Stairway to Heaven (RB)

Scott Hardie | May 17, 2009
The 2009 tournament is launched! Now all of you will have that song stuck in your heads like I've had it in mine for two weeks.

Tournaments were something that I intended to do from the beginning to shake up the game: We'd start with a traditional all-in tournament, but then I'd try mixing it up, like a tournament with only female players playing only female bands, etc. Themed concerts came along to provide that variety, and the game already offered plenty of goals for players to pursue.

So why start a tournament now? The game needs something to liven it up. A new way to play, with a strong musical theme, and actual prizes for the first time (not counting the mini-tournament at GooCon), all make for an exciting twist. This will keep everyone playing for a while, and will bring together opponents who otherwise wouldn't meet. It will also show off a bunch of cards that you haven't seen yet, so keep watching.

I have guessed at a number of variables in the concept, especially how long of a tournament will be satisfying without taking too long to resolve. (An earlier idea called for 100 steps in the stairway.) This seems right to me. Kelly helped me find the last piece, how to stay alive when you're at risk of being eliminated (defeat Devil): hard enough that people won't abuse it to jump from 9 to 10, but convenient for people who really are in trouble and are willing to do what it takes to stay alive. My only regret about the rules is that I wasn't able to program a better spread of cards, since I fear all at the same level will result in too many draws; I gave it my best and this will have to do.

This "stairway" concept will only apply to this year's theme. Next year's tournament might be a traditional bracketed tournament, or it might eliminate one player at a time as everyone else finds a way to survive ("musical" chairs?), or it might follow some other concept entirely. For now, I'm focused on making the 2009 tournament as fun as it can be.

What do you think? Are you ready to climb to the top?

Amy Austin | May 17, 2009
Sounds like fun. All except for defeating Dev-, uh ahem... Steve West, that is.

Steve West | May 17, 2009
I'm not feeling too Sith-ish right now so take advantage Darth. Sure sounds fun, though.

Scott Hardie | May 17, 2009
There are certain pairs of players who don't want to play each other because of personal history. If you want to be excused from facing a certain opponent, just ask and let me know why. It won't affect your odds or theirs. You can't use this option to get out of playing tough opponents like Steve, sorry. :-)

Amy Austin | May 17, 2009
Not at all... I think I actually play Steve more than every other player combined!

Tony Peters | May 17, 2009
how does one start playing? or is it just automatic?

Scott Hardie | May 17, 2009
It's automatic. Half of the players will be entered into a new concert daily.

Tony Peters | May 17, 2009
OK I'll be ready....

Chris Lemler | May 18, 2009
Scott what happens if there is a draw in the tournament?

Scott Hardie | May 18, 2009
It's designed so that there can't be a tie. A tie would only happen if two people won the Final Challenge at the exact same second in time, which is unlikely because of its nature. (And in that case, I'd either declare both players winners because of the extremely unlikely nature of what just happened or initiate a second Final Challenge.)

Scott Hardie | May 18, 2009
Wait, I'm sorry, you asked about a draw, not a tie. Having a draw in one of the tournament concerts won't affect your score either way. I considered applying the Overtime rule to every tournament concert to force a win/loss outcome, but we'd wind up playing a lot of these tournament concerts all at the same time.

Aaron Shurtleff | May 18, 2009
Will these tournament concerts count for Achievements?

Scott Hardie | May 18, 2009
No, they're themed concerts. They do count towards the "defeat ten themes" and "defeat fifty themes" achievements, though.

Amy Austin | May 21, 2009
Not a tournament comment or question, but figured I'd just take the opportunity to offer an RB Achievement suggestion I've been thinking about for a while now. Every now and then, a concert comes along where I find myself wishing that the numbers on a particular card were in a different order to maximize that play -- it almost always seems that such a maneuver could have made the difference between a win and a draw. I think this would be a cool option... it could work one of two ways (or even be broken down into two different Achievements, for that matter): 1) you could be given a command/dropdown option that offers "clockwise" or "counter-clockwise"... thus shifting the numbers on the selected card (currently in play) in the appropriate direction; and/or 2) it could just be randomly jumbled and you get what you get. I would call the first option "Rotate" and the second "Jumble"... whether they can be applied to each card in the concert or just one is debatable, but I kind of tend to think that since Rotate offers greater control, then maybe it should just be used for just one select card -- and, of course, playing with this Achievement means that both players have this option in their back pocket, similarly to the way Landmines can be used. Jumble seems like it would be more fun to be able to use on each card one time only... perhaps even after it's already been played? (No... I guess that wouldn't work...) Kind of like a mini-Random effect -- you are still playing the same level as your opponent, but this gives each player a way to stir it up within that even. Seems like fun to me... what do you think?

Steve West | May 21, 2009
I second the motion for Rotate for all the reasons stated. Cool!

Amy Austin | May 21, 2009
Could also be a "Mirror" or "Reverse", with the obvious implications... (dropdown: up/down, side/side)

Scott Hardie | May 21, 2009
There was an error with Psychedelia and Decades that kept them from appearing in tournament concerts correctly. I have removed these terms from existing concerts (as an alternative to placing them myself) and they should be fine in the future. Very sorry for the disruption.

