Clarification on the rules/etiquette of Competitive play.

I'm just seeking clarification on an issue that annoyed me. I was playing a cw, i was france my opponent was uk. Turn 1 i circle walled my cap with 8 units with the intention to wall inside it turn 2 thus keeping my capital safe until turn 4. Overall taking 11 units.

after the turn ended i found the circle wall had been wf'd. the wall looked roughly as shown in the following screenshot and the red circle was the location of the wf, on french territory.



As we all know you are not meant to place units on your opponents territory turn 1. Or interfere with walls on their territory. Sometimes this is unavoidable in cases where countries are almost on top of each other. However the standard etiquette is usually to pretend that the walls are there and continue as normal.

When the wf happened to me in the cw i just thought whatever and played on. He probably will pretend the wall is there. Next turn i found a wf beside my cap breaking the inner wall i had made within the circlewall. I was pissed but i finished the cw. After however i criticised the other player for his rulebreak only to be laughed at and told to stop making up rules. Am i wrong in what i thought was always the standard? Is it ok to interfere with walls on another persons terrirtory and then pretend theyre not there? Should we applaud the other player for not capping me?



his argument was that the wf was on belgium and not france, it was on france's boarder and there are witnesses but whether he is right or wrong about the wfs location he still interfered with the wall on my territory.

Feel free to give your opinions, and if anyone knows where the rules about turn 1 territory invasion and wfs is stated, please post it. Or is it just an unofficial etiquette/standard some of us maintain?

It's like getting bugged wall turn 1 where 2 units merge. And the opponent WFs it. You tried to make another 3 man wall in the midst of this. Which means you are safe for 3 turns. Sorry not this time.

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:03

It's like getting bugged wall turn 1 where 2 units merge. And the opponent WFs it. You tried to make another 3 man wall in the midst of this. Which means you are safe for 3 turns. Sorry not this time.

i completely disagree with this. The situation youre describing is when the player places the ends of a triangle wall too close together and they merge at the end of the turn leaving the wall open. The standard response to this is to pretend the wall is there and place your wf beside it.

i placed an 8 unit circle wall on my territory only to have it wallfucked and ignored as if it hadnt been placed there. Let me clarify that the wall is on MY territory. I dont care where your wfs are. You shouldve pretended it was there as most players would have.

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:08

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:03

It's like getting bugged wall turn 1 where 2 units merge. And the opponent WFs it. You tried to make another 3 man wall in the midst of this. Which means you are safe for 3 turns. Sorry not this time.

i completely disagree with this. The situation youre describing is when the player places the ends of a triangle wall too close together and they merge at the end of the turn leaving the wall open. The standard response to this is to pretend the wall is there and place your wf beside it.

i placed an 8 unit circle wall on my territory only to have it wallfucked and ignored as if it hadnt been placed there. Let me clarify that the wall is on MY territory. I dont care where your wfs are. You shouldve pretended it was there as most players would have.

If he had attacked your cap it would be different... I think that circle wall is BS also.. But all he did was prevent another wall from being made. Nothing wrong still sorry.

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:10

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:08

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:03

It's like getting bugged wall turn 1 where 2 units merge. And the opponent WFs it. You tried to make another 3 man wall in the midst of this. Which means you are safe for 3 turns. Sorry not this time.

i completely disagree with this. The situation youre describing is when the player places the ends of a triangle wall too close together and they merge at the end of the turn leaving the wall open. The standard response to this is to pretend the wall is there and place your wf beside it.

i placed an 8 unit circle wall on my territory only to have it wallfucked and ignored as if it hadnt been placed there. Let me clarify that the wall is on MY territory. I dont care where your wfs are. You shouldve pretended it was there as most players would have.

If he had attacked your cap it would be different... I think that circle wall is BS also.. But all he did was prevent another wall from being made. Nothing wrong still sorry.

Whether you think that circle wall is bs is irrelevant, these are the rules that i was lead to believe we all follow. By your logic i should be able to wf cap walls that are close to boarders and bypass them turn 2. Its ridiculous. Not to mention that i wasted 8 extra units on a strategical wall that your clanmate illegally interfered with.

