This was an interesting Final Tribal Council; I learned a lot about the game and about my opponents. I would like to thank all of you for your questions, you were raw and pulled no punches. I would also like to congratulate Urbo and Mipha for making it this far, we all made it to the end, and no one can take it away. With the formalities out the way, time for me to take my final bow.
I think Urbo, Mipha and I all played good games, any game that gets you to the end is good in my eyes. However, the question is not which of us played good games, but which of us played the best game. This is a hard question to answer for many of you, after all we played vastly different games: one with many items, one with redemption and one with neither. However, I think I have a framework that will make this easy. Judging the quality of a game of Survivor is not about judging what a person did, rather it is about judging what a person did with what they were given. Survivor does not dish out opportunities equally, neither does life, and we do not think more of the son of a millionaire over that of a fisherman. As such I will not focus on what Urbosa and Mipha did, but how much more they could have done.
MiphaMipha is the easier of their two cases, and I'm going to focus on the elephant in the room, Mipha played a game that got them voted out. My qualm here is not that they were voted out but why. They were not voted out due to an unfortunate tribe draw, the wrong person winning immunity, a twist, or them valiantly trying to pull something big and it backfiring. They were voted out because they did not play strongly enough, found themselves on the bottom and were unable to find the right people to save them. So much so that a vote split organized by yours truly was able to ensure that no matter what happened, them or their ally would go home. Even if they did survive here, they would not have made it much further, they claimed that even with their redemption revelation earlier they would not have made it here, so how would they have managed without it at all? They would not have. A game that was strong, hits a snag and uses redemption to come back is a game worth voting for. A game that was weak, has the logical conclusion occur, and needs redemption for them to make the end is not.
However, Mipha did make use of the redemption mechanic, to rather tedious results. I did not trust them, Sidon did not trust them, Kass did not trust them, and it does not seem Epona did either. When after just 2 rounds half the game does not trust you, you have not done a good job even if it works out. They gave up information they could have kept hidden, revealing it at proper moments to execute their needs without angering a lot of the game. They should have done more surveying to tell lies that wouldn't quickly be seen through, ones that fed into what people already believed. However, they did not do this, and, on several occasions, they were targeted for this distrust. They also made the same misplay here as they had before, playing their idol to be safe when better surveying would have ensured they didn't have to play it or enabled them to correctly play it on Oven, so how much of a lesson was redemption really? They learned some things, but not nearly enough to play a game I think is worthy of winning.
UrbosaUrbosa walked out of the Bazaar with relations with very dominant players like Sidon, Kohga and Kass and a lot of other relations to capitalize on from their first tribe. They also possessed a cavalcade of items. Between all this them making the end in a dominant fashion would seem inevitable. Yet they made every decision to ensure that it would not be the case. They made moves that caused Kohga and Kass to not trust them as much and by the end had decided not to talk to Sidon at all, choosing silence over a potentially fruitful relationship. They attempted to reforge bonds with Hunnie and Oven, only to immediately discard Hunnie instead of trying harder to earn their trust. Had it not been for an idol and my work on the other tribe, they would have lost Oven as well. Urbosa soon found themself in a sticky situation and instead of working to forge new relations they doubled down on what they had, Mipha, Oven and Myself. Together we made it through the first few rounds but even of that four, Urbosa was the one who would be discarded barring an immunity chain or items. Urbosa's social game was one that formed a dependency on their challenge prowess or items, when instead they should have used their challenge prowess and items to improve their social position.
Think of how much more Urbosa could have done with their items, they used them at the last minute to carve a path to the end, but they could have waltzed in with a little more thought. Think of what you could have done if you had access to the tools Urbosa had at their disposal. Allow me to break down why I think their remarks on why they didn't use their items in the situations on page 4 of their FTC was unconvincing: (if you already disagree with their response there is no reason to read this)
1. This one is on Link to decide, regardless I already said it was minor point.
2. On Hunnie they state that it was "too risky" and that Hunnie was leaking plans, but Urbosa was already exposed as a saboteur and traitor at this point, no matter what side you choose it will be risky. If there is a person you want to work with but isn't trusting you, a really good way to get them to trust you is to let them know you know what they did, forgive them and save them. Sidon went way up in my rankings when he handed me the amibo reader and Hunnie seems like the type that would be very receptive to an item being used to help them. If Urbosa had nothing but immunity here I would understand the double back, but given they had WAY more than that it was a completely missed opportunity.
3. Urbosa tries to play the card that the criticism is that they had too many items in response to me arguing it was not that they had items but how they used them? Knowing Oven was not the target is not a major bonus (it is something I suspected as well), items could be passed during revotes, so just knowing one of us getting voted is enough. Using the vote blocker or another tool protects against the litany of things that could have been done if anyone in the other alliance decided to "play it safe" is just smart play. At the very least bringing up that you have AN item that can help probably secures everyone on board instead of risking someone jumping ship because the plan is too dangerous. Do you really think they could not just spare something here to ensure their will was done?