Amy, I like your suggestion very much. I'll have a longer reply soon.

Amy Austin | May 21, 2009
Thanks... glad you like. ;-) Another (hopefully) minor request I have: it would be nice if win/lose/draw status also appeared on the recent concerts page. I mean, I know that's available on the Dashboard upon concert completion, but when you clear it, it's gone, and then you have to consult the actual concert to see the result. Like I said, minor request... but I don't know if it's minor programming -- just something I think would be useful... minorly. ;-)

Scott Hardie | May 21, 2009
Joanna beat Matthew in a concert that could have easily swung in Matthew's favor if Psychedelia had been working. After thinking about it overnight, I've decided to credit Matthew for the point he lost. It was my screw-up and he shouldn't be penalized.

I have added a Concert Outcomes list to the tournament page, showing how each person's score was changed daily. It doesn't mention the draws.

Scott Hardie | May 21, 2009
Amy, your minor request has been granted. I have a lot more to say about your rule suggestions which I'll get into shortly.

Aaron Shurtleff | May 22, 2009
Dang, Steve West! Show mercy on the rest of us, would ya?!?

Steve West | May 22, 2009
Let me think abou...no.

Amy Austin | May 22, 2009
There are apparently two Steve Wests... see May 17 2009, 8:28AM EST -- one of these Steve Wests is lying!

Steve West | May 22, 2009
I wasn't feeling it then. I've gotten some sleep since. Then I was dead but I got better. And c'mon! It's just getting started. A few losses and I'm right back where I started.

Aaron Shurtleff | May 22, 2009
Oh, certainly! You lose all the time, Steve! :P

If you're above level 10, and you're bored, and you play the Devil, will it bring you back to 10? Steve, go find out for us, would ya? :D

Aaron Shurtleff | May 22, 2009
Also (I hate to double post!), here's another scenario that I hope never happens, but I want to know what could happen. Let's say Mr. Big Time (this is you, Steve) gets to around step 50, and he has great cards (I assume that is what will happen, as it was implied in the description that your cards get better as you rise) and the random generator puts him against The Plucky Underdog (that's me!), who has had mixed luck and it still stuck at lowly step 10. I have the first move, and due to the horrible combination of cards and/or rules, I'm 99% sure that I will get trounced. If I never make that first play, will that give Mr. Big Time a win by default (and a loss for me!), or will it never count?

Let me also mention that I think that the possibility of keeping someone from rising and/or winning by just continuously not accepting a match with them (since they will come less and less for you as your Step increases...right?) would be a dick move, and I wouldn't be very impressed by anyone who did that. I'm not looking to condone or promote such dickery. I'm just asking about that sort of situation. If it's a Outrank match, and the lowest of the other players cards outranks the highest of mine (if this could happen), I totally would not want to go through with a match that is nearly impossible to even get a draw (for example).

I'm sure Scott has a system in place for this, but I like to have things like this spelled out for me. :) I always find the way to be a dick in every system! :)

Steve Dunn | May 23, 2009
The dick in the system is essential for testing purposes. I think it's virtuous. If your system can't account for the dick, then your system needs work.

My only beef so far is that I'd like to play in more tournament concerts. Steve's won more concerts than I've even played!

Steve West | May 23, 2009
That's a legitimate beef. I hope and expect it to even out over time.

Steve Dunn | May 23, 2009
According to Scott above, "Half of the players will be entered into a new concert daily." So I suppose it should even out, though certain details are still unclear to me (ie, can someone be playing in more than one tournament concert at the same time?)

Aaron Shurtleff | May 23, 2009
I think I've been in more than one concert at one time, so yes.

By the way, Steve (West)... I see you have Right Said Fred in the Exchange. Could it possibly be they they are too sexy for your label? Too sexy for your label? :D

Scott Hardie | May 23, 2009
Don't worry, my system is as dick-proof as... I'm stumped, make up your own joke.

The cards will always be balanced between opponents so that neither has better cards than the other. Both players in the tournament concert must have reached a high step before the high cards come out; otherwise they'll land somewhere between the players in power level. I wish I could have come up with a way to break up the ranks of cards a little more while still keeping them equal (something like you would have 4-3-2-2-1 and your opponent would have 5-3-2-1-1), but each attempt I made to code this was more than even Miah's enterprise-level server could handle, so I gave up and provided you all with straight ranks. I might give it one last shot; I have an idea for this code that might work.

There is no option for declining challenges. You have to play when your concerts begin, unless you want to forfeit and give your opponent an automatic win. We're about to have our first forfeit since Miah has signed offline for the next week while he moves. Anybody "playing" against Miah in the tournament gets a free win. I figured there would be some of this with the less-active players, and they'd get eliminated early, and a few players would score some free points off of them. As long as it was a minor effect and everyone had equal odds of benefitting from this, it seemed like the right way to include everyone. The alternative would have been an opt-in tournament, but I was pretty sure only half of the players would bother to opt in, whereas simply throwing everyone into competition would get around three-fourths of the players playing.