I suspect your issue with this wall is similar to your issue with rewalling, which is why youre supporting your clanmates actions rather than adhering to logic. I'm going to wait to see other opinions on this.

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:15

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:10

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:08

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:03

It's like getting bugged wall turn 1 where 2 units merge. And the opponent WFs it. You tried to make another 3 man wall in the midst of this. Which means you are safe for 3 turns. Sorry not this time.

i completely disagree with this. The situation youre describing is when the player places the ends of a triangle wall too close together and they merge at the end of the turn leaving the wall open. The standard response to this is to pretend the wall is there and place your wf beside it.

i placed an 8 unit circle wall on my territory only to have it wallfucked and ignored as if it hadnt been placed there. Let me clarify that the wall is on MY territory. I dont care where your wfs are. You shouldve pretended it was there as most players would have.

If he had attacked your cap it would be different... I think that circle wall is BS also.. But all he did was prevent another wall from being made. Nothing wrong still sorry.

Whether you think that circle wall is bs is irrelevant, these are the rules that i was lead to believe we all follow. By your logic i should be able to wf cap walls that are close to boarders and bypass them turn 2. Its ridiculous. Not to mention that i wasted 8 extra units on a strategical wall that your clanmate illegally interfered with.

I suspect your issue with this wall is similar to your issue with rewalling, which is why youre supporting your clanmates actions. I'm going to wait to see other opinions on this.

I'll be honest, I'm not trying to protect my clanmate. I just have my own opinion.. And what about wfing Italy from making units so you can bypass Cagliari like your clan has done so many times against Nero..


Making wall in Cagliari across the islands so boats cant even dock on Italy, all to get a bomber placed dead smack in the center of the island so Neros wall is down and Spain or France can invade turn 2. Same circumstances, and you know which wall I'm talking about.. (If not ill ss)

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:19

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:15

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:10

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:08

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:03

It's like getting bugged wall turn 1 where 2 units merge. And the opponent WFs it. You tried to make another 3 man wall in the midst of this. Which means you are safe for 3 turns. Sorry not this time.

i completely disagree with this. The situation youre describing is when the player places the ends of a triangle wall too close together and they merge at the end of the turn leaving the wall open. The standard response to this is to pretend the wall is there and place your wf beside it.

i placed an 8 unit circle wall on my territory only to have it wallfucked and ignored as if it hadnt been placed there. Let me clarify that the wall is on MY territory. I dont care where your wfs are. You shouldve pretended it was there as most players would have.

If he had attacked your cap it would be different... I think that circle wall is BS also.. But all he did was prevent another wall from being made. Nothing wrong still sorry.

Whether you think that circle wall is bs is irrelevant, these are the rules that i was lead to believe we all follow. By your logic i should be able to wf cap walls that are close to boarders and bypass them turn 2. Its ridiculous. Not to mention that i wasted 8 extra units on a strategical wall that your clanmate illegally interfered with.

I suspect your issue with this wall is similar to your issue with rewalling, which is why youre supporting your clanmates actions. I'm going to wait to see other opinions on this.

I'll be honest, I'm not trying to protect my clanmate. I just have my own opinion.. And what about wfing Italy from making units so you can bypass Cagliari like your clan has done so many times against Nero..


Making wall in Cagliari across the islands so boats cant even dock on Italy, all to get a bomber placed dead smack in the center of the island so Neros wall is down and Spain or France can invade turn 2. Same circumstances, and you know which wall I'm talking about.. (If not ill ss)

i know what youre talking about, but that wall extends outside italys boarders and overwater. Since its not completely on his territory it is perfectly acceptable to break the wall on the parts outside his territory and bypass it as normal.

However in my case the wall was 100% on french territory. If we are to accept the "no turn 1 enemy territory or invasion rule" then breaking a wall extending over a patch of water and then passing through that patch of water as normal should be logically acceptable.

I think in this circumstance your opponents intention was to WF Belguim, you ran the risk of it being wfed by making it so close to a city that is perfectly fine to wf, had you made a standard triangle wall the placing of his wf unit would not have come into question. In this circumstance, I don't think it is unfair for him to wf your cap next go, since all that happened really is that your plan did not work.

