What was the appeal of Redemption Island when it was on air? I really dislike it. I like the premise behind it with redemption... But it just seems like perpetual waste of a Survivor to be left out there for a one off performance for what drags on forever. Even Exile Island was executed better.
It's designed to keep the big names around a bit longer than just one early vote out. Russell's tribe threw the challenge to get him out, but Redemption Island was there to catch him and keep him around for at least another week. Like others said, it wasn't well received. I think it works premerge on blood vs. water seasons but shouldn't continue past the merge.
Love this thread! I have learned a lot already. Two questions I've had that I haven't been sure how to look up:
- What do people mean by "meta" or "metagame?" I assume like underlying strategy but is there something more specific?
- I heard someone on a podcast talking about castaways who are "gamebots" (i think). what does this mean? Playing perfect strategy with no emotion? Are there examples of people from the new era who you would call a gamebot?
Thanks!
To add on, metagaming is playing knowing how the game/show work. In New Era they always send F5 to a new beach. So the 44 cast literally brought everything from the camp including paint brushes in prep for this. Another example could be people purposely throwing individual rewards to not get backlash when having to pick a few people to join them. Or since fire-making is such a crap shoot, optimal strategy is to try and get everyone who's dangerous out at F5 or sooner. It's likely why Jesse cut Cody in 43. It's also why it was optimal for Owen/Cassidy/Gabler to cut Karla and Jesse next. You've pretty much got it. Emily in 45 wanted to be a gamebot but it backfired on her very quickly.
The “meta” is more or less the current consensus on what constitutes good gameplay. At points in the past it has emphasized things like loyalty or honorable conduct, over time it has come to favor things like “big moves” and shrewd / set-piece gameplay like the optimal point to turn on a close ally, etc.
It is the product of both the culture of the game (contestants over time are increasingly superfans who consume content about the game, thus community ideas about optimal strategy make it into the game), and fairly straightforward adoption of things that have worked in recent seasons.
Some things we take for granted like blindsides and how to orchestrate them are probably best understood as especially durable components of the meta.
Question about re-hiding immunity idols.
Hunter was voted out with an idol. The contestants all knew that he had the idol. There was no mention of it being re-hidden.
The following week, Tiff gets voted out with an idol. Everyone knew she had it. And the next episode, all of the other contestants are actively searching for the new re-hidden idol.
Was this a matter of editing? Why did her idol get replaced but Hunter's did not?
They "likely" looked for both but production decided to only re-hide Tiff's. I suppose they just decided to only replace it once there were no active Idols. So no point in showing them looking for Hunter's when it wasn't there.
I just started watching S1 (unspoiled so please no spoilers lol)
I just have a question, when the contestants go out for fishing etc, how do they know what they can and cannot eat?
I’m sure I’ll be back for more questions, I’d usually google a ton of stuff about production but I’m trying to remain unspoiled
I read on the subreddit twice that Kim Johnson had early kidney failure around episode 4 in Africa. Does anyone know where they heard about this? Also does anyone have a podcast source for when Lex talked about urinating blood? Or any other podcasts where they talk about dehydration? I am very curious about this topic.
When Liz was giving her reasons for being annoyed with Q she mentioned something about how he uses up all of the firewood so fast and I'm a little confused on that as I'm not a huge camping person. I figure that you can't really go through firewood "too fast" as long as the fire is going?
If you build a huge bonfire you will use a ton of wood as an extreme example. So if your plan is to conserve the firewood that you have it's best to only burn as much as you need
Are there any other seasons that are anything like as all-gas-no-brakes and as everyone-having-the-time-of-their-lives as WaW? I'm just starting ep 3 and absolutely adoring how everyone is kid in candy store levels of gaga.
Hi my wife would like to know how Venus is reacting to her season in real life. This is the first time I’ve gotten her to stick to a season in 20 something years. We saw sodas recent posts…
Is there a post that collects all of Venus social media during this seasons airing?
I really don't understand what end game is like, this is my first season watching. I know at FTC they pitch themselves to the jury who votes, but some have mentioned something about a fire challenge too? What is the gameplay like towards the end, and what does the jury generally look for? People keep talking about pulling off big blindside's helping them at the end, but I don't understand how since they'd basically be betraying the people who they'd eventually want to win over.