My original plans for concert assignment called for an even spread of opponents. Aaron would play Amy, Chris would play Dave, and so on, then Aaron would play Chris, Amy would play Dave, and so on, always repeating the pairs until everyone had played everyone and we started over. But I wanted something different from round-robin this time; we might revisit that system in later years. I wanted a system in which you're climbing to the top of the list and the people still lingering towards the bottom have more opportunities to climb than those at the top. Forcing the concert assignments to be evenly distributed would not have allowed for that, since once a player climbed to a higher level, it would take weeks at least before that player would get to play again, and a longer wait each time. Randomization allows anybody to play on any given day, just with some having better odds of playing than others. Your name can only come up in one new concert per day, regardless of your odds.

Besides randomization, which is both fair and unfair (let's just say it's fair enough for me), there is one way in which some players have a distinct advantage over other players. If you don't like being one of the disadvantaged players, you can do something to improve your chances, and I hope being disadvantaged motivates you to do so. Anybody know what I mean?

Scott Hardie | May 23, 2009
Amy, brilliant suggestion. I like the "Rotate" idea as something you do to your own cards, and "Jumble" as something you do to your opponent's cards to neutralize them. I would probably let you rotate cards in your hand as much as you wanted to, but once they were played on the stage, no more rotating. Your suggestion is definitely on my to-do list and will be implemented as soon as I can do it.

This has inspired me to try something during Operation Chillax (yes, I'm really using that stupid name) that Rock Block has needed for years but would take me too long to do in a weekend. When I built the game, the first script I wrote was the one that drew the card images, because it was one of the most complicated scripts and it was fairly independent from other game components. I set it up so that I only needed to pass in the band, the rank of the band (since old concerts needed to show the rank that was played at the time), and the hex color, and the script looks up all of the information it needs from there to draw the card. Thus, if Smashing Pumpkins at R6 have 2-5-9-6 on the sides, then those sides are what it will draw automatically when I tell it to draw Smashing Pumpkins at R6 in green. This has prevented me from altering the sides of the cards during concert, which is something the game really needs. When you play Decades, the sides really should go up by 2 or down by 2 visually. When you play Landmines, the sides really should go down to 0-0-0-0 visually. You shouldn't have to keep track of all of this math in your head. Those mental gymnastics do kind of make the game more fun in their own way, but let's face it, having the site take care of it for you is the superior way to play.

So I could add Rotate the short way by simply putting some kind of spinning-dial icon over the card that indicates how many degrees it turned and let you do the math in your head, although that would be a pain on top of the other rules. But I don't even see how Jumble could work if you didn't actually see the numbers change; I would have to spell it out for you on the page somewhere, and that just doesn't seem right. I'll work this week on reprogramming the site to draw the numbers as needed along with some other card-image upgrades that I believe are overdue, and hopefully by next weekend we'll have a better way to play and some new play rules too. Thanks for the inspiration, Amy.

Amy Austin | May 23, 2009
;-)

Steve Dunn | May 23, 2009
Anybody know what I mean?

More experienced players are more experienced with the various play rules?

Aaron Shurtleff | May 23, 2009
um...a nun with a titanium chastity belt? That's fairly dick-proof...

Steve West | May 23, 2009
Not to mention said nuns being attended by a horde of eunuchs. But I really wanted to mention that the combination of SELLOUT and CASCADE is very interesting and seriously affects the devastation that CASCADE normally represents.

Steve West | May 24, 2009
All these Satan comments made me think of this. Devil In A Blue Dress. And in an ironic sidenote, this was post #666 for me. Coincidence?

Scott Hardie | May 24, 2009
It looks great on you. Really matches your eyes.

What kind of prize do I need to give out at GooCon to get you enact that image?

Steve West | May 24, 2009
My daughter can't decide whether to call me "Cindersteve" or Steverella". I replied she should call me "Sir". Capital S.

Steve West | May 24, 2009
And there aren't enough chicken mcnuggets in the world to get me to do that outside the virtual world.

Aaron Shurtleff | May 25, 2009
I'll pitch in on the dippin' sauce! Any flavor!! :D

Scott Hardie | May 26, 2009
I'm still working on Rotate and Jumble, but the rest of the code changes that I described above on May 23 are done. The card images now integrate the icons into them, and their sides are now automatically redrawn according to the bonuses. No longer do you have to add or subtract the sides in your head; the cards show you their current sides at all times. This also means that the various play rules that use icons are no longer mutually exclusive, so go nuts with the combinations to see what happens.

Amy Austin | May 26, 2009
Very cool. But, as an aging person of diminishing sight, I'd like to ask another minor adjustment, if possible... I notice that the Decades icons are now smaller -- I am sure this is to accommodate their use with all the other pretty icons -- but I actually missed one just now, because I couldn't see it over the stage directions! Can we either a) have the decades moved up over the stage directions, or b) have the stage directions dimmed a bit (after all... I think we should all know those by now!)?

Just a small request... and man, does it make me feel old.