Edit: And just to clarify before you rage, I wouldn't count that wall as a 'cap wall' so he hasn't done anything wrong in wfing belguim that side.

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:23

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:19

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:15

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:10

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:08

Geschreven door Mr_Own_U, 06.10.2014 at 23:03

It's like getting bugged wall turn 1 where 2 units merge. And the opponent WFs it. You tried to make another 3 man wall in the midst of this. Which means you are safe for 3 turns. Sorry not this time.

i completely disagree with this. The situation youre describing is when the player places the ends of a triangle wall too close together and they merge at the end of the turn leaving the wall open. The standard response to this is to pretend the wall is there and place your wf beside it.

i placed an 8 unit circle wall on my territory only to have it wallfucked and ignored as if it hadnt been placed there. Let me clarify that the wall is on MY territory. I dont care where your wfs are. You shouldve pretended it was there as most players would have.

If he had attacked your cap it would be different... I think that circle wall is BS also.. But all he did was prevent another wall from being made. Nothing wrong still sorry.

Whether you think that circle wall is bs is irrelevant, these are the rules that i was lead to believe we all follow. By your logic i should be able to wf cap walls that are close to boarders and bypass them turn 2. Its ridiculous. Not to mention that i wasted 8 extra units on a strategical wall that your clanmate illegally interfered with.

I suspect your issue with this wall is similar to your issue with rewalling, which is why youre supporting your clanmates actions. I'm going to wait to see other opinions on this.

I'll be honest, I'm not trying to protect my clanmate. I just have my own opinion.. And what about wfing Italy from making units so you can bypass Cagliari like your clan has done so many times against Nero..


Making wall in Cagliari across the islands so boats cant even dock on Italy, all to get a bomber placed dead smack in the center of the island so Neros wall is down and Spain or France can invade turn 2. Same circumstances, and you know which wall I'm talking about.. (If not ill ss)

i know what youre talking about, but that wall extends outside italys boarders and overwater. Since its not completely on his territory it is perfectly acceptable to break the wall on the parts outside his territory and bypass it as normal.

However in my case the wall was 100% on french territory.

Unit was in Belgium. But NP. Let's leave it alone and let others think about it. Doesn't matter whose right or whose wrong. All of us you, me are designated to opinions.

I support laochra in this time. But meh... community will do nothing about it. There are no "rules". Commando did the same to me.

Next we will be arguing about sea territory and not being able to wf sea walls because it is not international waters BLAH!

Geschreven door b0nker2, 06.10.2014 at 23:24

I think in this circumstance your opponents intention was to WF Belguim, you ran the risk of it being wfed by making it so close to a city that is perfectly fine to wf, had you made a standard triangle wall the placing of his wf unit would not have come into question. In this circumstance, I don't think it is unfair for him to wf your cap next go, since all that happened really is that your plan did not work.

Edit: And just to clarify before you rage, I wouldn't count that wall as a 'cap wall' so he hasn't done anything wrong in wfing belguim that side.

im surprised that you would take this stance. By your logic the existence of belgium near my boarders makes it perfectly acceptable to interfere with walls on my territory turn 1. Whether it is a cap wall or not is irrelevant.

and to clarify the wf was placed on french territory as marked on the screenshot. There are plenty of witnesses.

Also question for you Lao, Had he fulled Belguim and left his trans in the channel between dover and calais area would you complain then when it fucked the north of your wall?

Geschreven door clovis1122, 06.10.2014 at 23:27

I support laochra in this time. But meh... community will do nothing about it. There are no "rules". Commando did the same to me.

i fear that you are right, since these rules arent officially stated and clarified upon, it leaves some room for player interpretation.

Geschreven door b0nker2, 06.10.2014 at 23:30

Also question for you Lao, Had he fulled Belguim and left his trans in the channel between dover and calais area would you complain then when it fucked the north of your wall?

thats the same issue, they should pretend the wall is there since its on my territory. its like turk players who wf odessa turn 1 but pretend its there.

a question for you in return. if i attempted to make the same wall on ankara in turkey, and an opponent as ukraine placed a bomber on the water just at turks boarder to break the circle wall on turks territory, would you find that acceptable?

