Gypsy rewall

Can we forbid this kind of rewall? It has same purpose like rewall does. Placing another wall on same place/city where you had wall last turn. Doesn't matter if the wall was broken or not. The 3 units next to your city are placed there for only one purpose - to wall your city. So if those units get wfed you should not be allowed to make a new wall. Otherwise the other player needs to attack the unit of that broken wall to prevent auto wall + put a new unit to wf a new wall. So it's the same cost as rewall. I've seen many people do it in cws and it's not fun to play against. It's just dirty but they can defend themselves and say it's not defined in cw rules.
Pic 1 - normal wfed wall
">
Pic 2 - new wall
">

Real name for any kinds of rewall is ratwalls.

RATWALLERS are worst kind of players.

No

Yes do ban.
it is kind of sad how people even do these stupid little tricks which pretty much destroy the spirit of the game.
this isn't hard or clever.
it's just stupid as fuck and ruins the fun for everyone.

i literally can't see how this could be fun for anyone

I don't see autowalling as being a problem because its commonsense to attack one of those units to prevent it from happening, but when someone removes those units and places new ones there its closer to a rewall as the only way to prevent it is the same tactic as preventing a rewall.

Kirjoittanut gothboy, 28.04.2021 at 12:18

this isn't hard or clever.
it's just stupid as fuck and ruins the fun for everyone.

i literally can't see how this could be fun for anyone

Full support.

3v3s became long wall and rewall simulator since long wall upgrade. Its funny since comp players in 2014-5 would mock RP players for wall spams.

I don't see the problem here. u wf his wall and he makes new wall. u both have broken it. no use crying from one perspective