Scott Hardie | May 26, 2009
That problem bugs me a little, too. I'd like to remove the label entirely when there is an icon there, since anyone who has played long enough to have access to those icons is well familiar with what corner Downstage Left is. But I've already created flat images with the labels in them for 100+ themes, and it's going to take me a while to redo all of those. So even though I've solved a longstanding code problem this week with all of these changes, apparently I've just created a new code project for myself that's going to take a long time to finish. :-(

Amy Austin | May 26, 2009
Aww... I'm sorry -- now I feel bad for mentioning it. ;-\

Lori Lancaster | May 26, 2009
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | May 26, 2009
Sorry, Lori. I've gotten such stinging criticism in the past for sending out unsolicited announcements about the site that I don't do it any more. You're the second person to bring this up about the tournament, so what I'm working on instead are automated email notifications about site activity, such as it being your turn in concert. I used to have these years ago and disabled them because they resulted in my domain being blacklisted as a source of spam, and switching from celebritygoogame.com to goo.tc was an effort to escape that blacklist status. I'm working on a solution that I hope to have done shortly that will provide the same data in your Dashboard via email and rss for anyone who opts into it.

That said, thanks for coming on to wish me a happy birthday, and I'm glad to see you playing the game again. Good luck in the tournament; it looks like you've already started kicking butt before I finished typing this. :-)

Lori Lancaster | May 26, 2009
[hidden by request]

Aaron Shurtleff | May 28, 2009
I was thinking about Rock Block today (I know...what the heck!) and I had an idea for an theme, but I don't know how doable it would be... The name I was thinking of was Lost Loves (but I have a flair for bad names, so that would be negotiable!). In the theme, you would be using only cards that you had previously lost in trade concerts at some point in your RB career. Of course, you would have to have previously lost 5 cards in trade concerts (for obvious reasons). It would be fun (for me at least) to go back down memory lane and play using those cards that I used to have, but don't anymore. I don't know if anyone else would appreciate the reminder of past failures, though. I know that cards have a list of who had them previous to you, but I don't know if there is any kind of notation as to whether it was lost as a trade, or traded in the Exchange, though. Plus, it might be a nightmare to program for all I know (which is very very little).

So, in a hypothetical situation, does that sound like fun to anyone else, or just me??

Erik Bates | May 28, 2009
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | May 28, 2009
Aaron, I like the idea, and I can do it that way. However, I'm tempted to take it in a different, darker direction: Instead of playing with the cards you used to have, you face down the opponents that took them from you. For instance, if you played me, my hand would be five cards that I took from you, at the ranks they were when I took them, and vice versa for your hand. This makes it more about battling the person who took your cards away than getting reunited with the cards. Is this worth doing?

Aaron Shurtleff | May 28, 2009
That would be cool, too, Scott. I just don't know if I've lost that many cards to any one person or not... (or taken, honestly!). It would make it more difficult to unlock, and it might encourage more trade concerts, which is not a bad thing by any means...

Sarah Kyle | May 31, 2009
Scott I really like the idea of being able to block certain users from playing against each other...

Watch out steve west keep kicking my butt and I will block you.. lmfao.. Just kidding

Steve West | May 31, 2009
That's funny! But is that a realistic scenario? Not necessarily me, but can people just stop playing whoever is at the top of the leader board? Seems a little unfair for that person.

Scott Hardie | May 31, 2009
No. I set up the system to block pairs of opponents who had a personal history together off-site that made them not want to face each other in concert. I won't let people use it just to avoid playing a really tough opponent or the high-scorer or something like that. And it's been implemented in a way that doesn't affect the odds for anyone. It's possible that the tournament could come down to just a pair of opponents who won't play each other, but I guess we'll cross that bridge if we come to it.

Sarah Kyle | June 1, 2009
Sorry Steve. I would never deny your games.. I like being up against a challenge.. I would never quit playing you just because you beat me.. Just take it easy on me and try not to beat me to bad.. I just started finding time to play again.. I see I done got kicked out of the whole tournament from not having time to log on and search.. I see you made it again.. Congrats

Steve West | June 1, 2009
Thanks! I didn't think you were anything except kidding, really. But it raised an interesting question that Scott answered. Thanks for bringing it up. Sorry you're not in the Goo thing.

Sarah Kyle | June 2, 2009
All is good.. I have had to stop playing for a while because the little one has needed lots of mommy time.. He is cutting his upper teeth and walking now so I am on my toes with him.. lol..

Aaron Shurtleff | June 3, 2009
That's ok then!

I just saw that I had lost the Big E to a Rock Block, and I was fully prepared to be perturbed, but if I recall correctly, Amy had the first instance of Elvis, and plus I know she's mentioned being a big fan. Awesome job, Amy!!

Plus, I got Rolling Stones as a replacement, which is better than the LAST time I had to get a replacement card...SCOTT!!!! ;)

Yeah, this doesn't really go here, but I like to let the whatever dribble out my mouth!

Amy Austin | June 4, 2009
Lol... I'm sorry, Aaron -- I did deliberate on it for some time before deciding to "just do it!" last night. (Blame Steve for encouraging me. ;-D) And yeah, I wasn't too thrilled with my R10 replacement when I lost one before, either. But thanks for being a sport about it. ;-)

Steve Dunn | June 22, 2009
Yo Scott is there something wrong with the Concert Archive? I can't seem to pull up information about my recent concerts. Specifically, I am trying to figure out how many of my Stairway To Heaven concerts have included Decades, Psychedelia, or both, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE #*($&%#$ ALL OF THEM!!!!!

