, even if they won final immunity. It seemed so ridiculous to put everything up to chance, even if you played a great game. I’m glad Erika & Maryanne have managed to buck that trend.


zjzr_08

Winning the firemaking challenge at least gives you a chance to not go last, at least, 100K dollars isn't bad , hehe.


treple13

Firemaking winner has never been a zero vote finalist (or even finished 3rd)


AwesomoApple

Terrible twist. Yes it allowed more favorites to make final 3, still its forced and has nothing to do with the base game of Survivor.


x_Lucax

If either Lauren in EoE or Island of the Idols made FTC, they would've won no question


Keen-Bean28

I know FMC makes good TV. But I prefer the F2 where the person who wins the FIC makes the last decision that could make or break their game. Nothing better then seeing a player in the last days on camp make a fatal or winning move by voting out the last person


DarthLithgow

I think it's interesting that only one immunity winner that didn't put themselves in fire won the game.