You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

AoW1 Play By Email (Turn Logs)
Moderated by Enginerd, Ziggurat Mason

Hop to:    
loginhomeregisterhelprules
Bottom
Topic Subject: AOWH WIZARDS LADDER -- Current Standings and Hall of Records
posted 01-22-03 04:25 PM EDT (US)   
Official AOWH Wizards Ladder Current Standings and Hall of Records

Original Ladder System and Rules Created by: ArmageddonUnlimited and Dark Side of Day
Modified for Play-By-Email by: Cay
Ladder Update Program Written by: Talon

Ladder Administered by: Cay

The AOWH Wizards Ladder is an ongoing competitive system for Age of Wonders. Participants seek out and challenge other ladder players to play-by-email (PBEM) games. The winners of each game earn ladder points, while the losers lose ladder points. The ladder is sorted daily, and players move up or down the ranks depending on whether they have won or lost. The goal is to work your way to the top of the ladder where you may challenge the reigning champion to a duel.

Please note: Until further notice the AOWH Wizards Ladder will operate under playtest status. In the event of any technical problems with the ladder system or update program, ladder administrators may be required to clear or edit match results without advance warning. This notice will be removed when it becomes clear that the ladder system and update program are operating as intended.


This thread is to be used for:

  • Viewing the Current Standings and Hall of Records
  • Discussing the AOWH Wizards Ladder

Off-topic replies will be moved or deleted. For other ladder functions, please visit the AOWH Wizards Ladder Main Thread.


The AOWH Wizards Ladder has been updated:

November 18, 2003 at 12:05 US Eastern Time


Ladder Legend:

Purple # = Ladder Games Played.
Purple % = Players Win Percentage.
+ Green # = Wins in a row won by player.
- Red # = Loses in a row lost by player.
Green Ladder Points = Player moved up his last game played.
Red Ladder Points = Player moved down his last game played.
= Current Champion
= Former Champion
= Ladder Battlemage



The AOWH Reigning Champion!
148: Species8471.................Email: species84712@yahoo.com (12 100%)(+12)

The AOWH Former Champions
104: Sleet.........................Email: sleet@shaw.ca (13 61%)(-2)
62: Cay............................Email: cay@heavengames.com (33 39%)(-2)

The AOWH Battlemages
185: Sprout........................Email: speicher@wueconc.wustl.edu (68 82%)(+6)
100: unicorn77...................Email: unicorn@77heron.freeserve.co.uk (47 48%)(+3)
62: Cay............................Email: cay@heavengames.com (33 39%)(-2)

The AOWH Experts
(None)

The AOWH High Inters
185: Sprout........................Email: speicher@wueconc.wustl.edu (68 82%)(+6)

The AOWH Inters
148: Species8471.................Email: species84712@yahoo.com (12 100%)(+12)
135: Nojd...........................Email: nojd@heavengames.com (18 72%)(-1)
127: Elvons........................Email: shrekrocks@yahoo.ca (5 100%)(+5)
118: Dan Petersson..............Email: dan_petersson@telia.com (9 66%)(+3)
115: Eriksson.....................Email: p.ove.eriksson@telia.com (16 81%)(+2)