Geschreven door b0nker2, 06.10.2014 at 23:28

Next we will be arguing about sea territory and not being able to wf sea walls because it is not international waters BLAH!

dont be ridiculous, the standard rule is to not invade an opponents territory turn 1, since waters arent attributed to certain countries in this game in colour, we can ignore their relevance to this rule.

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:29

Geschreven door b0nker2, 06.10.2014 at 23:24

I think in this circumstance your opponents intention was to WF Belguim, you ran the risk of it being wfed by making it so close to a city that is perfectly fine to wf, had you made a standard triangle wall the placing of his wf unit would not have come into question. In this circumstance, I don't think it is unfair for him to wf your cap next go, since all that happened really is that your plan did not work.

Edit: And just to clarify before you rage, I wouldn't count that wall as a 'cap wall' so he hasn't done anything wrong in wfing belguim that side.

im surprised that you would take this stance. By your logic the existence of belgium near my boarders makes it perfectly acceptable to interfere with walls on my territory turn 1. Whether it is a cap wall or not is irrelevant.

and to clarify the wf was placed on french territory as marked on the screenshot. There are plenty of witnesses.

Why be surprised that I don't agree with you, like I said you ran the risk by placing your units next to somewhere that is in my opinion a legitimate place to wf, If he had attempted to wall Belgium it would have had the same outcome.

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:34

Geschreven door b0nker2, 06.10.2014 at 23:30

Also question for you Lao, Had he fulled Belguim and left his trans in the channel between dover and calais area would you complain then when it fucked the north of your wall?

thats the same issue, they should pretend the wall is there since its on my territory. its like turk players who wf odessa turn 1 but pretend its there.

a question for you in return. if i attempted to make the same wall on ankara in turkey, and an opponent as ukraine placed a bomber on the water just at turks boarder to break the circle wall on turks territory, would you find that acceptable?

Yes I personally would find it acceptable. Either way its a failed plan, just hit all sides of that wall and chances are you will still be wallfucked with your rewall.

If your wall interferes with a unit (on different territory) and enters that unit's proximity range, your wall wont connect.
After that fact, knowing that the unit is not in france, and the "WF" was legitimate, the opposing player can now enter a unit into France. If that player chooses to put that unit near Paris, so be it.

Too say that the player should act as if the wall is there, knowing that the your wall being broken is legitimate,is just ludicrous!

as an aside; The player who is choosing to make a circle wall, also has the choice to make a 3man wall around his/her cap within that circle wall. This tends to be a better choice for those who make their walls a little too big, and may possibly interfere with other players units.

Geschreven door clovis1122, 06.10.2014 at 23:27

I support laochra in this time. But meh... community will do nothing about it. There are no "rules". Commando did the same to me.

Your support to Loachra is clearly bias. Support denied :p

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:29

Geschreven door b0nker2, 06.10.2014 at 23:24

I think in this circumstance your opponents intention was to WF Belguim, you ran the risk of it being wfed by making it so close to a city that is perfectly fine to wf, had you made a standard triangle wall the placing of his wf unit would not have come into question. In this circumstance, I don't think it is unfair for him to wf your cap next go, since all that happened really is that your plan did not work.

Edit: And just to clarify before you rage, I wouldn't count that wall as a 'cap wall' so he hasn't done anything wrong in wfing belguim that side.

im surprised that you would take this stance. By your logic the existence of belgium near my boarders makes it perfectly acceptable to interfere with walls on my territory turn 1. Whether it is a cap wall or not is irrelevant.

and to clarify the wf was placed on french territory as marked on the screenshot. There are plenty of witnesses.

The SS you have provided is not from a Clan War match. A private match we should add.
Had it been so dramatic and against the rules, you would have taken a SS at the time it happened.
There are plenty of witnesses.. hahaha. all in illyria?

Geschreven door b0nker2, 06.10.2014 at 23:34

Why be surprised that I don't agree with you, like I said you ran the risk by placing your units next to somewhere that is in my opinion a legitimate place to wf, If he had attempted to wall Belgium it would have had the same outcome.

if he had wf'd belgium from the other side this would never have been an issue. this should never have been a risk.

