Posts from Round table

I ask you to pay attention to the Rule: "Penetration is prohibited." That is, based on a literal interpretation, if it were possible not to break through the guard at the entrance to the Teleport (Underground) from your spawn point, it would not be considered a violation (not breaking through the guard at the entrance to the Teleport (Underground), since the guard at the entrance to the Teleport (Underground) is located on the spawn point from which the Player leaves, but not breaking through the guard on the other side of the Teleport (Underground) - I consider unacceptable, because not breaking through the exit from the Teleport (Underground) is identical to the concept of "penetrating another spawn point" without breaking through the guard of that spawn point, i.e., it entails a violation of the Rules.

Well, this has become an argument for the sake of an argument :) But according to your logic, if I'm playing, say, as Castle and going to Snow, and there are two guards, one of which is strictly on Grass and the other strictly on Snow, then it turns out it's not necessary to beat the Grass one, but it is necessary to beat the Snow one. Correct? But this contradicts your own position that you cannot beat the far guard without first beating the near one :) In short, you could break your head over this, it's a clear gap in the rules. For now, I think it would be absolutely logical to allow beating any one guard in any case to gain access to another respawn (in that spot) — IMHO, that would be clear and fair.

I once had a case of a double guard on a secondary town, positioned so that breaking through the first one allowed you to slip past to the secondary's respawn, but you couldn't get back — you had to beat the second one. I was playing as Castle, and the second one was nasty — not a given that I would have broken through. I ran to the secondary, fought with marksmen at the secondary and with cavaliers at my native respawn in the first week — how can this be interpreted???

It's not about the four-sided maps. Here's another example. Let's say the game is on a popular map. The Guard Tower is in the elevator. On one side, it's an easy target, like Hydras, and on the other, it's guarded by Phoenixes. Let's say one of the players kills the Hydras, and on the other side, the guard is moved. So, he's sitting there, waiting for the right moment to take the Castle. I don't understand why the moved guard should fight according to the rules, but this advantage isn't.

You're getting something wrong. First, explain what you mean by "sitting and waiting" - what's the meaning and how would it look? Does the opponent see the shifted Guardian from the start, or am I missing something? Second, the second player, whose territory the shifted Guardian is in, isn't blind either and sees that it's shifted. They can also see the opponent emerging from the teleport (by the way, shifted Guardians don't seem to appear in the lifts) for a second. (In the Underworld, you can even see the opponent's moves on the visible territory) - so it's unclear how this supposed trick would work, and even if it did, you need to be ready for the Guardian to be attacked. And a player who attacks the Guardian early has the right to certain bonuses. So stop overcomplicating things!

This is a completely incomprehensible discussion...
As far as I understand, the teleport guardian (as well as the metro guardian) consists of two parts (and therefore, both parts are slightly weaker than one whole guardian) - so you need to attack both parts of the guardian.

A generally incomprehensible discussion...
As far as I understand, the teleport guard (like the guard in the metro) consists, by definition, of two parts (accordingly, both parts are a bit weaker than one whole guard) — accordingly, you need to defeat both parts of the guard.

Where does this information come from?

I consider it necessary to extend this rule to Teleports=Underground as well.