Clarifcation on Wall-Glitching(Admins pls read)

So heres the thing, removing a wall and rewalling with units from elsewhere or wallglitching as it has grown to be called truly a glitch/bug?

the mechanics of it seem to be this, a wf is sent at the wall, the wall is moved elsewhere, the wf either

1. Follows the wall
2. doesnt move at all
3. tb's the wall an successfully wallfucks

but heres the thing, then theoretically, if you move the unit to beside the wall, then attack the wall as a second movement, if tb'ing the wall fails, shouldnt the wf remain in place beside the city to wf the new wall? sice you minimised the range of the wf it wont follow the units. thus being a counter to the so called wallglitch?

unfortunately though on testing, i found this failed, the wallfuck remained inside the city i sent it from.

unless i am very much mistaken in my understand of how the mechanics "should" work, this is a bug, and it needs to be fixed as its too prevalent an issue.

for example i was playing as uk vs an opponent, i walled germany with inf and capped it, next turn i hadnt enough units to cap austria, i had 5 inf, so i sent the inf from the wall and rewalled with the less valuable militia inside my capital.

then unfortunately my opponent was like "wtf you wg??!?".

so should i not have capped austria just to not accidently exploit a bug against my opponent?

the mechanics of the rewalling is a clever little tactic given the game mechanics, but my counter should also work. 2 units to ensure the breaking of the wall should not be necessary.

while this bug has that counter, it should not be necessary, and the bug should be addressed and fixed or at least put up as a high priority.

then finally it wont be necessary for tourneys to dictate a no wallglitching rule, and we wont have to hear players complaining about it.

Inb4 tl;dr

I don't think it should be considered a bug, just a cheap little tactic that should be fixed. Its quite annoying.

I tested it laochra. And it's a bug imo. I don't see it as a tactic more then a cheap move.

People seem to have an opinion on whether it is a bug or not. it either is or it isnt, only the admins can provide clarification.

i dont believe the wallfucking unit should remain in the city when the wall is removed, i believe it should remain in its' last location, so moving the wf beside the wall before actually attacking the wall should be a sufficient counter

I don't think it's a bug, it's linked in with the TBs etc - I've had times when I attack a place and my whole stack goes to another. However I only think it's a cheap tactic if it's done on your capital wall...

eg. If I walled Serbia with inf and wanted to use that inf, since it would be a waste, I would use them to attack/wf or do whatever. - This isn't necessarily a tactic, just using units more efficiently.

From what older players have said, I think it was the exploiting of a bug once, but they fixed that, and the name has stuck. It's here and one can complain about it as much as one wants, but nothing will happen. I personally don't see why everyone is so angry with wg, and used to use it for the purposes of using the units to wall somewhere else, but I make sure I don't do it now out of courtesy.

The people that are the most irritated with wg are the people who don't like walls in general, and don't believe making walls is a valid tactic.

Nice post Laochra! I agree with everything you said. Failed TBs should go to the destination. That would fix part of the problem. Finally, this in particular, is why it would be silly to ban rewalling:

Geschreven door Permamuted, 17.02.2014 at 22:48

for example i was playing as uk vs an opponent, i walled germany with inf and capped it, next turn i hadnt enough units to cap austria, i had 5 inf, so i sent the inf from the wall and rewalled with the less valuable militia inside my capital.

then unfortunately my opponent was like "wtf you wg??!?".

so should i not have capped austria just to not accidently exploit a bug against my opponent?

Lao..
THREAD Nº 12321! HUE YEAH.

Hmm, my english kinda sucks so I couldn't get it. How can a wf attack a wall? What do you exactly mean by wf?

Geschreven door Permamuted, 18.02.2014 at 15:05

Geschreven door Grimm, 18.02.2014 at 14:18

Failed TBs should go to the destination.

or providing they dont have the range to reach the destination, they should remain in the last position they were moved to before they actually attacked the wall.

Geschreven door Guest, 18.02.2014 at 14:19

Lao..
THREAD Nº 12321! HUE YEAH.

Hmm, my english kinda sucks so I couldn't get it. How can a wf attack a wall? What do you exactly mean by wf?

stop being autistic, you know well what i mean, even if you do speak paraguay, and all other wallglitch threads have been created to moan about its usage, i want to have it actually addressed by the admins, is the mechanics of it actually what they had intended? to me it wouldnt seem so

I'm not being autistic You mean, attacking the wall?