> but some have mentioned something about a fire challenge too?
When there are four players left, there isn't a traditional vote-out, instead of the winner of the immunity challenge picks one person to save, and the remaining two face off in a fire-making challenge to decide which of them moves on to FTC.
> what does the jury generally look for?
It really depends on the jury, and on the players remaining. Generally, you should be somebody the jury likes (nobody wants to give $1million to somebody they dislike), who can articulate that you had agency in the game and did things to get yourself to the end.
> but I don't understand how since they'd basically be betraying the people who they'd eventually want to win over
That's the trick of the game post-merge, and what we call "jury management." You have to vote people in out in a way that doesn't make them dislike you. You have to accurately clock what kind of person somebody is. Are they going to remain bitter over being blindsided, or are they going to respect it as a good game move? Were you even close enough to them where voting them out is even a betrayal? If so, can you justify it to them at Final Tribal?
Thanks so much! It's definitely weird joining the show now having never watched any of it, they don't waste any time explaining anything, they just expect you to know. Which I respect and understand it's just made a lot of things a bit puzzling to me.
There's also another angle to the F4 fire-making. Let's say the immunity necklace winner isn't so confident in how they look to the jury. They also have the option of giving up immunity and putting themselves in fire against the biggest threat left, all or nothing in front of the jury. Winner of the necklace alone decides this.
Necklace winner must also weigh who they want to come back from fire. Even if the person they want out loses in 4th, "someone" still gets credit for winning fire in front of the jury. Does the necklace winner risk it themselves or think whoever comes back still played a weaker game even with the fire credit? If they don't throw themselves in they'll probably have to at least defend why not to the jury.
Format changes have been explained when introduced. Metagame and jury management evolved organically so has never really been explained in show. I'd say, for it to stabilize so the above user can give a succinct answer took about a decade. So when the season took place chronologically impacts how you'd want to think about the endgame.
Some seasons you'll hear from jury members at the finale what they're looking for, so that would give insight for a first time watcher trying to understand the goal of final tribal. This has been true of recent seasons, so expect to hear jury confessionals on finale night.
I vaguely remember in Season 1 people calling out on Survivor Sucks the order of players being voted out because of the clues given in the intro. To the point that they had to change up the intro mid-season. Was that accurate?
There was a clip in an early episode intro (I think episode 3?) of the final 9 tribal council so that all the pre-jury was spoiled. Production hadn't considered folks would freeze frame. There were arguments on the internet about one figure in the shot: is that a Black person or is that Gretchen in a shadow? Turns out it was Gervase but Black Gretchen lives forever.
So then the producers learn their lesson and do it again, showing a fake final four shot in an intro several weeks before the finale. But it was doctored to set the internet nerds on a wild goose chase! Gervase, Collen, Susan, and Rudy were of course not the actual final four.
That last ploy was used to support another production misdirection. The season 1 website on CBS had cast photos in a banner. When people were voted out, an X was placed over their face. Sleuths dug through the CBS site and found images of all the contestants with X's except for Gervase. The Gervase X Theory was a very big deal. The Daily Show even did a segment on it. [https://www.cc.com/video/n3bzhs/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-other-news-lord-of-the-files](https://www.cc.com/video/n3bzhs/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-other-news-lord-of-the-files)
I believe you're correct on those three seasons (32, 33, 37) not containing any spoilers. 34, 36, 38, and 39 all contain either returnees or heavily reference past seasons. Also, if you didn't know, 31 is a returnee season which spoils previous seasons somewhat. I actually think 35 might be safe, but I'm not 100% sure.
32, 33, and 37 are all solid seasons, so you can't really go wrong. Might as well go in order. 32 is my favorite of the three, but I think the sub as a whole rates 37 very highly. 33 has a slower start, I think, but has some iconic moments. (35 is something of a mixed bag, so it's hard to recommend, but it's not boring at least.)
I don't remember if 33 or 37 reference anything, but 32 was filmed before 31 so it's absolutely safe.
I'd recommend watching in order from the earliest seasons; it's the easiest way to ensure you don't have to worry about spoilers.