4. I mean, people did not want to go for Sidon but Urbosa insisted that was the case, the quote I shared from Oven shows that much, they were too stubborn to consider the needs of others. If you are going to be stubborn then at least be like "look I have X, I will use it this way, as such voting Sidon is the best move and if you don't it's likely one of you dies" then they would have gotten everyone on board in dominant fashion. Also, if you think everyone is unsure about your plan, they had 2 items that reset the round upon play to give them more time to plan. Urbosa acts as if getting a bunch of items out of the game the round Oven leaves makes the endgame harder to navigate? That was exactly what most people's goals were for that round anyway.
5. I mean the social argument that I got someone to play an item for my benefit is the same regardless here? Like it makes no difference if they give it to me or not, what matters is someone else's item was used to MY advantage. I just use this as a warrant for why I feel Urbosa majorly misread people, like how I think Hunnie would have reacted to being protected. Why would you think someone, in a round where you have an idol and a half, and a bunch of other items abound, would not use the item to protect themself, like what vague cool usage was there here that screwed them over, killing myself by playing it on Mipha? Holding back is just paranoia through and through.
Urbosa had so many tools at their disposal to put themself in a dominant social position to pair with their challenge prowess, instead they ignored this until they had to use the items to get themself to the end, all the while shutting out potential allies and giving false promises in a stubborn attempt to get what they wanted. They played like their head was the guillotine when it was not, and that caused them to be in the guillotine at the end. To me that does not sound like the best game.
Now it is time to look at my game.
Reactive GameplayMany complaints have been lodged against my game, but I think in the end the critiques are minor. My game is not perfect, but I believe it is the best of the ones before you right now. People tried to lampoon me for being passive and at the behest of others the entire game, but this is far from the truth. I was reactive to the game, I surveyed the field and looked where the wind was blowing. If it was favorable, I skated into it. If it was not favorable, I changed it. This allowed me to get what I wanted without people singling me out when they did not. If you think this is untrue then I ask you, which tribal councils were not to my advantage? In fact, let me show you the score, comparing my record to Urbo and Mipha:
Link: As I showed before Link going was one of the options Horse, Epo and I planned prior to merge. Furthermore, he was targeting my ally. This vote clearly was good for me. Meanwhile Urbosa lost a relation they attempted to forge and Mipha voted in the minority. Revali: 1 Urbo: 0 Mipha: 0
Mipha: Both Mipha and Patricia were also people on my kill list at the start of merge. This did benefit Urbo, but I was the one who organized the split and informed them, not the other way around. Revali: 2 Urbo: 1 Mipha: 0
Royal Horse: In hindsight this vote was regrettable, but I had no way of knowing Horse had made a mistake and then forgotten they made a mistake. Urbo tries to claim this was their move, but let us face it, anyone thinking this round belongs to anyone except Epona or someone with more connections than us is surely mistaken. Revali: 2 Urbo: 1 Mipha: 0
Patricia/Hunnie: The votes were there to save Oven, even without their idol it was 3-2 on Patricia, someone who seemed to wish me ill will the entire game. I protected someone I would work with later and eliminated someone who had ill will towards me. I also hurt Mipha who I expected to come back into the game. Meanwhile Urbosa had a huge missed opportunity with Hunnie, compromising and unable to get Kass out like they wanted. Revali: 3 Urbo: 1 Mipha: 0
Oaki: Oaki was a compromise vote. Losing a returnee meant that Mipha had a much narrower path to the end and it was only good for them in the sense that Oaki was not Mipha. Urbo and I both had reasons not to trust Oaki, so his loss did not hurt us nearly as much. Not to mention we successfully pushed a wagon off Oven from the very start. Revali: 4 Urbo: 2 Mipha: 0
Kass: Mipha argues that me not targeting Kass from the get go was a mistake, but given that could have easily gotten back to Kass and Mipha was both a necessary vote and acting incredibly erratically, I don't see a mistake in waiting until things were settling on a counter-vote and once it landed on Kass, I locked it in so it wouldn't move. A good round for all involved. Revali: 5 Urbo: 3 Mipha: 1
Oven: This round we got beat hard, all of us got beat hard. Mipha and Urbosa's stonewalling the round before made this round incredibly hard to navigate and I tried my best but failed. I would like to point out that unlike either of them, I possessed no tools that could have saved Oven here, Mipha had an idol and Urbo had a litany of them. Still, we all lost. Revali: 5 Urbo: 3 Mipha: 1
Sidon: Urbo did get what they wanted here; Sidon went. But Sidon was someone who was incredibly hard to argue against at FTC having very few failings in the game. Both Mipha and I were going to vote them out before the end and I even voted for Sidon before the round was reset. I would also like to point out Mipha incurred Sidon's vote and rage here, I did not. Revali: 6 Urbo: 4 Mipha: 2