The AOWH Low Inters
110: FrenchKisser...............Email: tw_yen@hotmail.com (1 100%)(+1)
105: hesiden......................Email: mhesidence@houston.rr.com (2 100%)(+2)
105: TalonThorn..................Email: talonthorn1@yahoo.com (3 33%)(+1)
104: Sleet.........................Email: sleet@shaw.ca (13 61%)(-2)
103: enginerd.....................Email: mjschuck@juno.com (16 43%)(-3)
102: Snow Leopard...............Email: snowleopard000@hotmail.com (1 100%)(+1)
102: engelboi.....................Email: phaedrus@senet.com.au (1 100%)(+1)
102: Serendipitious............Email: stew@glasshousemusic.com.au (1 100%)(+1)
102: Zsaber81.....................Email: Zhengzjm@earthlink.net (1 100%)(+1)
101: Berend........................Email: bvschaik@hotmail.com (4 50%)(+1)
100: Thorongil...................Email: joseph.brooks@asbury.edu (14 42%)(-4)
100: unicorn77...................Email: unicorn@77heron.freeserve.co.uk (47 48%)(+3)
98: Emperor_Bone14............Email: tnchad@msn.com (1 0%)(-1)
98: karmic........................Email: karmic@musician.org (1 0%)(-1)
98: Scorpi0......................Email: scorpio_ritchie@hotmail.com (1 0%)(-1)
98: Tarantulus..................Email: immortal_succubus@blueyonder.co.uk (1 0%)(-1)
96: chef...........................Email: pauldmm@hotmail.com (2 0%)(-2)
96: crowclaw.....................Email: hans.strom@bredband.net (2 50%)(-1)
95: Hoplosternum...............Email: hoplosternum@hotmail.com (3 33%)(-2)
95: Terryn........................Email: oozemaru@home.se (2 0%)(-2)
95: jaricus......................Email: jaricus@hotmail.com (3 33%)(-1)
95: Alex Mars...................Email: alexmars@aol.com (2 0%)(-2)
94: CubanGeneral...............Email: JamesdaCuban@aol.com (5 40%)(+1)
93: Da_Moose.....................Email: da_moose@optusnet.com.au (1 0%)(-1)
90: OnePoorHalfling...........Email: armed_@lingz.org (2 0%)(-3)

The AOWH Good Rookies
89: Arctic Wolf.................Email: Tundraiwolf@Aol.com (3 0%)(-3)
88: Walky.........................Email: walky_one@gmx.ch (13 30%)(-1)
88: Ill Frog.....................Email: a3_pbem@km.ru (2 0%)(-2)
86: heavykaragh.................Email: heavykaragh@hotmail.com (3 0%)(-3)
84: Jayhawk......................Email: jayhawk@heavengames.com (7 42%)(-3)

The AOWH Rookies
79: Menaardi.....................Email: Menaardi@hotmail.com (5 0%)(-5)
75: Jaheira......................Email: dehall74@cogeco.ca (15 20%)(-3)
68: Blacksmith_Tony...........Email: markdellis@hotmail.com (18 16%)(-6)
66: GillB.........................Email: gillb@heavengames.com (35 17%)(-4)
62: Cay............................Email: cay@heavengames.com (33 39%)(-2)

The AOWH Zero Gamers
100: Termy.........................Email: Termy@softhome.net
100: Fastfeet.....................Email: santyyeh@sympatico.ca
100: ashaanti.....................Email: ashaanti_19@hotmail.com
100: Romantic_Vampire.........Email: romantic_vampire@hotmail.com
100: Yu Gi Oh King 13.........Email: rgoodcharlotte@aol.com
100: izaqyos......................Email: izaq_y@hotmail.com
100: Demon.........................Email: i_is_a_demon@hotmail.com
100: Roger the Rampant........Email: rampantroj@NOSPAMyahoo.com
100: sgfz01........................Email: sg.zappa@comcast.net
100: jeffery88...................Email: jeffery88@time.net.my
100: Egregor......................Email: mtpathy@yahoo.com
100: Lord Lurifax...............Email: johanoanna.olsson@telia.com
100: OrionBlauw..................Email: articjustartic@hotmail.com
100: Wild Weasel.................Email: mfcz@hotmail.com
100: Dats Me......................Email: Tdstra@Aol.com
100: Shadowed_Flames...........Email: eternal_lead@yahoo.com
100: Woggy222.....................Email: woggy222@comcast.net

The AOWH Non-Participating Forumers
(None)



Milestones:

  • 2003.01.22 AOWH Wizards Ladder goes online
  • 2003.01.22 First player added Walky
  • 2002.01.24 First match registered River of Life Sleet vs unicorn77
  • 2003.01.30 First match completed River of Life Sleet defeats unicorn77
  • 2003.01.30 First AOWH Ladder Champion declared 102: Sleet (1 100%)(+1)
  • 2003.02.05 First AOWH Inter declared 114: Sprout (5 100%)(+5)
  • 2003.02.06 First match defaulted Blood Isles (APWC 2001) chef defaults to Cay
  • 2003.02.05 First AOWH Good Rookie declared 86: Walky (3 0%)(-3)
  • 2003.02.09 First AOWH Rookie declared 78: GillB (6 0%)(-6)
  • 2003.07.22 First AOWH High Inter declared 170: Sprout (58 81%)(+9)


High Scores:

  • 2003.01.21 You must qualify for the rank AOWH Ladder Expert before registering a high score


Hall of Champions:

  • 2003.01.30 102: Sleet (1 100%)(+1)
  • 2003.02.19 105: Cay (9 55%)(+1)
  • 2003.02.26 124: Species8471 (6 100%)(+6)

Cay
CayMack on Xbox LIVE, PlayStation Network, and Steam. CayMack#1436 on BattleNet.
Visit: TrueAchievements|TrueTrophies

[This message has been edited by hiranu (edited 11-24-2003 @ 08:40 PM).]

Replies:
posted 01-24-03 08:00 AM EDT (US)     1 / 31  

Quoted from unicorn77:

Species - I think your WL means Wizards Ladder rather than WarLocks. So if you want a TS game, count me in!

Hmmm... Is that going to be a problem? I always thought of Triumph Studios' and Warlock's Rules as TS (TS136) and WR (WR110), respectively, not WL.

Also, I think I should put something in the rules about what maps the Champion can choose to play when a Challenger makes a challenge. The Champion shouldn't be allowed to choose Warlock's, Lighthawk's, or any other ruleset in case the Challenger doesn't have it installed. Also the Champion shouldn't be allowed to choose an unreasonably long map (ie. XL with 3 levels). What would be reasonable?


Cay
CayMack on Xbox LIVE, PlayStation Network, and Steam. CayMack#1436 on BattleNet.
Visit: TrueAchievements|TrueTrophies

[This message has been edited by Cay (edited 01-24-2003 @ 08:03 AM).]

posted 01-24-03 06:04 PM EDT (US)     2 / 31  
Firstly, this is a great idea and a daunting task to administer, so thanks to all involved for getting it moving. I'm looking forward to an enhanced aow gaming experience!

Some comments.

I think this thread needs to be sticky.

Maybe we should confine WL games to TS136 rules (no non standard rulesets and all playing with the same patch).

I can't offer any suggestions as to how this could be improved, but the process seems a bit complex. I think the summary links are fine, but I got a bit confused about the need to register a game once it started.

Also, is it OK to decide on a game privately, rather than post a challenge first?

Once again, great idea!

posted 01-24-03 06:58 PM EDT (US)     3 / 31  
I'd suggest you keep games to standard rulesets, also.

What are non-participating forummers, and why do they get their own category?

posted 01-24-03 07:28 PM EDT (US)     4 / 31  
Umm, yeah, and you could call it the Challenge Ladder or Champion's Ladder.

Wizard's Ladder makes it sound like you're talking about a different game. ;p

posted 01-25-03 03:32 PM EDT (US)     5 / 31  

Quoted from unicorn77:

Firstly, this is a great idea and a daunting task to administer, so thanks to all involved for getting it moving. I'm looking forward to an enhanced aow gaming experience!

I'm hoping that everyone will enjoy it!

Quoted from unicorn77:

I think this thread needs to be sticky.

Okay. There are some that agree, and some that disagree. I'm trying to get a sense of which is the majority. So far it seems that most people agree with you on this.

Quoted from unicorn77:

Maybe we should confine WL games to TS136 rules (no non standard rulesets and all playing with the same patch).


Quoted from Xenobea:

I'd suggest you keep games to standard rulesets, also.

Alrighty! After thinking it through again, I agree with this!

Quoted from unicorn77:

I can't offer any suggestions as to how this could be improved, but the process seems a bit complex. think the summary links are fine, but I got a bit confused about the need to register a game once it started.