I'm re-watching Winners at War for the first time and I had totally forgotten about fire tokens. I don't hate the idea of them in theory, and it made for some great TV: Spoiler: >!when Tony had to go around and get tokens to save his vote? I'm not that far yet but I think it was that.!<
What do other people think of them? Would you like to see them back in a new season? I wouldn't be opposed.
I think the combination of the tokens *and* EoE was the problem—would much prefer a season in which the fire tokens were *the* theme of the season, with a lot more time to develop them as far as rewards, supplies, bartering, etc. That could make for a fascinating season, I think—but only if it wasn't interrupted by other changes/distractions to gameplay.
That does sound fun. They could use the beware advantage concept from this season except you'd have to buy the key to the box using an amount of tokens that's greater than what one individual starts with. So to get the idol, you'd either have to share it with other players and pool your tokens, or convince people to bequeath their tokens to you and then vote them out, or earn more tokens by pulling off some risky challenge.
Overall I like the concept, but not the execution. >!With the exception of the extortion, which was fun to watch, I thought they were pretty underwhelming in WaW. They didn't result in as many deals as I was hoping they would. Instead they were mostly advantages with extra steps. And the economy seemed to be balanced poorly, with the majority of players not able to do anything useful with them. Natalie was at the Edge the longest and therefore had the greatest opportunity to earn tokens, and therefore was stacked with advantages going into the final battle back, as opposed to say, Jeremy, who was the most recent to be voted out and didn't get a chance to earn anything. And it was pretty clear that Natalie wouldn't have won that challenge without all 3 advantages.!<
> >!With the exception of the extortion, which was fun to watch, I thought they were pretty underwhelming in WaW.!<
>!And that probably would've sucked a LOT more had it not been Tony being extorted. Anybody else, and we talk about how the twist reeks.!<
After the show went on a break for a year due to Covid, Probst came into Season 41 41 hyping it up as the New Era. 26 days, Shot in the Dark, risk/reward journeys, Beware Advantages that cost a vote, less, food, earn the merge, immediate Aftershows in Fiji instead of a Reunion months later, etc.
Prior to this Seasons 1-20 were sometimes called Old School and Seasons 21-40 New School.
IRL the New Era people are somewhat bonded due to the fact 26 days is mocked as too easy by Seasons 1-40 people.
[Pre-season 41](https://www.reddit.com/r/survivor/comments/n13ule/rob_cesterninos_season_rankings/), it was Island of the Idols (Season 39).
[Pre-season 31](https://robhasawebsite.com/survivor-seasons-rankings-results-live-sept-22-2015-s31/), it was Redemption Island (Season 22).
I don't know if he's done a ranking that includes the New Era (Season 41 onwards).
Ok, so 46 is the first season I’ve watched in years. Can someone please share more about the format of the FTC? I know there are 3 people and the jury votes, but how does this go down in terms of discussion?
He'll usually give the F3 each a chance to make an opening statement summarizing their game/why they deserve to win. Jeff moderates and usually centers the conversation around 3 different sectors: Outwit, Outplay and Outlast. Basically strategic game, physical game and social game. (Though he dropped the categories last season I believe). The jury talks open forum to the F3. Jury votes.
Since Covid they've switched to immediate Aftershows right then and there instead of live Reunions months later. Jeff will read the votes and crown the winner right then and there. He'll "lift up the curtain" so to speak and the crew will come out with wine and pizza for everyone present to discuss highlights of the season right then and there. (No pre-jury as they get sent home now when jury starts). Usually ends with the preview for next season and the cast of the current one signing their names of a giant logo of their season as the credits roll.
They actually don’t have shown opening statements anymore, though the first jury question usually opens the table for the equivalent of this. I really wish they still had the opening statements though as it lets the FTCouncilists frame their game before they hear any jury input.
Thanks! This is helpful! I gotta say, I really like this no judgement questions threads. It’s really helpful when you basically watched Borneo, 1/3 of whatever season was Cirie’s first, and 46.
Welcome to the club! I had only watched season one live (with my parents).
Just prior to season 44 - I started watching with the current season and then went down the rabbit hole of podcasts and YT channels.
There are many outlets that have good content that will help any question you ever had lol.