Think of it as a first turn wf.

Whether it's a glitch or not it's still not accepted by the community and is a tactic that should not be used.

Geschreven door Fockmeeard, 18.02.2014 at 22:17

Whether it's a glitch or not it's still not accepted by the community and is a tactic that should not be used.

It's not accepted by some members of the community. Many others, including veteran players, think it's fine. There's no consensus on whether or not it shouldn't be used. Also, you can't really ban it effectively, like you can 1st turn WF. See this topic for full discussion: http://fr.atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=9612

Geschreven door Permamuted, 18.02.2014 at 15:05

Geschreven door Grimm, 18.02.2014 at 14:18

Failed TBs should go to the destination.

or providing they dont have the range to reach the destination, they should remain in the last position they were moved to before they actually attacked the wall.

Yeah, that's what I meant. I didn't write it clearly. Strange how some failed TBs already behave this way and others don't...

Hard to say if the current mechanic is a bug or a feature...
Sure is, there was a bug which caused walls to become pretty much indestructable but this got fixed (removal of flower power). Now we are left with a mechanic that allows rewalling / wallglitching and might leave an inexperienced opponent very confused why he didnt break a wall. So one can see this as an unfair exploit but then again there are many
things new players cant cope with.

Geschreven door Fockmeeard, 18.02.2014 at 22:17

Think of it as a first turn wf.

Whether it's a glitch or not it's still not accepted by the community and is a tactic that should not be used.

I agree with this. Most members (that I know anyways) of this community don't accept wallglitching and therefore it should be considered a tactic that should not be used, and those that do wallglitch risk losing their reputation. Just like those who first turn wf.

I think I get it.
I understand that most of people consider this a "tactic", but I think it should still not work like this. Like you said, 2 units is too much. There is a way of wallfucking and breaking the wall at same time but I won't share it xD.

I think that units should never follow the wall, BUT, the problem is that if someone has a stack and a near unit attached to it, it will be considered as wall, and therefore, it would be exploitable to not to get attacked/turnblocked.

There's only one thing I don't understand, you said that if turnblocking the wall fails and you put an unit near, it won't wallfuck the new wall? For me, after testing, it did work. If I'm not wrong, sometimes when you put the unit too near to the city, next turn it may merge/attack a city/stack. If you zoom out, there are bigger chances to make it happen.

Geschreven door Permamuted, 19.02.2014 at 17:47

Geschreven door Guest, 19.02.2014 at 17:41

There's only one thing I don't understand, you said that if turnblocking the wall fails and you put an unit near, it won't wallfuck the new wall? For me, after testing, it did work. If I'm not wrong, sometimes when you put the unit too near to the city, next turn it may merge/attack a city/stack. If you zoom out, there are bigger chances to make it happen.

really? i tested it twice and both times the wf'ing unit remained in the city, rather than the last location i had it at before i actually attacked the wall?

Well, browser version and installed version are different - believe it or not. Let's test it later when I get on.

Geschreven door TheRiddler, 19.02.2014 at 11:00

Geschreven door Fockmeeard, 18.02.2014 at 22:17

Think of it as a first turn wf.
Whether it's a glitch or not it's still not accepted by the community and is a tactic that should not be used.

I agree with this. Most members (that I know anyways) of this community don't accept wallglitching and therefore it should be considered a tactic that should not be used, and those that do wallglitch risk losing their reputation. Just like those who first turn wf.

Again, this is not the case. The community is divided on the issue, with some of the best players in favor of rewalling (see http://fr.atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=9612). I'll say this again too: Even if we decided to ban it, how would you go about doing this effectively? Unlike 1st turn WF, you often can't tell if rewalling was done "on purpose" or not. Take the example from the OP for instance:

Geschreven door Permamuted, 17.02.2014 at 22:48

for example i was playing as uk vs an opponent, i walled germany with inf and capped it, next turn i hadnt enough units to cap austria, i had 5 inf, so i sent the inf from the wall and rewalled with the less valuable militia inside my capital.

then unfortunately my opponent was like "wtf you wg??!?".

so should i not have capped austria just to not accidently exploit a bug against my opponent?

Geschreven door Goblin, 20.02.2014 at 03:26

I cant stand people calling wg (rewalling) a tactic ...its a simple trick for god sake.

.