|
There is much controversy about it and would like to end it here,
post your arguments to defend your opinion so we can legitimize an agreement
----
>.>
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
Depends on what was decided pre-match. The unspoken rule is that it is allowed though.
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
Depends on what was decided pre-match. The unspoken rule is that it is allowed though.
it is allowed, but some players get mad and leave the game
if you can make a wall around a neutral city you can wallf**** a neutral citie
Players disagree only for their own benefit, like cow that say everytime to don't use wallglitch in first turn and in some games does
----
>.>
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
What's wall glitching? Is that just making walls around a neutral city?
----
~Somewhere in the distance an eagle shrieked as it rode an American buffalo to an apple-pie-eating contest at a baseball field.~
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
Placing a unit near a neutral city so your enemy cannot wall it as he takes it.
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
Oh, then I see no problem with that. It's a legit strategy. Sure it might piss them off, but since when did anyone not get pissed in a game?
----
~Somewhere in the distance an eagle shrieked as it rode an American buffalo to an apple-pie-eating contest at a baseball field.~
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
It must be a legal action, otherwise it would also be illegal to attack a neutral city, which your opponent might attack too.
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
I say no. Its fun to wall glitch on your opponents
----
I like stuff.... Yay?
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
Напишано од Safari, 06.03.2012 at 08:21
It must be a legal action, otherwise it would also be illegal to attack a neutral city, which your opponent might attack too.
u kidding ?
----
>.>
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
Напишано од Safari, 06.03.2012 at 08:21
It must be a legal action, otherwise it would also be illegal to attack a neutral city, which your opponent might attack too.
u kidding ?
i think you missunderstood me. i meant that wall glitching must be legal, because attacking a neutral city, which you opponent might attack is a similar action. And this is a legal and it should be legal.
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
First turnblocking on enemy cities has a luck element in it, so it shoudn't be allowed. Wallglitch a neutral city has not. Therfor: No, its not illegal and it also should not be. If you are a good player and don't do the predictable moves, then you don't have to worry about wallglitching on neutrals.
----
Exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence.
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
SuperiorCacaocow Корисникот е избришан |
SuperiorCacaocow Корисникот е избришан
Players disagree only for their own benefit, like cow that say everytime to don't use wallglitch in first turn and in some games does
It is called wallfuck and not wallglitch. Wallglitching is something completely different.
Also stop telling lies about me please. I always ask in the beginning of a game if players agree with neutral wallfucks or not. Of course I will use them as well if the others do.
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
Напишано од Guest, 09.03.2012 at 13:07
Players disagree only for their own benefit, like cow that say everytime to don't use wallglitch in first turn and in some games does
It is called wallfuck and not wallglitch. Wallglitching is something completely different.
Also stop telling lies about me please. I always ask in the beginning of a game if players agree with neutral wallfucks or not. Of course I will use them as well if the others do.
ok, but wallfuck songs bad to the poll title
that's no lie
and this is the purpose of the topic: end these biased agreements in the beginning of a game
----
>.>
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
SuperiorCacaocow Корисникот е избришан |
SuperiorCacaocow Корисникот е избришан
and this is the purpose of the topic: end these biased agreements in the beginning of a game
Since there is no standard rule about neutral-wallfucks as about first-turn-turnblocks, first turn agreements are necessary.
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
Напишано од Guest, 10.03.2012 at 13:48
and this is the purpose of the topic: end these biased agreements in the beginning of a game
Since there is no standard rule about neutral-wallfucks as about first-turn-turnblocks, first turn agreements are necessary.
now we have a standart rule because we have 18 votes vs 6 votes ok
----
>.>
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
Cat Daddy Корисникот е избришан |
Cat Daddy Корисникот е избришан
Напишано од Guest, 10.03.2012 at 13:48
and this is the purpose of the topic: end these biased agreements in the beginning of a game
Since there is no standard rule about neutral-wallfucks as about first-turn-turnblocks, first turn agreements are necessary.
now we have a standart rule because we have 18 votes vs 6 votes ok
>implying 30 votes in a forum poll reflect the opinion of the whole community. no sry
Also you asked if it is 'illegal'. Of course it's not, neither are first turn blocks.
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
Well Cow I'm afraid if these results go on the answer will be "NO."
----
I like stuff.... Yay?
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
You and your autism, taking everything in the literal sense
----
>.>
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|
|
How the hell can it be illigal be caging people in in a unbreakable cage! unless u break it from outside, common now
Вчитување...
Вчитување...
|