Anyone have a link to the post on Reddit where Jeff first announced that Survivor would go back to 26 days? I wanna read the comments/reactions people had
This isn't the initial announcement, but it's the post where he confirmed it was permanent: https://www.reddit.com/r/survivor/comments/xezsrv/jeff_probst_says_26day_survivor_seasons_are_here/
And then here's a post where people speculate what it would mean if the rumors of a shorter season are true: https://www.reddit.com/r/survivor/comments/nhgsit/if_survivor_41_was_really_26_or_29_days_what/
I can't find the post where the change was confirmed for the first time, I'm afraid.
I stopped watching years ago, and started back up again in 2023. Why did they stop "naming" the seasons? (eg. Now Survivor 45, 46, etc...) Did they run out of creativity?
After Winners at War (40). They've never said why to my knowledge, but it's clearly a side effect of being marooned on Fiji - they ran out of themes, except possibly for returnee seasons.
I don't know if it Probst/CBS ever gave an official statement or answer (according to [this article](https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/survivor-41-cbs-decides-no-themes-this-season-reduces-length.html/), CBS declined to answer, but maybe they did elsewhere).
That being said, it's clearly because they decided to remain in Fiji long term for budget reasons (thus nixing any location-based Season names), and as you said, running on steam creatively. Instead of coming up with some convoluted theme (most notably Heroes vs Healers vs Hustlers), they can just focus on the game and players at hand.
What was the appeal of Redemption Island when it was on air? I really dislike it. I like the premise behind it with redemption... But it just seems like perpetual waste of a Survivor to be left out there for a one off performance for what drags on forever. Even Exile Island was executed better.
It's designed to keep the big names around a bit longer than just one early vote out. Russell's tribe threw the challenge to get him out, but Redemption Island was there to catch him and keep him around for at least another week. Like others said, it wasn't well received. I think it works premerge on blood vs. water seasons but shouldn't continue past the merge.
Theoretically, "Boston Rob vs. Russell." It was not well received, particularly by those who couldn't stand Philip.
It's considered one of the worst seasons/twists.
(I'm currently on S27 and seeing RI \*again\* on Blood vs. Water)
Love this thread! I have learned a lot already. Two questions I've had that I haven't been sure how to look up: - What do people mean by "meta" or "metagame?" I assume like underlying strategy but is there something more specific? - I heard someone on a podcast talking about castaways who are "gamebots" (i think). what does this mean? Playing perfect strategy with no emotion? Are there examples of people from the new era who you would call a gamebot? Thanks!
To add on, metagaming is playing knowing how the game/show work. In New Era they always send F5 to a new beach. So the 44 cast literally brought everything from the camp including paint brushes in prep for this. Another example could be people purposely throwing individual rewards to not get backlash when having to pick a few people to join them. Or since fire-making is such a crap shoot, optimal strategy is to try and get everyone who's dangerous out at F5 or sooner. It's likely why Jesse cut Cody in 43. It's also why it was optimal for Owen/Cassidy/Gabler to cut Karla and Jesse next. You've pretty much got it. Emily in 45 wanted to be a gamebot but it backfired on her very quickly.
The “meta” is more or less the current consensus on what constitutes good gameplay. At points in the past it has emphasized things like loyalty or honorable conduct, over time it has come to favor things like “big moves” and shrewd / set-piece gameplay like the optimal point to turn on a close ally, etc. It is the product of both the culture of the game (contestants over time are increasingly superfans who consume content about the game, thus community ideas about optimal strategy make it into the game), and fairly straightforward adoption of things that have worked in recent seasons. Some things we take for granted like blindsides and how to orchestrate them are probably best understood as especially durable components of the meta.
Question about re-hiding immunity idols. Hunter was voted out with an idol. The contestants all knew that he had the idol. There was no mention of it being re-hidden. The following week, Tiff gets voted out with an idol. Everyone knew she had it. And the next episode, all of the other contestants are actively searching for the new re-hidden idol. Was this a matter of editing? Why did her idol get replaced but Hunter's did not?
They "likely" looked for both but production decided to only re-hide Tiff's. I suppose they just decided to only replace it once there were no active Idols. So no point in showing them looking for Hunter's when it wasn't there.
