Submissions Thread

Kinda hate this jury vote because it will, on the surface look like I didn't think this through and voted my friend. So I am going to go through my marking rubric and the main points that framed what was an wasn't acceptable in the game.
Rule 1: The game mechanics are game mechanics, regardless of abuse or favouritism.
This is an important rule to draw in the sand. Revali made many points about doing a lot with a little. My argument would be that having little is its own failing. There were so many opportunities to get items and the item economy was so pivotal to this game.
Rule 2: A Finalist gains points by impacting the game.
This is where the gulf starts to form. Urbosa and Mipha effected the game in truly immense ways. Revali was a survivor player.
Rule 3: The game is fun. The game is about how much honesty and when. The game is not about stabbing or getting personal.
This is my own spin because this is what I value in my own play. This is core to how I think Survivor SHOULD be played.

So, my vote. Up until closing statements I had a fair idea of how I would vote. It was going to be tight between the powerhouses of Urbosa and Mipha, and unfortunately Revali just doesn't match up according to my rubric. That doesn't mean they aren't a deserving finalist, just that in deciding, lines have to be drawn somewhere and this is how my lines are drawn.

Between Mipha and Urbosa, they had two key positives. They played the game hard, and they made the most of the core mechanics of the game. I think Mipha getting out of Redemption with items was a testament to her play. I wouldn't have done that for Horse and I doubt Riju would have either. Urbosa won a bunch of challenges I would say were vaguely lucky. I do not think that Urbosa exhibited a particular chalenge skill past that of the other challenge threats in Revali, Kass, Myself, and Oaki. It is what each of these players did with the positions they managed to get to within the framework of the game that is why they are here. Urbosa got items one way, Mipha got hers another.

Before Closings, I was slightly up on Mipha. Solely because of the contrast in play between pre-redemption and post-redemption. I think it showed a clear growth curve and a narrative I can get behind, but it was truly splitting hairs.

However after closings, boy was I unhappy with Urbosa's. Framing yourself in the context of best by shitting on the others is not an appeal to a vote I will ever get behind. Revali's was ok. He talked about points of difference, and didn't actively shit on the other players. Mipha raised a valid point but that was already a part of my rubric.

And so my vote goes to Mipha, and Revali gets the consolation second. At this point I will be incredibly disappointed if Urbosa wins. I think it shows them as an actively poor sport, a quality I will never vote for.

Thanks,
PATRICIA