I really just dont understand where you guys are coming from on this or what logic youre applying, it basically fucks with the standards i have maintained since i begun playing competitively.

So youre saying its perfectly ok to wf on an another persons territory turn 1, as long as its not a cap wall and the wf remains outside the territory?

Quote:

Quote:

dont be ridiculous, the standard rule is to not invade an opponents territory turn 1, since waters arent attributed to certain countries in this game in colour, we can ignore their relevance to this rule.

In that case as a Spain or Italy vs France we cannot put units onto Corsica as it is french land.

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:41

Geschreven door b0nker2, 06.10.2014 at 23:34

Why be surprised that I don't agree with you, like I said you ran the risk by placing your units next to somewhere that is in my opinion a legitimate place to wf, If he had attempted to wall Belgium it would have had the same outcome.

if he had wf'd belgium from the other side this would never have been an issue. this should never have been a risk.

I really just dont understand where you guys are coming from on this or what logic youre applying, it basically fucks with the standards i have maintained since i begun playing competitively.

So youre saying its perfectly ok to wf on an another persons territory turn 1, as long as its not a cap wall and the wf remains outside the territory?

You are making your statements on false evidence. Shame.
You keep saying that the WF unit was on french territory, as a way to claim an intentional WF.
This is not the case,
A WF was on Belgium, interrupted your wall because it came too close, and now you are crying foul on forums. Its just un-called for.

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:41

Geschreven door b0nker2, 06.10.2014 at 23:34

Why be surprised that I don't agree with you, like I said you ran the risk by placing your units next to somewhere that is in my opinion a legitimate place to wf, If he had attempted to wall Belgium it would have had the same outcome.

if he had wf'd belgium from the other side this would never have been an issue. this should never have been a risk.

I really just dont understand where you guys are coming from on this or what logic youre applying, it basically fucks with the standards i have maintained since i begun playing competitively.

So youre saying its perfectly ok to wf on an another persons territory turn 1, as long as its not a cap wall and the wf remains outside the territory?

Lao, his Wf was for Belguim, your plan failed. The only unofficial rule is not to intentionally WF cities. Which he didn't. I will repeat you ran the risk by having the wall that far out, if he had rushed paris turn 2 I also wouldn't have had a problem.

Geschreven door W4R_MaChINE, 06.10.2014 at 23:37

If your wall interferes with a unit (on different territory) and enters that unit's proximity range, your wall wont connect.
After that fact, knowing that the unit is not in france, and the "WF" was legitimate, the opposing player can now enter a unit into France. If that player chooses to put that unit near Paris, so be it.

Too say that the player should act as if the wall is there, knowing that the your wall being broken is legitimate,is just ludicrous!

as an aside; The player who is choosing to make a circle wall, also has the choice to make a 3man wall around his/her cap within that circle wall. This tends to be a better choice for those who make their walls a little too big, and may possibly interfere with other players units.

the wf was in france.

and your third point is ridiculous, even if id made the inner wall that turn you still wouldve ignored the circle wall and wallfucked it.

Geschreven door W4R_MaChINE, 06.10.2014 at 23:40

The SS you have provided is not from a Clan War match. A private match we should add.
Had it been so dramatic and against the rules, you would have taken a SS at the time it happened.
There are plenty of witnesses.. hahaha. all in illyria?

whether there are witnesses inside or outside illyria is irrelvant, your own integrity is in question, the wf was on the france side of belgium and on french territoy, if you deny this you are simply a liar.

Irregardless your whole attitude to this has just pissed me off in general.

And don't try to twist what I said please.

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:47

Geschreven door W4R_MaChINE, 06.10.2014 at 23:37

If your wall interferes with a unit (on different territory) and enters that unit's proximity range, your wall wont connect.
After that fact, knowing that the unit is not in france, and the "WF" was legitimate, the opposing player can now enter a unit into France. If that player chooses to put that unit near Paris, so be it.