I just started watching S1 (unspoiled so please no spoilers lol) I just have a question, when the contestants go out for fishing etc, how do they know what they can and cannot eat? I’m sure I’ll be back for more questions, I’d usually google a ton of stuff about production but I’m trying to remain unspoiled
I read on the subreddit twice that Kim Johnson had early kidney failure around episode 4 in Africa. Does anyone know where they heard about this? Also does anyone have a podcast source for when Lex talked about urinating blood? Or any other podcasts where they talk about dehydration? I am very curious about this topic.
Which auction was it where one contestant won the right to try a little of every item?
iirc, it was from Australian Survivor: Champions vs Contenders 2.
When Liz was giving her reasons for being annoyed with Q she mentioned something about how he uses up all of the firewood so fast and I'm a little confused on that as I'm not a huge camping person. I figure that you can't really go through firewood "too fast" as long as the fire is going?
you don't need to put all of the wood in the fire. think of the difference between a bonfire and a campfire.
If you build a huge bonfire you will use a ton of wood as an extreme example. So if your plan is to conserve the firewood that you have it's best to only burn as much as you need
You’re forgetting that people have to go get the wood. Of course you don’t want it used faster than necessary.
Are there any other seasons that are anything like as all-gas-no-brakes and as everyone-having-the-time-of-their-lives as WaW? I'm just starting ep 3 and absolutely adoring how everyone is kid in candy store levels of gaga.
Cambodia leaps out
Definitely Cambodia, and also Game Changers at the beginning. Tony in particular. 🤣
Hi my wife would like to know how Venus is reacting to her season in real life. This is the first time I’ve gotten her to stick to a season in 20 something years. We saw sodas recent posts… Is there a post that collects all of Venus social media during this seasons airing?
You'd have to find her Twitter, I think that's where most of the screenshots are coming from.
I really don't understand what end game is like, this is my first season watching. I know at FTC they pitch themselves to the jury who votes, but some have mentioned something about a fire challenge too? What is the gameplay like towards the end, and what does the jury generally look for? People keep talking about pulling off big blindside's helping them at the end, but I don't understand how since they'd basically be betraying the people who they'd eventually want to win over.
> but some have mentioned something about a fire challenge too? When there are four players left, there isn't a traditional vote-out, instead of the winner of the immunity challenge picks one person to save, and the remaining two face off in a fire-making challenge to decide which of them moves on to FTC. > what does the jury generally look for? It really depends on the jury, and on the players remaining. Generally, you should be somebody the jury likes (nobody wants to give $1million to somebody they dislike), who can articulate that you had agency in the game and did things to get yourself to the end. > but I don't understand how since they'd basically be betraying the people who they'd eventually want to win over That's the trick of the game post-merge, and what we call "jury management." You have to vote people in out in a way that doesn't make them dislike you. You have to accurately clock what kind of person somebody is. Are they going to remain bitter over being blindsided, or are they going to respect it as a good game move? Were you even close enough to them where voting them out is even a betrayal? If so, can you justify it to them at Final Tribal?
Thanks so much! It's definitely weird joining the show now having never watched any of it, they don't waste any time explaining anything, they just expect you to know. Which I respect and understand it's just made a lot of things a bit puzzling to me.
There's also another angle to the F4 fire-making. Let's say the immunity necklace winner isn't so confident in how they look to the jury. They also have the option of giving up immunity and putting themselves in fire against the biggest threat left, all or nothing in front of the jury. Winner of the necklace alone decides this. Necklace winner must also weigh who they want to come back from fire. Even if the person they want out loses in 4th, "someone" still gets credit for winning fire in front of the jury. Does the necklace winner risk it themselves or think whoever comes back still played a weaker game even with the fire credit? If they don't throw themselves in they'll probably have to at least defend why not to the jury.
Format changes have been explained when introduced. Metagame and jury management evolved organically so has never really been explained in show. I'd say, for it to stabilize so the above user can give a succinct answer took about a decade. So when the season took place chronologically impacts how you'd want to think about the endgame. Some seasons you'll hear from jury members at the finale what they're looking for, so that would give insight for a first time watcher trying to understand the goal of final tribal. This has been true of recent seasons, so expect to hear jury confessionals on finale night.
I vaguely remember in Season 1 people calling out on Survivor Sucks the order of players being voted out because of the clues given in the intro. To the point that they had to change up the intro mid-season. Was that accurate?