I really hope that people aren't overwhelmed by it. The basics are simply: (1)join a game; (2) register the game; (3) report the final result when it is finished. I hope that people will get accustomed to these basics after doing it a few times. All of the rest of the details -- and there are a lot of them -- are the fine print, which can be ignored most of the time, but has to be there just in case of problems.

As far as the need to register a game goes, this is to prevent cheating. If the game is registered when it begins, and there is an active turn log, then a player who realizes they are about to lose cannot say they didn't know it was a ladder game, or drop from the game, or even say that the game never took place, etc. There is a record of the game (the turn log), and a record of the agreement in advance to make it a ladder game (registering the game).

Quoted from unicorn77:

Also, is it OK to decide on a game privately, rather than post a challenge first?

Yes, certainly -- as long as the game is registerd once it is started, you can arrange the game privately over email.

Quoted from Xenobea:

What are non-participating forummers, and why do they get their own category?

Non-participating forummers are players that have to take an extended leave of absence from the ladder -- consider them "inactive ladder members". They are moved to a separate category so that active ladder members can recognize this, and not waste time trying to challenge them or set up games with them. When they return, their records/standings will be reinstated.

Quoted from Xenobea:

Umm, yeah, and you could call it the Challenge Ladder or Champion's Ladder.
Wizard's Ladder makes it sound like you're talking about a different game.

Okay... sure... that will go on the list of things to consider, but I've got other priorities right now!


Cay
CayMack on Xbox LIVE, PlayStation Network, and Steam. CayMack#1436 on BattleNet.
Visit: TrueAchievements|TrueTrophies
posted 01-27-03 07:07 PM EDT (US)     6 / 31  
Can you see what you can do about reducing the number of sticky threads in this forum? I'm not saying it has to be one of these, but there are six, and maybe something can be combined...
posted 01-28-03 03:51 PM EDT (US)     7 / 31  
I respectfully disagree. The number of sticky threads is fine. If it was getting many more, then I would agree - but 6 is fine. The idea of combining may be viable with the house rules and how to set up a PBEM game...perhaps start a new thread with the combined information and get rid of the old threads. Also possible to put both of them in with Talon Thorn's thread as well. However, I am happy with the why it is as well. I believe having the 3 wizard ladder threads sticky is good. After a few months then we can see how often they are used and have a better idea of whether to have them sticky or not.

Although - if someone would include how to make the different color posts and the links to other threads that would be nice. I have not challenged anyone since I do not know how to make a link I guess I am a little behind the times

Sprout


The grass is always greener on the other side because we spend so much time looking over the fence instead of minding our own yard.
posted 01-28-03 04:41 PM EDT (US)     8 / 31  
I can make a link! But I would like to know how to name it, rather than show all the gobbledegook.
posted 01-28-03 04:51 PM EDT (US)     9 / 31  
Well, click the BB Code link and read

/Eriksson
Life is nothing but a game
poe@telia.com
posted 01-30-03 07:36 AM EDT (US)     10 / 31  
Now, how about this.

It looks like ladder points are awarded/deducted when the result is declared.

But you could start and finish games between starting and finishing a particular game. So your standing could change and the points you expected to win/lose change from when you ageed to play the game.

I suppose it would be fairer to base the points on standings when the game started, but this would make the admin even more onerous, and for that reason I'm not suggesting this is done.

But, if I've got this right, I would suggest it is made clearer. I wouldn't want people to get dissappointed about the points they get from a win! Personally, I'm just hoping for any points!

posted 01-30-03 01:00 PM EDT (US)     11 / 31  
At 1024x768 resolution I can't even see anything but sticky threads when I open this forum. Since I have little interest in the sticky threads I'm going to have to stop posting on these forums because it is too tiresome to do all that scrolling, especially from home where I have a lower resolution.
posted 01-30-03 02:22 PM EDT (US)     12 / 31  
Scrolling tiresome? Well, the youth of today

/Eriksson
Life is nothing but a game
poe@telia.com
posted 01-31-03 10:45 AM EDT (US)     13 / 31  

Quoted from Walky:

Question about Winning and Losing:

Losing: if you lose the game (Leader or all troups depending on Settings)

Winning: If you WIN the scenario or just if you didn't lose first? In the first case: What if both players lose against an Indie Player?