Ahem.

Sorry, just checking to see if the Concert Archive is busted or the problem is on my end. Every time I input a query, I get a blank response (not a blank white screen, but a response screen with no information).

Amy Austin | June 22, 2009
I've been wondering about all the archives, actually... or rather the ability to search them.

Scott Hardie | June 22, 2009
Sorry, the archive scripts on the site have been busted for some time, only working for some searches. It's a server memory thing; I need to rewrite the scripts very differently, and I haven't had time. The site search at the top of every page works, but not for concerts. I can run any specific query you wonder about in the meantime. For Stairway to Heaven concerts, just go to the tournament page and ctrl-f for "steve dunn" to find them all.

James Voltz | June 25, 2009
I came to post the same commen----er, complaint?----Steve Dunn did. Not a big fan of Landmines, Psychedelia, Decades playing as big of a role in the STH as they are. I'd also rather see all or nearly all games be played with the "hidden" rule.

Just my $.02.

Scott Hardie | June 25, 2009
Even though I don't like the degree to which those randomizing rules diminish the importance of strategy, they do increase the odds of a win over the odds of a draw when the cards are so balanced. This provides veteran players an advantage over the beginner players, who must somehow beat an opponent with all R1s or R2s with no help from the play rules. Those new players are likelier to have draws no matter how well they play. (This is the advantage that I alluded to on May 23rd at 9:27am in the last paragraph.)

If both players have it unlocked, Hidden has a 1 in 2 chance of appearing, Landmines 1 in 4, Decades 1 in 5, and Psychedelia 1 in 6. I will consider lowering those odds, but like I said, I consider them to be advantages.

Fair warning: When the tournament started, I planned for certain rule tweaks that would help to accelerate the tournament if necessary. I'm pleased with everything happening so far, but it is starting to lag behind the progress that it should have made by now. If I'm going to take corrective action, I'd rather do it soon than keep monitoring for weeks while it gets worse. If I do apply a change within the next few days, it will be retroactive to the beginning of the tournament. Nobody's score will suddenly be different, but it will have an immediate effect on everyone's chances of improving, in a way that will probably be daunting and exciting at the same time. I'll provide details if and when I make the change; for now I choose to be obscure.

Amy Austin | July 3, 2009
I'd like to take this opportunity to make a suggestion regarding Heaven & Hell. Since I had quit playing the Devil in non-Steve West concerts long before this tournament -- with a success ratio of 1 win in 11 concerts -- it was a only a relatively/minorly annoying thing until now. Now that I've jumped up to 1 in 33 as a direct result of STH, I have a different opinion and wish to beg mercy in a small way.

Playing the Devil this many times in a row is tedious enough... but it truly becomes Hell when you have to select one itty bitty radio button and then check five more itty bitty square boxes (which are *not* always cooperative on the first click, and/or are often delayed, making for several clicks even more!) -- I've even accidentally started a concert with Angel instead. My meager request (I hope) is that 1) the images of Angel & Devil be hyperlinked to select by clicking on one of them instead of the insanity-inducing radio button; and 2) the top five cards in your collection be auto-checked for submission. Since both Angel & Devil will select cards comparable to these, it only makes sense that these would be the only cards ever selected by players -- can't we please take pity on the aged here?

Surely I'm not the only one who detests checking boxes in order to start a concert! (Hell, this is more than half the reason I rarely start a concert that isn't themed... and I have grown to LOVE the randomizer for this reason, too!) Maybe it's only because I use a laptop with a mousepad instead of a point-&-click mouse that would allow me much greater control in making these selections... but damn if it doesn't just make me want to throw a fit sometimes! (Yes, I am more prone to irritability these days, but I mean... c'mon!) Am I alone and/or asking too much on this? (Devil opinions don't count... I think this eliminates anyone named Steve. What kind of a rapping name is "Steve" anyway?)

Scott Hardie | August 1, 2009
Suggestion granted, Amy, for players who have previously defeated Devil. Thanks.

For anyone clicking here from the tournament page, a second discussion about the tournament is underway as well.

James Voltz | August 16, 2009
I don't like the gimmick games. I don't enjoy them. I don't understand why they're included in what is ostensibly a contest of skill. Can I just have a coin flipped in lieu of having to play Decade, Psychadelia, Landmine games?

Amy Austin | August 16, 2009
Okay... so I didn't know that if you went to Hell you could actually sink to the very depths of it... i.e., I didn't realize you could continue to go negative in rank once you got there.

Scott Hardie | August 17, 2009
James, I hear that you're frustrated. I've already adjusted the tournament once to make those rules come up less frequently. I don't think it's feasible to have an option for players who want to play tournament concerts without those rules, since both players would have to be in sync about it, but I'll give it some thought. Next year's tournament may or may not be designed with more freedom of choice.