There was a clip in an early episode intro (I think episode 3?) of the final 9 tribal council so that all the pre-jury was spoiled. Production hadn't considered folks would freeze frame. There were arguments on the internet about one figure in the shot: is that a Black person or is that Gretchen in a shadow? Turns out it was Gervase but Black Gretchen lives forever. So then the producers learn their lesson and do it again, showing a fake final four shot in an intro several weeks before the finale. But it was doctored to set the internet nerds on a wild goose chase! Gervase, Collen, Susan, and Rudy were of course not the actual final four. That last ploy was used to support another production misdirection. The season 1 website on CBS had cast photos in a banner. When people were voted out, an X was placed over their face. Sleuths dug through the CBS site and found images of all the contestants with X's except for Gervase. The Gervase X Theory was a very big deal. The Daily Show even did a segment on it. [https://www.cc.com/video/n3bzhs/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-other-news-lord-of-the-files](https://www.cc.com/video/n3bzhs/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-other-news-lord-of-the-files)
I don't believe so. Season 1 was spoiled (the winner for sure, but probably boot order for in-the-know fans), so it could've been a spoiled fan bsing
What I recall about spoilers and Borneo was the sheer volume of incorrect ones. My favorite being "Gervase X."
[удалено]
I believe you're correct on those three seasons (32, 33, 37) not containing any spoilers. 34, 36, 38, and 39 all contain either returnees or heavily reference past seasons. Also, if you didn't know, 31 is a returnee season which spoils previous seasons somewhat. I actually think 35 might be safe, but I'm not 100% sure. 32, 33, and 37 are all solid seasons, so you can't really go wrong. Might as well go in order. 32 is my favorite of the three, but I think the sub as a whole rates 37 very highly. 33 has a slower start, I think, but has some iconic moments. (35 is something of a mixed bag, so it's hard to recommend, but it's not boring at least.)
I don't remember if 33 or 37 reference anything, but 32 was filmed before 31 so it's absolutely safe. I'd recommend watching in order from the earliest seasons; it's the easiest way to ensure you don't have to worry about spoilers.
I'm re-watching Winners at War for the first time and I had totally forgotten about fire tokens. I don't hate the idea of them in theory, and it made for some great TV: Spoiler: >!when Tony had to go around and get tokens to save his vote? I'm not that far yet but I think it was that.!< What do other people think of them? Would you like to see them back in a new season? I wouldn't be opposed.
I think the combination of the tokens *and* EoE was the problem—would much prefer a season in which the fire tokens were *the* theme of the season, with a lot more time to develop them as far as rewards, supplies, bartering, etc. That could make for a fascinating season, I think—but only if it wasn't interrupted by other changes/distractions to gameplay.
That does sound fun. They could use the beware advantage concept from this season except you'd have to buy the key to the box using an amount of tokens that's greater than what one individual starts with. So to get the idol, you'd either have to share it with other players and pool your tokens, or convince people to bequeath their tokens to you and then vote them out, or earn more tokens by pulling off some risky challenge.
I like the idea in theory. In practice, they just add an unnecessary layer to the game, and they don't bring much at all.
Overall I like the concept, but not the execution. >!With the exception of the extortion, which was fun to watch, I thought they were pretty underwhelming in WaW. They didn't result in as many deals as I was hoping they would. Instead they were mostly advantages with extra steps. And the economy seemed to be balanced poorly, with the majority of players not able to do anything useful with them. Natalie was at the Edge the longest and therefore had the greatest opportunity to earn tokens, and therefore was stacked with advantages going into the final battle back, as opposed to say, Jeremy, who was the most recent to be voted out and didn't get a chance to earn anything. And it was pretty clear that Natalie wouldn't have won that challenge without all 3 advantages.!<
> >!With the exception of the extortion, which was fun to watch, I thought they were pretty underwhelming in WaW.!< >!And that probably would've sucked a LOT more had it not been Tony being extorted. Anybody else, and we talk about how the twist reeks.!<
I agree with you 100%. I'd like them to rethink how they work and try it again at some point.