Quoted from Rules of the AOWH Wizards Ladder in the Sign Up thread:

A win is granted when a single player eliminates their opponent in a 1-vs-1 game, or when all players from the opposing team have been eliminated in a team game.

So, Indie players don't factor into the equation. As soon as the first player (or team) is out of the game, the second player (or team) is declared the winner. They don't have to go on and win against the Indies, although they could if they wish to.


Cay
CayMack on Xbox LIVE, PlayStation Network, and Steam. CayMack#1436 on BattleNet.
Visit: TrueAchievements|TrueTrophies
posted 01-31-03 10:50 AM EDT (US)     14 / 31  

Quoted from Xenobea:

Can you see what you can do about reducing the number of sticky threads in this forum? I'm not saying it has to be one of these, but there are six, and maybe something can be combined...

Yes, we'll see what we can do about combining some of the stickies...

Quoted from unicorn77:

But, if I've got this right, I would suggest it is made clearer. I wouldn't want people to get dissappointed about the points they get from a win! Personally, I'm just hoping for any points!

Good idea...


Cay
CayMack on Xbox LIVE, PlayStation Network, and Steam. CayMack#1436 on BattleNet.
Visit: TrueAchievements|TrueTrophies
posted 01-31-03 11:41 AM EDT (US)     15 / 31  

Quoted from Walky:

Is it possible to post also all challanges in the sticky header as in Thalon Thorns post? or should we move this whole stuff to that thread and leave this thread as a Registry for the games?

If people wish to use Talon Thorn's thread for organizing their ladder games, then I think that is a great idea. Essentially, that is what his thread is there for. I specified to do it in the Game Registry just to keep them separate from the regular games, but there's probably no need. I'll just make sure that Talon Thorn doesn't mind. Either way, I'll allow people to continue posting in the Game Registry if they wish.


Cay
CayMack on Xbox LIVE, PlayStation Network, and Steam. CayMack#1436 on BattleNet.
Visit: TrueAchievements|TrueTrophies
posted 02-01-03 10:46 AM EDT (US)     16 / 31  
Two questions:

1) I think playing with the non-standard rulesets should be allowed. If two players both want to do it - what is the reason that it should not be allowed? I have not played Warlocks at all, but have played Lighthawks and find it challenging, different and fun. I would think that if someone chalenges the champion or something like that - then unless *both* agree that a non-standard ruleset be used then the standard rules should be used. Why the limitation?

2) I was curious about why players can not play more than 1 game at once. For example - the recent games on Blood Isles[World Cup 2001 thingy] - they could have been done mirror style...where each player plays 2 games: one as goblins, one as halflings. That way no one can complain about the map being unbalanced...as a matter of fact - I think that that map is fairly balanced - but other maps are not and one way that is fun is to play 2 games at once...one from each side. Is it part of the software updating stuff that does not allow this - or is there another reason?

Thanks,
Sprout

posted 02-14-03 08:08 AM EDT (US)     17 / 31  

Quoted from Sprout:

I think playing with the non-standard rulesets should be allowed. If two players both want to do it - what is the reason that it should not be allowed? I have not played Warlocks at all, but have played Lighthawks and find it challenging, different and fun. I would think that if someone chalenges the champion or something like that - then unless *both* agree that a non-standard ruleset be used then the standard rules should be used. Why the limitation?

There's nothing in the ladder rules to prevent people using other rulesets for their games, so go ahead. I'll clarify this the next time I have a chance to rewrite some of the rules.


