Thoughts on the FTC...
Honestly, my vote is still open. It should have been a lock for Oracle, but I feel like Oracle had a terrible FTC here. Talking about every detail does seem to be very much their thing - I wouldn't be surprised if this is their first FTC and they're just putting their all in, because I did the same in my first FTC - but the amount of information thrown makes people a) tune out and b) feel like they're padding and making up reasons. Quality > Quantity, always.
It's a massive shame, because I feel like Oracle played a far better game than Richie from a strategic perspective, which is the platform Richie is trying to run on. Oracle also feels a lot more self-aware to me, but it's drowned out by all the words they're using. They'll admit something was a poor decision and that they grew and learned from it, but then they'll go through a dozen reasons why they went with it in the first place...
I really do get it, because I'm the same way. If something was a mistake, surely people will want to know why you went with it in the first place? If you don't tell them, they might not vote for you because they think you're a bad strategist! But... no, that's not how it works at all. The mistake remains a mistake even if you write a 10,000 word essay about why it made sense at the time. The juror is looking for an apology, if you give that apology and then go 'BUT ACKSUALLY IT MADE SENSE TO ME BECAUSE' you just make your apology sound really insincere. And yeah, that's obviously not exactly what Oracle was saying, but it came across that way in my eyes.
Maybe it's just my point of view here (I'm definitely no FTC guru, as anyone who saw Reepicheep will know!) but I don't see any way Oracle wins this after that performance, even with a good speech here. They would have done a million times better if they'd restricted their posts to 200 words each. I tried to throw them a question hinting at that with my 'no explanations allowed' one but I don't think they picked up on it.
I really liked Gustave's FTC - he focused on being friendly, which was exactly what he needed to do imo because he was never going to do well on the strategy front compared to the other two. It was masterfully done in my eyes, even in response to my 'your game was terrible' post he just kind of nodded and gave a friendly, upfront response, admitting to it, and saying he was playing this game for fun more than to be a perfect strategist. Which is exactly what he needed to say!
Richie lost any chance at my vote with his opening speech, I think, so I can't really give an unbiased view on his FTC. I'll take his compliment about being well-connected, but the whole thing just came across to me as though he never believed I had any agency in the game - I was in a good position because people liked me, but my ability to drive things was zero so I only factored into plans as a number. I think if I'd stayed in the game that assumption could very well have gotten him voted out.
It's a very specific complaint about my own position in his vision, though. I doubt that factors into anyone else's decision-making, and I feel like he probably had a great FTC to everyone else. He certainly played the strategist card far better than Oracle did.
I considered making my decision based on who is more likely to beat Richie (because why throw away a vote, right?) but after thinking that through I figured... that's not my job as a juror. If I'm voting that way, it's a vote against Richie, and I don't want to cast a vote against Richie. I want to cast a vote for the person I want to vote for, it doesn't matter whether they win or not. I was so much happier voting for the runner up in SotF than I was voting for the winner in BotW.
Obviously, for me it's between Gustave and Oracle. If Oracle takes it, it'll be because of the way they played the game and the friendship I had with them, and it would be in spite of their poor FTC. If Gustave takes it, it'll be because of their FTC, and very much in spite of their gameplay. I think it very much comes down to these closing speeches.