Epona: Urbosa argues not voting them here was a mistake and I disagree very deeply. To expect someone to vote into someone with 1.5 idols the last round they can be played is a very undue burden. Secondarily, the main worry was Urbosa keeping around Epona as then they would be guaranteed a path to the end of the game even if they lost final immunity. Thirdly, a person with a bunch of items who held onto them played them to protect their ally, who had gotten more beneficial votes in the early merge tribals and equal things in the mid game tribals, all with minimal item use or immunities, who here is the better player? I would say it is the latter. Revali: 7 Urbo: 4 Mipha: 3
Kohga: If Kohga won, Urbosa was gone, if Urbosa won, Kohga was being voted by both me and Urbo. Unless Mipha was going to send it to a tiebreaker (which they were not) I was safe despite having played a rather strong UTR social game up to this point. Still we did all get what we want. Revali: 8 Urbo: 5 Mipha: 4
Even if you disagree with one or two of my assessments, the case is clear, my reactionary play ended up with me getting votes that were good for me far more often than either of my colleagues. People may disagree with my methods, but they are clearly the most effective of those here.
Social GameMy social game was far better than either of my opponents. That is because I was adaptable with my social strategy as well. Everyone in the game of survivor is different and the reasons they have to keep you around will be different. So, by reading the conversation, I presented the side of me that would most make someone want to have me around, if not as a primary ally, then as someone they would rather have than the other wagon. When someone did want me gone, I went up to them to change that. To some I showed my keen mind and potential as a strategist, to others I showed my kind heart and shared the most adorable pictures in the world, to some I showed my humor and love for off the wall information and to others I was just a number, but a number that was more useful than others. Whichever side of me a person needed me to show at that moment, I showed and it payed off in numerous potential relationships and numerous people willing to go to bat for me.
I was also careful with how I approached the debacle of lying in the game. I was willing to lie to advance my cause, that is a part of the game, but I tried to do it only when necessary. When the jig was up, it was up. I did not bury my motives under flowery false apologies, I just made it apparent that was what I was doing and why. People are not stupid, so why would I pretend they are? Link knew he was the vote; I did not try to hide it. Patricia knew I was voting for them; I did not try to hide it. When Sidon found out he was the vote, I did not try to hide it, I just let him do what he felt he should. Kohga knew I was voting for them, I knew they were pitching me, we did not hide anything from there. Even Urbosa knew I would vote for them if unprotected, but they were loyal to me anyway. When people did try to vote for me, my reaction was not rage or anger at the fact they voted for me, if I was ever angry it was that it wasn't in their best interest to vote for me. When it was in their best interest, I just accepted that, moved on and tried to make sure they had a reason next time to work with me. Because of this, I was able to openly strategize with Sidon and Kohga following 4 votes for me. Because of this, Sidon voted for Mipha over me at F6 and I went from person Hunnie wants to kill to person they are voting with. Sidon said that no one had an axe to grind with me in the jury forum, and this is why.
There were a million things I didn't know this game, there were items and relationships that were beyond my awareness. But it would be unfair to expect anyone to know everything in a game with as many dimensions of this, and I knew that. I lost ally after ally and had to go from plan A to plan D in the blink of an eye. But It would be unfair to expect anyone to be in control of everything all game, but I was able to mitigate that by having a lot of relationships. My social game ensured that when I took a loss, it wouldn't be the final one, that if I wasn't the majority vote here, I wouldn't be next time.
ClosingI didn't need a ton of items to make the end, but Urbosa's lies and stubbornness made them reliant on theirs. I did not need a redemption revelation to make the moves necessary to get to the end, Mipha needed theirs and even then, they managed to anger half the game in a ridiculously short amount of time. The fact they HAD them should not be counted against them, but the fact they NEEDED them when I did not need them at all, should. I was given barely anything, despite trying to get items and idols throughout the entire game, but still I triumphed.
And I think that brings me to my final point. This was a game of twists and turns, many dimensions and different things. My opponents played complicated games while I did not. If you vote for me you are sending a message I think is powerful. In a game with so many dimensions you don't need to be a challenge beast to win, you don't need to be a social god or goddess to win, you don't need a bunch of items or twists or anything, all you need is to talk to people and make them want to kill you less than the other guy. Anybody can play the game I played, and as such, anybody can win Survivor. Goodnight Hyrule.
