Runes of Magic US / AU

I seriously doubt they would ban the Honor Guard for choosing to attack an opponents gate. Don't know why they would even consider it. Flame Towers and Electric Towers also attack gates, as do the regular tower guards, always have. Now, Faces of Treachery used to attack gates up until a year or so ago, they did fix that, one would think they would have fixed the others at the same time if they believed it an "exploit".

yeah it would be interesting if your Honor Guard got banned and you couldn't deploy him for 30 days

Here is the link with the GM statement. Basically the first sentence says

Quoted

At the moment destroying gates using a Honor Guard is NOT legal.

Devil knows what "At the moment" means in this sentence but my best guess is "Until we think about it again and determine otherwise, for now [destroying gates using a Honor Guard is NOT legal.]".

The general reaction of players is "Wait. What? Why?".

The story behind it, as I understand it is as follows: it seems that there were some threads on the German forum (Ehrenwache läuft im BK durch Tore) about using a Honor Guard, if I understand correctly, for destroying buildings inside the castle without destroying gates. This lead to more and more people (mostly from German servers) considering more generally pulling a Honor Guard as always something fishy. While the others kept using it as a part of their tactics. At some point it lead to ppl being called cheaters on a regular basis just for pulling the Honor Guard to the opponents' gate.

The way I look at this is:
* it's not strange that a Honor Guard attacks an enemy's gate if he is close to it (just as Auros said above, flame towers do the same);
* pulling a Honor Guard to the gate is not such an easy thing; you basically have to have huge dominance at the war anyway or opponents have to act really silly not defending the area around their castle.

So it's probably predominantly used only to finish faster a war you were overwhelmingly winning anyway. And it is something that requires skill and time, and the whole plot can be easily interrupted by the opponents.

I really don't see the point in classifying pulling the Guard to gates as an illegal action. Especially that I have not seen more severe ninja-bad-ass things (like destroying the throne through the walls) called illegal in as an explicit way...

Oh, yeah, and so far in the discussion following the GM statement on the Polish forum there was not a single player supporting this (as far as I understand - preliminary) statement/decision.

But it would be interesting to hear what you guys think.

It was stated a long time ago, on US forums, that it is not a legal action to intentionally draw honor guard to enemy gate. If it gets there by TRUE accident, then that's one thing, but laying towers in a line toward gate clearly shows your intent to force honor guard there.

I'll try to see if I can find the post...

Who would get banned? The entire guild? The herald?
Who is to say it is on purpose? There ARE some pretty clear cut and dry cases where it is obvious, but some not might not be on purpose.
What about if the opposing guild instigates it by putting towers next to their gates to lure your guards to their gate and then take a picture of just the guards attacking the gate? Would you be responsible?


Too many questions to take into account when dealing with this.
Allow us to keep doing it or get Runewaker to make it so guards can't deal damage to gates. Don't ban people on such questionable offenses.

Quoted from "BlankMinded"

It was stated a long time ago, on US forums, that it is not a legal action to intentionally draw honor guard to enemy gate. [...]
I'll try to see if I can find the post...

Yeah, I would be really grat if you could find it back. I couldn't find any statement from GMs on the forum...

As far as players opinions go, it seems that you had here several threads from 2012 where in general players lean towards NOT looking at this a as a cheat:
* thread 1

Quoted from "thebadtouch09/Darwec"

Quoted

1. Using tower guards to take down a gate, cheat or not?

1. Either they took a lot of effort chaining electric towers (Which you should 1-2 shot) or someone ran back away form the guards to your gate. Not a cheat, just lots of work, or a really bad mistake on your part.

and later in the same thread:

Quoted from "L3g3nd"

Everything except #3 [3. Placing flames, etc where they can not be hit, ie in walls] I would consider as strategics.

* another thread

Quoted from "ipeacefrog"

Legit Strat.

* and yet another one

Quoted from "Malignatus"

Pulling the guards away from the towers, however one does it, is *not* an exploit, Mega. (I hate it when anyone screams "exploit" at the drop of a hat, especially with the self-willingness to drop the hat.) It may seem unethical to use flame or electric towers to pull the guards from a tower your team has just occupied over to the opponent's castle gate by using flame/electric towers, but it's long been an accepted tactic. I've done it myself, no shame in admitting to taking advantage of something that's built into the game.

In the same threads there are a few lone voices leaning otherwise but their opinion seems less well grounded. But in neither of these threads was there a GM saying it is illegal.

So: has something changed since 2012??? BlankMinded, are you sure that the statement you think of was not about using a Honor Guard to destroy buildings inside the castle without destroying the gates?

Update: here someone says that he chatted with GMs of other communities and they said clearly that using Honor Guard this way is OK.

Which seems to match the general opinion of the players (see the links above).

Update from Pl community - PlTeam has withdrawn this rule, till uniformization the one set of rules for all the communities.
So it looks that it is still legal.

Yep, here is the official info from Celes (insieme con Sis - CM di tutti CMs): until uniform rules are announced for all servers, the preliminary announcement that it is illegal is removed.

Which indirectly, preliminarily, temporarily etc. but kind of almost clearly implies that for now it is legit.