For what it's worth, Rock Block is not a game of pure skill, nor is the tournament. Your cards are random, your opponents are random, and how often your name gets chosen for the next concert is random. Having those rules in play are just another form of shaking up the game. I don't know about other players, but I would just as turned off by a tournament of pure skill, where you always face the exact same array of opponents with the exact same cards and the exact same rules, because there's just not enough variety to keep playing that for months, or it would be over too fast. We'll see how next year's tournament will be structured when the time comes to plan it.

Besides, I would say that all three of those play rules involve skill. Landmines the most so; you try to outsmart your opponent with where you place your bomb and where you figure that your opponent would have place his or hers. Psychedelia involves playing cards carefully to negate the effect of the bonuses, and taking calculated chances about risky payoffs. Decades requires you to think ahead about what bonuses your opponent would go after and how to counteract their effect. You aren't playing with the Invincible rule yet, which I suspect you would like even less based on your opinion of the others, but even it still involves strategy.

Scott Hardie | August 18, 2009
Fyi, I'm hearing from some players who feel overwhelmed by the current number of tournament concerts they're in, and honestly I'm feeling the same way. I have slowed down the rate of new concerts to half of its current rate, every two hours instead of every hour.

Erik Bates | August 18, 2009
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | August 20, 2009
James, and anybody else who agrees or disagrees with James: I hope I didn't scare off further discussion on the subject. I do want to hear your opinions. I am still considering a change to the play rules in the tournament.

Steve Dunn | August 20, 2009
I disagree with James. There's a lot of randomness in all tournament concerts - geez, you don't even choose your cards!

I find Psychedelia annoying, but I figure it benefits me as much as it hurts me and it doesn't come up much, so who cares? As far as I can tell, all other play rules require strategy. Heck, Richard and I just finished up a Decades concert in which all cards held by both players were from the 90s and 00s. See here: http://goo.tc/rb_concert.php?load=13320 I started out thinking I was completely screwed, but turns out, so was he!

Amy Austin | August 20, 2009
Ditto. (Although I do tend to dislike the degree of randomness involved and do feel that it has hurt me somewhat in the tournament... that's just how card games are.)

Ryan Dunn | August 21, 2009
I like the randomness. To me it's like having to play a football game in a blizzard. Sure, the snow's gonna affect your playing strategy and make things harder...but it's the same for your opponent.

Hasn't affected freakin' Steve West. That guy, I tell ya. Did anyone not think he would skyrocket to the top of the stairs?

Steve West | August 21, 2009
You think this is easy?! Every one of you #$^@@#'s are hard to beat. As for the play rules and randomness, I agree with Scott, that each one has it's own skill set. Even Invincibility, which I abhor, has it's unique strategy to work around. Decades I like and all of the math rules.

Amy Austin | August 21, 2009
Shhh... wait... so hard to hear in all this snow...

Steve West | August 21, 2009
Pffft.

Ryan Dunn | August 22, 2009
Harumph.

Scott Hardie | August 26, 2009
By now, some of you have noticed a weird glitch in Stairway to Heaven concerts that run into overtime, where the cards are not re-distributed correctly, sometimes without the correct 5-5 balance. This phenomenon is specific to the Stairway to Heaven theme, but that's all I can tell about it; I've tried investigating it and fixing it four different ways, each of them having no effect. I'm continuing to think about possible fixes, but with the tournament past its halfway point, I have to accept that it might not get fixed at all, and resign myself to manual corrections each time it happens. If you see this happen, please alert me right away and I'll adjust the hands as soon as I can. I wish it wasn't happening, but either I'll fix it or the tournament will end, and that will be the end of it.

We have our first resignation: Chris asked to be removed from the tournament, saying that he was unable to raise his score and that Steve West seemed to have victory sealed. (I would be discreet about Chris's identity here, but it's right there in the concert outcomes for yesterday.) Chris's score has been set to zero, but the pending concerts involving him need to run their natural course. I suspect that his score will temporarily rise above zero due to forfeits in his favor, then dip back down when he forfeits himself, and he'll be naturally eliminated a week from now.

For what it's worth, while Steve's ascent up the stairway has been impressive, I don't think his victory is as sure a thing as Chris and others may think. Not to put words in his mouth, but I suspect Steve would agree with me. The stairway gets increasingly harder to climb as you approach the top, and then there's the matter of the Final Challenge, which won't be easy for whoever makes it to step 55. This tournament has a ways to go yet.

Justin Woods | August 27, 2009
Anyone want to make any bets on Steve West wining the tournament by a forfeit?

Just giving you a hard time Steve but I think you have like four more coming to you...

Steve West | August 27, 2009
Go peddle crazy somewhere else, we're all full here. I'm pretty comfortable with how I got where I am. Some forfeits but I'm confident it's no more than anyone else realistically.

Steve Dunn | August 27, 2009
I just want to say that I am not yet ready to hand the crown to Steve West. Anyone can hit a cold streak, as I have discovered in the past week.

Lori Lancaster | August 27, 2009
[hidden by request]

Steve West | August 27, 2009
I agree, you shouldn't concede victory to me. I've suffered through a cold spell too and it could happen again. Even this late in the game. Beat me head-to-head and you leap two places closer. This ain't over yet. And I may get to 55 on a forfeit but that's not how you win if I understand the wording of the rules correctly. It gives you the opportunity to win, whatever that means. Scott hasn't clarified that yet.

