Talk:Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TODO[edit]

  • Add information on how much experience you get for each action.
  • Add more internal and external links.
  • Add screenshots.
I added a couple of screenshots to the main entry, and I've used one to illustrate the team killer entry. --Jacj 22:53, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add information on popular third party maps. Maybe different articles for different maps?
  • Add a section for generic map elements: vehicles, collectible objectives, major (permanent) destructibles, command posts and other constructibles/destructibles, team doors (including mention of uniform usage!) -- Perey 14:30, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Add information about team play (6vs6, 3vs3 mostly), stopwatch game. Clanbase and other leagues.
  • Add about how to set up a et/etpro server.
This might be better in a W:ET Wikibook. Anyone else interested in writing one? I saw one of those but cant remember where. -- Perey 20:36, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
It's not that complicated to setup a public/restricted et/etpro server. This game is alla about multiplayer and nothing about singleplayer so there is some use for at least to mention that part. --Svarvsven 21:25, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I'm not saying it's too complicated to put here. I'm saying that a how-to is not encyclopaedia material. Strategy guides are discouraged in Wikipedia game articles in favour of Wikibooks; I think the same should apply to details on setting up a server. -- Perey 18:56, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Ok, I see. Maybe then a sentance/section about that the software can be both client or server? Not the detailed how-to. --Svarvsven 00:31, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Are ET game screenshots copyrighted?
They are, but they may be used under fair use. --Jacj 22:53, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so --Ignignot 14:01, Aug 25, 2004 (UTC)
  • would ya do me a favour and add something about Engineers? Or even better, where do i get the info? Splash, cfg's? Also I'm always playin' one, i don't know exactly what you get for more XP... -TF-HellRaiser

Disputed changes[edit]

I changed the "Comparison to QW" part because the previous version said the gameplay was hugely different to WET, whereas in fact QW's gameplay is similar- the classes and objective based gameplay are the same. I also described the changes and cleaned up the comparison to Battlefield 2. - October 14th

I thought the bonuses gained from getting level 4 in experience in each class are available even when spawning as a different class. For example, non-medics with level 4 in medic experience will still have an adrenaline shot. Is this mod only for sure?

  • Battle Sense and binoculars: This is one I'd intended to test myself, but the most recent edit states that players 'can now also spot them with binoculars' (emphasis mine). Has the game changed lately? Or, as I suspect, is this an ETPro alteration? Not in etpro, but another mod.
  • Stabbing in/from the back: There was nothing wrong with the original wording; indeed, 'stab in the back' is the more conventional phrase.
  • MG42 crouch/lay: The alteration is incorrect. The soldier must be prone to deploy the MG.
  • Seawall Battery objectives: The 'and' is misleading, as it groups two separate objectives (the assault ramp and the bunker).
  • Gold Rush objectives: The edit 'with the truck'/'with it in the truck' seems redundant, and I think the older form reads better.
  • Würzburg Radar objectives: Again, 'and' has replaced punctuation, misleadingly grouping objectives. (The defence of one entrance does not hinge on the defence of the other, for instance.)
  • Fuel Dump objectives: Both gate and grate are correct, referring to separate targets.

I'm changing the MG42 and Fuel Dump entries now. If there's no discussion on the others, I'll edit or revert them after about a week. -- Perey 11:22, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

  • Just go ahead, it isn't like this is the evolution page or something. --Ignignot 21:59, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)
  • on the Seawall Battery map, the objective of capturing the bunker and constructing the assault ramp comes hand in hand, what's the point of constructing the ramp if you are not going to get the bunker?!? -__-
    • Easy: slip a small force in behind the defenders, who continue to spawn at the bunker (and are thus further from the gun controls) if they're not alert.
  • concerning the 'and' operator, and simiply groups similar things in nature together, defending this entrance is the same as defending the other entrance.
    • It's not. If this were an itemised list, they would be separate items.
  • stabbing in/from the back...-___- need i say more? who cares it's one word, go ahead if you want to reverse the change.
  • with the truck/with it in the truck ... OKAY

if you feel THAT strongly about how the original wording 'sounded better', then go ahead i cannot stop you from altering it anyways. Have fun. — LegolasGreenleaf 03:04, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

Hey, no point being defensive about it. Sure, several points are minor and pedantic, but the same can be said of the changes themselves, no? I don't 'feel THAT strongly' about them that I didn't invite some discussion first. -- Perey 11:22, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

  • I think it is important to remember the Be Bold rule in wikipedia. Just make the changes, if someone really doesn't like them then open up discussion. Also, maybe the objectives for each map should be put into an itemized list? I should have thought of that when I first wrote the section. --Ignignot 14:51, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)
    • Sometimes being too bold may have led a few misguided people to vandalize some pages, notably Wayne Gretzky's page, the great hockey player. If you were to take a look at its history, you'd be surprised by how many times trolls have BOLDLY modified the pages...lol... — LegolasGreenleaf 02:59, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)
  • Minor objectives in several maps include mention to build command post for each team, but not to destroy the other teams command post (sometimes there is only one shared command post). For example in the description of Oasis. Another funny detail could be found in Fuel Dump where allied team have 1 mg nest built (outside 1st spawn), then they can build one outside ammo/medic racks and finally build one near their command post. All these these three can be ruined by Axis dynamite/satchel/nade (and rebuilt by Allied). Axis can build two MG Towers that Allied can dynamite/satchel. --Svarvsven 21:36, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • But it's important to note that the command posts are always listed as objectives in the game's objective list, while the mg nests never are. Personally, I wouldn't list mg nest-related things here, either. Aquillion 07:01, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Previous modifications, such as the popular ET Pro competition mod, couldn't change much." what is the purpose of this sentance? It doesnt make sense since ET Pro competition mod is based on the same source that was later released to the public. However, ET Pro was never considered to be a "fun" mod and had no such intentions to make any radical changes (like you would expect to see in some other mods). --Svarvsven 21:36, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • I thought I might just point out that MGs can also be damaged by continual knifing.