Quoted from Sprout:

I was curious about why players can not play more than 1 game at once. For example - the recent games on Blood Isles (World Cup 2001 thingy) - they could have been done mirror style...where each player plays 2 games: one as goblins, one as halflings. That way no one can complain about the map being unbalanced...as a matter of fact - I think that that map is fairly balanced - but other maps are not and one way that is fun is to play 2 games at once...one from each side. Is it part of the software updating stuff that does not allow this - or is there another reason?

This limit was left over from the rules for the online ladder, where people could play several games against each other in a single day. This is not a problem for PBEM, so I've completely removed the limit from the rules.


Quoted from Species8471:

I feel so bad...he's lost so many games. I think maybe newbies should learn in non-WL games so they don't end up in a hole points-wise.


Quoted from Jayhawk:

First of all, Gill's a she, not a he.
Secondly, she's started playing the ladder knowing that she'd be losing quite a few games initially. However, she's willing to take that dive in points learning how to play a better game.
I did manage to get er invovled in a few non-ladder 'test' games, but only after a lot of pushing from my side, as she actually felt she was cheating me out of possible ladder points.
I think we should admire such perseverence, rather than suggest newbies should go play off the ladder rather than on it.


Quoted from unicorn77:

Echoing Jayhawks comments, I hope GillB continues to play - everyone has to start playing somewhere and someone has to prop up the ladder. The thing about playing in the ladder is that it gives added meaning to the games and I'm sure it will be very pleasing to GillB when she gets her first victory. She did, in fact, do a very good move at the begining of our game. Plus, the beauty of the ladder is that lower ranked players can easily shoot up the rankings.
But I understand where (Species) is coming from too. However, the rankings are starting to show what people's abilities are, and people will therefore know what sort of a challenge they face. And at the end of the day, it's only a game and you can have a lot of fun getting beaten - I know this for a fact.

I agree with everything that Jayhawk and Unicorn have already written. But I have a possible suggestion: If you are a player near the top of the ladder, and you want a match or rematch against a player near the bottom, then why not play a game on an unbalanced map -- give them a large starting advantage to even things out a bit. I know the point distribution system for winning/losing assumes a balanced map, but there aren't any rules that say it must be balanced. It could be a fun challenge for both sides!


And one last thing... The rules currently state that an official challenge to the Champion goes through this process:

(1) Challenger makes an official challenge.
(2) Champion chooses a map and which races to play.
(3) Challenger decides who will play each race.

What would people think of this change:

(1) Challenger makes an official challenge, chooses a map and chooses which races to play.
(2) Champion decides who will play each race.

I think it is still a fair system. It should have the advantage of reducing the number of steps involved in setting up a game. But more improtantly, in the current system, the Champion has the motivation to choose a larger, lengthier map which could take considerable time to play. In the proposed system, the Challenger has the motivation to choose a smaller speeider map which is more in the spirit of the ladder.

Another alternative would be to keep the current system, but make a list of acceptable "Challenge" maps -- not too big, not too small, completely balanced.

Thoughts?


Cay
CayMack on Xbox LIVE, PlayStation Network, and Steam. CayMack#1436 on BattleNet.
Visit: TrueAchievements|TrueTrophies
posted 02-14-03 09:23 AM EDT (US)     18 / 31  
I see Cay's point, and agree it needs to be changed. I like the idea of "acceptable" maps. I did start to wonder whether that could be extended to all ladder games, then came back to the view that that would be too overbearing. But I think it would certainly be OK for the challenge.
posted 02-16-03 07:36 AM EDT (US)     19 / 31  
I would agree with Cay and Unicorn. The idea sounds great.

It may be a good idea for people to modify and submit some maps that are good for 1 vs 1. These can be used if people would like them. I think the world cup maps have been very well-received and other maps that are made in a similar way would increase the fun of the ladder - whether they are "required" I do not know...but having them available would be very nice...perhaps a link in one of the current sticky posts to a set of maps (not really sure how all that link and stuff works).

posted 02-18-03 10:58 PM EDT (US)     20 / 31  
Unless there are serious objections, I am going to start deleting old games from the Game Registry. I know the list looks nice with winners in green and losers in red. But deleting those old games will make the job of updating the ladder MUCH easier by keeping the list a more reasonable size. The ladder is less than a month old, and already it is getting a bit unruly to edit that list in the forum window.