Tony Peters | August 27, 2009
my luck has improved of late playing devil style

Justin Woods | August 28, 2009
Yes I know there has not been any clarification on how step 55 will be won but I had to give you a hard time since your last six wins, 2 of them by defeat and 4 by forfeit. Plus I didn't know this was going to bring so many out of the woodwork to comment, I have no plans on giving up, I am hoping to bring you down the steps here soon :-)))

Scott Hardie | August 28, 2009
Lori, sorry to hear that, but I understand. Please let me know (soon) if you change your mind.

I look forward to the conclusion of this tournament in the coming weeks. Steve is an outstanding competitor, but it won't be over until the final play in the final concert. Don't count yourself out yet.

Dave Stoppenhagen | August 31, 2009
I should have thought of asking to be removed as well. I am on the road a lot lately and not much time to be on.

Scott Hardie | August 31, 2009
Sorry to see you playing less, Dave, but I hope the game is still fun when you do play. Are you asking to be removed from the tournament?

Fyi, Chris is back in.

Dave Stoppenhagen | August 31, 2009
Yes just from the tournament. Hopefully life will slow down and I'll be able to play more. Thanks for the great games and challenges all.

Aaron Shurtleff | August 31, 2009
My ability to hover around 10 (where I started) amazes even me... ;)

Scott Hardie | September 1, 2009
Dave, I have removed you from the tournament. Please let me know soon if you want back in.

Fyi for people watching the scores, nothing will happen automatically when someone reaches step 55. I will be in touch privately with anyone who makes it to that milestone.

Tony Peters | September 1, 2009
I'm out........

Steve Dunn | September 7, 2009
So what's the deal with Steve West? Has he won the tournament? What's up?

Steve West | September 7, 2009
In a word, no. Everyone else still has a legitimate chance to win. Scott has stated to me privately that I can speak of what is happening openly but I've chosen not to reveal too much. Suffice to say that everyone, I mean everyone, can still win this thing. Keep winning. Meet you there. I can say one more thing, I can guarantee that I won't win before someone else makes it here.

Steve Dunn | September 7, 2009
Hmmm. Interesting.

Ryan Dunn | September 7, 2009
So it's like, Highlander style...there can be only one.

Steve West | September 7, 2009
Yeah, cutting off my ponytail now seems a mistake in retrospect.

Steve West | September 7, 2009
Who wants a piece a' me!?

Ryan Dunn | September 7, 2009
/Users/Ryan/Desktop/goohigh.jpg

Who wants to live forever??!?!?!!??!?!?!?!!!


***edit: how'd you add the pic?

Steve West | September 7, 2009
It's gotta be posted on the web somewhere. I use myspace and upload it there first. Then use the html guide on this site for the right format to post the picture URL.

Scott Hardie | September 7, 2009
So... many... stairs... (huff, huff)...

 

Ryan Dunn | September 7, 2009


Who wants to live forever?!?!?!??!!!!

Amy Austin | September 7, 2009
Uh, yeah... that little bird at the bottom? That's me. Or Samir. I suppose I could be that little red flower hanging out at that one step a few up...

Steve Dunn | October 2, 2009
Is it accurate to say the effect of forfeits is increasing over time?

Amy Austin | October 2, 2009
I think so... and I've been fucking up with forgetting about mine.

Aaron Shurtleff | October 4, 2009
Speaking of which, I'm going to be away from computer access for about a week soon, so you all are welcome to do as you please. If you want to wait as long as possible to play your next moves so I can continue, cool. If you want to play right away so you win by forfeit, that's fine, too. It won't hurt my feelings. It's all up to each of you individually. I'm just letting you know so you can do as you will. Maybe I'm overestimating, but I think there's some folks here who would feel bad to get a forfeit win if they could prevent it. Not that I am that hard to beat, but whatever...

Or you can say you never saw this, and do whatever anyways! :)

Scott Hardie | October 4, 2009
Does this mean you're going to be away from Gothic Earth for a week too?

Me, I probably won't wait, sorry. I was moments away from step 55 twice yesterday and it hurt to have it taken away both times. I have no patience and no mercy left at the moment. But hey, thanks for asking. :-) Seriously though, have a good trip, if that's what it is.

Aaron Shurtleff | October 4, 2009
Um..yeah..I have something to talk to you about Scott!

It's not this week, but next week, so I'll see you tomorrow. Also, I have something for you, pertaining to a certain event in about 19 days...

Scott Hardie | October 5, 2009
We have a winner. I have stopped new concerts from being generated, but the rest of the changes that come about from the end of the tournament will be applied later this week.

Scott Hardie | October 5, 2009
I still don't know what happened. I spent weeks psyching myself up for a possible game against Steve, telling myself to think through every last play, and not to play when I was sleepy and distracted and less than 100% ready. After it became my turn, I had no trouble waiting all day long, figuring I wouldn't even start playing Steve until later in the week. Then around midnight, after I'd been working for 16 hours and could no longer form a coherent sentence in conversation, apparently I decided, why not. I felt sure that if I played this card here that Steve would play that card there. Within moments, it was all over. Playing him in that state was the dumbest thing I could have done, and there's no excuse.