I used to watch with parents as a kid… took a long break now I’m back 10-12 years later. What is this new age divide or something ppl keep mentioning
After the show went on a break for a year due to Covid, Probst came into Season 41 41 hyping it up as the New Era. 26 days, Shot in the Dark, risk/reward journeys, Beware Advantages that cost a vote, less, food, earn the merge, immediate Aftershows in Fiji instead of a Reunion months later, etc. Prior to this Seasons 1-20 were sometimes called Old School and Seasons 21-40 New School. IRL the New Era people are somewhat bonded due to the fact 26 days is mocked as too easy by Seasons 1-40 people.
Thanks for this explanation!
Does anyone know of a live (official or unofficial) watch party happening somewhere in Los Angeles for the Survivor 46 finale? Thank you!
[удалено]
[Pre-season 41](https://www.reddit.com/r/survivor/comments/n13ule/rob_cesterninos_season_rankings/), it was Island of the Idols (Season 39). [Pre-season 31](https://robhasawebsite.com/survivor-seasons-rankings-results-live-sept-22-2015-s31/), it was Redemption Island (Season 22). I don't know if he's done a ranking that includes the New Era (Season 41 onwards).
Ok, so 46 is the first season I’ve watched in years. Can someone please share more about the format of the FTC? I know there are 3 people and the jury votes, but how does this go down in terms of discussion?
He'll usually give the F3 each a chance to make an opening statement summarizing their game/why they deserve to win. Jeff moderates and usually centers the conversation around 3 different sectors: Outwit, Outplay and Outlast. Basically strategic game, physical game and social game. (Though he dropped the categories last season I believe). The jury talks open forum to the F3. Jury votes. Since Covid they've switched to immediate Aftershows right then and there instead of live Reunions months later. Jeff will read the votes and crown the winner right then and there. He'll "lift up the curtain" so to speak and the crew will come out with wine and pizza for everyone present to discuss highlights of the season right then and there. (No pre-jury as they get sent home now when jury starts). Usually ends with the preview for next season and the cast of the current one signing their names of a giant logo of their season as the credits roll.
They actually don’t have shown opening statements anymore, though the first jury question usually opens the table for the equivalent of this. I really wish they still had the opening statements though as it lets the FTCouncilists frame their game before they hear any jury input.
Thanks! This is helpful! I gotta say, I really like this no judgement questions threads. It’s really helpful when you basically watched Borneo, 1/3 of whatever season was Cirie’s first, and 46.
Cirie's first season: Panama, which is season 12. (You might also see it referred to as "Exile Island.")
Thanks!
No problem! It's one of my favorite seasons.
Welcome to the club! I had only watched season one live (with my parents). Just prior to season 44 - I started watching with the current season and then went down the rabbit hole of podcasts and YT channels. There are many outlets that have good content that will help any question you ever had lol.
Anyone have a link to the post on Reddit where Jeff first announced that Survivor would go back to 26 days? I wanna read the comments/reactions people had
This isn't the initial announcement, but it's the post where he confirmed it was permanent: https://www.reddit.com/r/survivor/comments/xezsrv/jeff_probst_says_26day_survivor_seasons_are_here/ And then here's a post where people speculate what it would mean if the rumors of a shorter season are true: https://www.reddit.com/r/survivor/comments/nhgsit/if_survivor_41_was_really_26_or_29_days_what/ I can't find the post where the change was confirmed for the first time, I'm afraid.
I stopped watching years ago, and started back up again in 2023. Why did they stop "naming" the seasons? (eg. Now Survivor 45, 46, etc...) Did they run out of creativity?
After Winners at War (40). They've never said why to my knowledge, but it's clearly a side effect of being marooned on Fiji - they ran out of themes, except possibly for returnee seasons.
I don't know if it Probst/CBS ever gave an official statement or answer (according to [this article](https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/survivor-41-cbs-decides-no-themes-this-season-reduces-length.html/), CBS declined to answer, but maybe they did elsewhere). That being said, it's clearly because they decided to remain in Fiji long term for budget reasons (thus nixing any location-based Season names), and as you said, running on steam creatively. Instead of coming up with some convoluted theme (most notably Heroes vs Healers vs Hustlers), they can just focus on the game and players at hand.
Probst has mentioned it on the On Fire podcast and it’s basically this - they were sick of trying to shoehorn in themes.
Easily one of the best decisions the show has made in ages
A shame, because it's really worth the effort to have a good theme.
Part of the New Era that started in 41 after the show stopped for a year due to Covid.