Cay
CayMack on Xbox LIVE, PlayStation Network, and Steam. CayMack#1436 on BattleNet.
Visit: TrueAchievements|TrueTrophies
posted 02-19-03 03:36 AM EDT (US)     21 / 31  
Understand you have a problem there, Cay! But I hate to see data lost forever. Could you just copy the entire list first to an "archive" thread every time you weed out the finished games? I know we could probably work out who had played who from the registry thread, but this is an easier record to look at.
posted 02-20-03 00:54 AM EDT (US)     22 / 31  
I would agree with Unicorn. Perhaps if you had a thread (non-sticky) that you copied the standing to that you delete each time. That way, every month or so, you can copy the stuff over and people can look at it if we want to see what has happened in the past.

Thanks

posted 02-23-03 05:16 PM EDT (US)     23 / 31  
I didn't pay much attention to the rules about the Champion (mainly because I never thought it would affect me!). But now Cay kindly pointed out I can challenge, I'm paying more attention!

As I understand it, if Cay loses the first of these challenges then the other two matches become normal ladder games. But I'm a bit confused as to the suggestion that players at the top of the ladder play each other in case one becomes the champion. It seems to imply that a match can become a challenge match as soon as one of the players becomes a champion. Is this right?

posted 02-23-03 10:23 PM EDT (US)     24 / 31  
Perhaps I should clarify the rules.

The Reigning Champion can lose his title in any 1-vs-1 game, not just an Official Challenge. So, even a Zero Gamer or a Rookie could ask the Champion for a game, and if the Champion accepts and loses, then he also loses his title. The key here is that anyone can ask the Champion for a regular game, but the Champion can choose whether or not to play. However, only the top 3 ranked players have the right to make an Official Challenge which the Champion is obliged to accept.

Does it make more sense now?


Cay
CayMack on Xbox LIVE, PlayStation Network, and Steam. CayMack#1436 on BattleNet.
Visit: TrueAchievements|TrueTrophies
posted 02-24-03 02:05 AM EDT (US)     25 / 31  
Absolutely!
posted 02-24-03 10:49 AM EDT (US)     26 / 31  
Guess it says somewhere but I'm tired of searching
What is an AOWH Battle mage?

/Eriksson
Life is nothing but a game
poe@telia.com
posted 02-24-03 10:54 AM EDT (US)     27 / 31  
Cay just answered that in the AoW2 thread - sorry but i am too lazy right now to give the link
posted 02-24-03 11:10 AM EDT (US)     28 / 31  
Heheh... yeah, guess I should crosspost some of the answers.

Quoted from Cay:

I haven't gotten around to assigning that honour yet. It will be for players who play a lot of tough games, win a lot of games in a row, accept all challenges made, show good sportsmanship, etc.


Cay
CayMack on Xbox LIVE, PlayStation Network, and Steam. CayMack#1436 on BattleNet.
Visit: TrueAchievements|TrueTrophies
posted 05-20-03 08:33 PM EDT (US)     29 / 31  
Reminder to Cay to change my email to species84712@yahoo.com (and to everyone else to please use that.)
posted 06-30-03 10:15 PM EDT (US)     30 / 31  
hi...

due to circumstances beyond my control i am unable to play anymore

please award points to all those who i was playing with

sorry

posted 09-21-03 09:26 AM EDT (US)     31 / 31  
Due to mail.com terminating their free service I've had to change my email address (yet again). I'm now using karmic2pbem@hot.ee for all my PBEMs. Apologies to all concerned.

Age of Wonders 2 Heaven » Forums » AoW1 Play By Email (Turn Logs) » AOWH WIZARDS LADDER -- Current Standings and Hall of Records
Top
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register
Hop to:    
Age of Wonders 2 Heaven | HeavenGames