I don't regret not beating Steve, because he was probably going to win anyway. I do regret not really playing against him and losing like this. Mostly I regret that months of buildup for all of us were spoiled in a few minutes' time. Certain other players were trying to climb to step 55 before Steve and I finished, and they had a fair chance of getting there, and I've robbed them of that. I'm very sorry.

I hate to stop with the winner known like this, but it's going to take me around 3 hours to do everything I need to do to wrap this up on the site, and I'm busy tonight and tomorrow night. I'll get to it as soon as possible.

Steve, you deserve every accolade. You are an outstanding player, incredibly talented and willing to do whatever it takes to win. You're also a polite sport about it, which takes the sting out of defeat. Congratulations on your triumphant victory.

Steve Dunn | October 5, 2009
Bravo Steve West. No one doubts you deserve the title.

Scott Hardie | October 5, 2009
By writing about my own experience, if I have in any way implied that Steve did not earn or deserve this victory, I beg forgiveness. Steve kicked my ass, plain and simple. I think Steve would have won no matter how this went down, since Steve is very good at that.

Steve Dunn | October 5, 2009
Scott, I didn't interpret your comment that way at all. I was just congratulating Steve because he's such an amazing player. In a similar spirit I didn't mean to denigrate your RB skills by my comment.

Steve West | October 5, 2009
I didn't take it that way either. I felt a little bad for getting a quick win under those circumstances. But I got over it pretty quickly in the excitement of actually winning. I wasn't positive at all that I would win but gave myself enough credit to think it possible. No shame is warranted by you Scott. You did well in your own right just to get there. I'm still basking in it all. Thanks again.

Aaron Shurtleff | October 5, 2009
Steve West wins every time! I, for one, am glad he won't be at GooCon hoggin' all the awards again!

:P PBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBTT!!!

But, seriously, great job on the victory, Steve, and your absence at GooCon will make us all miss you horribly, and we'll look forward to next time.

You still owe me a re-match!! ;)

And kudos to Scott for getting to "the big game", something I had no way of pulling off, no matter how big I tried to talk! I was so looking forward to yelling "HAX!!" if you won, that I am now slightly saddened that I cannot.

HAX!!!

Steve Dunn | October 6, 2009
What happens now with Stairway to Heaven? Are all the pending concerts going to play out or is it going to disappear some time soon?

Scott Hardie | October 7, 2009
They're going to play out, but I'm going to remove Overtime from them.

Steve Dunn | October 7, 2009
It's a sprint to all-important third place finish!!

Wait, did the Stairway to Heaven just disappear?

Scott Hardie | October 7, 2009
I didn't realize anyone was sprinting towards a third-place finish. I have restored it until the last of the Stairway concerts end.

Steve Dunn | October 7, 2009
NOOOOOOO!!!!

I was in third place! If it ended, the result was final!

Yeah, OK, maybe I'm the only person who would care about such a thing, but I actually delayed making moves in two concerts with Matthew Preston and Russ Wilhelm that I knew I was going to lose until after you posted that the concerts were going to play out. I figured maybe I could hang on to third place until the Stairway disappeared and, you know, fabricate a trophy for myself or something.

Steve Dunn | October 7, 2009
It's over!!

Well everyone, I had a great time. Russ, you gave me a strong challenge there at the end, but you know how it goes, there can only be one third-place finisher.

Congratulations to everyone else who played. I really enjoyed the competition, especially the part about beating all (but two) of you. I'd like to thank my parents for supporting me, of course my wife for letting me hog the laptop at night. I always dreamed of this moment. Wow. Third place in Stairway to Heaven. I never thought I would hear myself say those words.

[Kanye] I'm proud of you and I'ma let you finish, but Steve West and Scott Hardie are two of the greatest Rock Block players of all time! [/Kanye]

Scott Hardie | October 7, 2009
Steve Dunn, if you get a pretend trophy for third place, I want a pretend trophy for second place. I would like to thank Kelly for helping me plan the rules, other players for giving me a great emotional roller-coaster ride this summer, and Kanye for his continued support.

Steve West, you are a relentless winning machine. I knew that I had to be very careful to avoid mistakes, because there was no way you were going to make one. You dominated this tournament from beginning to end, and your place in the pantheon of great players (current membership: one) is very well deserved. Your secret prize will be revealed shortly, and your other prizes are in the mail.

Erik Bates | October 7, 2009
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | October 7, 2009
Steve's secret prize has been added to the site... but you must have won a concert daily for three weeks in order to see it, which only Steve, Chris, and I have done. If you've been considering another run at that most difficult of achievements, here's further incentive.

Steve West | October 7, 2009
Scott - you are the coolest, most generous guy I know. I can't throw enough superlatives in your direction. I'm naming my next kid after you. Either that or Kanye - it's a toss-up.

Scott Hardie | October 7, 2009
Well, he is a gay fish. It's hard to beat that. Anyway, thanks. :-)

Scott Hardie | October 9, 2009
Erik, sorry, you are twentieth overall for consecutive losses, and sixteenth within the Stairway tournament. You're going to have to start failing a lot harder if you want that record.