Too say that the player should act as if the wall is there, knowing that the your wall being broken is legitimate,is just ludicrous!

as an aside; The player who is choosing to make a circle wall, also has the choice to make a 3man wall around his/her cap within that circle wall. This tends to be a better choice for those who make their walls a little too big, and may possibly interfere with other players units.

the wf was in france.

and your third point is ridiculous, even if id made the inner wall that turn you still wouldve ignored the circle wall and wallfucked it.

Geschreven door W4R_MaChINE, 06.10.2014 at 23:40

The SS you have provided is not from a Clan War match. A private match we should add.
Had it been so dramatic and against the rules, you would have taken a SS at the time it happened.
There are plenty of witnesses.. hahaha. all in illyria?

whether there are witnesses inside or outside illyria is irrelvant, your own integrity is in question, the wf was on the france side of belgium, if you deny this you are simply a liar.

Irregardless your whole attitude to this has just pissed me off in general.

How would my third point be ridiculous? It's based on simple logic.
Yes I would still ignore your outer wall, because technically, it doesnt exist. Why would I sit and let you rewall your outer wall? LOL?
--------------------------------------------------------------
I'm just stating that your witnesses are those who were either playing the cw, or illyrian spectators, which creates bias.

" if you deny this you are simply a liar. " This just makes me laugh.
I would like a bit of proof before you start making statements like this.
It's very easy to get on forums, take a SS from a private match and say "This happened".
Just stop. this is all conjecture at best.

Geschreven door b0nker2, 06.10.2014 at 23:45

Geschreven door Permamuted, 06.10.2014 at 23:41

Geschreven door b0nker2, 06.10.2014 at 23:34

Why be surprised that I don't agree with you, like I said you ran the risk by placing your units next to somewhere that is in my opinion a legitimate place to wf, If he had attempted to wall Belgium it would have had the same outcome.

if he had wf'd belgium from the other side this would never have been an issue. this should never have been a risk.

I really just dont understand where you guys are coming from on this or what logic youre applying, it basically fucks with the standards i have maintained since i begun playing competitively.

So youre saying its perfectly ok to wf on an another persons territory turn 1, as long as its not a cap wall and the wf remains outside the territory?

Lao, his Wf was for Belguim, your plan failed. The only unofficial rule is not to intentionally WF cities. Which he didn't. I will repeat you ran the risk by having the wall that far out, if he had rushed paris turn 2 I also wouldn't have had a problem.

so by your logic it would appear that it is ok to wf walls on an opponents territory as long as you find a way to do so without invading their territory? that basically renders all non inland and city walls on an opponents territory useless.

i believe you will find many conflicting opinions to your view bonk, and not just inside the competitive community. Id imagine quite an outcry from most players if you are to carry out what youre describing on them.

Quote:

Geschreven door W4R_MaChINE, 06.10.2014 at 23:52

whether there are witnesses inside or outside illyria is irrelvant, your own integrity is in question, the wf was on the france side of belgium, if you deny this you are simply a liar.

Irregardless your whole attitude to this has just pissed me off in general.

How would my third point be ridiculous? It's based on simple logic.
Yes I would still ignore your outer wall, because technically, it doesnt exist. Why would I sit and let you rewall your outer wall? LOL?
--------------------------------------------------------------
I'm just stating that your witnesses are those who were either playing the cw, or illyrian spectators, which creates bias.

" if you deny this you are simply a liar. " This just makes me laugh.
I would like a bit of proof before you start making statements like this.
It's very easy to get on forums, take a SS from a private match and say "This happened".
Just stop. this is all conjecture at best.

i didnt take an ss of tthat wf, lucky you, if this was in court i would be laughed out of it. but we're not in court we're on a game forum, and its your own honesty thats in question, i dont give a fuck what you want the community to think, i know that unit was on my territory, you know it was. But you deny it to what, save face? i dont believe you did it intentionally, but i dislike how you're now lying about how it happened under the absense of proof.

congratulations, youve just been added to my shitlist.

Please stop saying what my logic is..... My logic in THIS circumastance, which is what you are asking, is that you made your wall too close to somewhere that was legitimiate to wf. If he had put the wf unit on the G of Belguim you would have they same situation. If that was the case and you complained then you would be laughed off the forum. Your only sticking point is the the unit is touching (barely I might add) french soil.