Yes, and thank you for letting us know how much time you spend on this game =] XD. I always wonder why sometimes people can kill me so fast (like, 3 or 4 shots)...even from a distance away... with the regular MP40 or Thompson..there's no way they can be THAT accurate unless there's some aimbot... -__-" LG-犬夜叉 21:48, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)

  • Please, this is not a page about my aim I hope? Cause it aint that much to brag about. Besides, anyone can bring down any other player with 3-4 HeadShots by aim or luck without any aimbot involved at all. Thats why players respawn after a short while anyway. About my remark on the on the source is due to I've recently made some changes in source (ie, creating a fun mod with slow panzers and sticky nades - oh worse; now he is a haxxor) that will never be released...then I came across the fact that ET Pro is based on the same source, however Bani (creator of ET Pro) got it earlier than the public release. This gives me a new idea though, the topic about aimbots and false accusations...nw, its a waste of time anyway. :) --Svarvsven 22:09, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Expansion or standalone?[edit]

Please read the News & Press archives at [1]. Enemy Territory had a chequered development lifetime, being variously conceived as a standalone, an expansion, commercial, free...

In any case, the reverted edits are wrong. It was at times (for instance, at the point when single-player was cancelled - see February 2003 at the above site) intended as an expansion to RtCW, even if at other times before and after it was meant as a standalone. And it is certainly in no discernable way set in the Wolfenstein universe. I have yet to visit any castles, foil any supernatural plots or shoot anything non-human in ET! (Unless one counts Medic-revived players as undead...) -- Perey 00:09, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The Cheats Dispute[edit]

  • I as a random browser and an active player would like to add that it has been stated by a ClanBase supervisor (Killerboy) who could be considered an "official source" that to his estimates approximately 10% of current players (on ETPro, the competitive mod) cheat currently. That is quite many, but it's complex as the cheating is more common in other groups of users than some. For example, polish players are very often thought to have cheats. While it might sound racism, I personally have bumped onto very many cheating polish teams in 6vs6 that I can't even be surprised by polish cheaters anymore. Many I have busted with the "PunkBuster screenshot" -facility which takes screenshots of how a player sees their game, and therefore is ideal for catching wallhackers (players who run a cheat that allows them to see other players through walls), although modern cheats usually have "Pbscreen blockers" that compromise this anti-cheat. I think the usual story is that one player in the team gets their hands on a cheat, and then distributes it to every other member of the team, urging them to start using it. It's a shame though.

Also there was a mod in development, AntiPro, to stop cheating. To my understanding it used quite advanced detections for cheats and could catch most nowadays undetected cheats. The developer stopped making it some days ago, stating that he had "Problems in real life". It was told that the anticheat part of the mod was already completely ready, the mod itself only requiring a bit of server-side tweaking and fixing of a few minor bugs. 84.251.5.184 (talk) 13:32, 22 December 2009 (UTC)Unregistered author[reply]

I've removed this section several times; perhaps it is time to discuss it. I haven't seen any evidence, though, that cheating is "particularly present" in ET, or indeed that it is a significent problem on any of the major public, PB-protected servers at all. I admit that to me, the claims made seemed so plainly counterfactual that I waited perhaps longer than I should have to come here and discuss them. In any case, I've now tried to edit the Cheats section into some sembience of accuracy. Please reply here with some proof of a serious cheating problem before changing it again. Aquillion 01:32, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for at last talking about it. I believe cheats is plenty appropriate for an article about an online game, and chain deleting it is not the answer. Now as to the actual content, feel free to contribute, but claiming it doesn't exist when in fact it's plainly visible, and I've personally seen several people admiting they cheat with aimbot wallhack etc, claiming on the article that it's a non-issue is not acceptable. And for the record I was always on pb-enabled servers. In fact you may notice messages on the console about "such and such as an outdated punkbuster version". The default config is to let them connect. Anyways I'm done, hopefully we can have meaningful edits instead of deletions from now on.Elfguy 02:54, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am glad that you, too, have stopped this unconstructive revert-war and finally agreed to come to talk; but I am still confused as to why you think devoting an entire section to cheats is necessary here. Most other first person shooters (Battlefield 1942, America's Army, Quake, Quake II, and Quake III Arena, for instance) make no mention of software cheats whatsoever. Even Counter-Strike only mentions it as part of the game's culture; mentioning it there is understandable given the impact Counter-Strike cheats had on its culture and gaming culture as a whole. The same is not true for Enemy territory; cheating and anti-cheat have no unique significence in this game, and there is no evidence for your original assertions that the cheating problem is "particularly present" in ET or that it has had any impact whatsoever on the game's popularity. Given that, why do you think that a specific cheats section here is approprate? Anti-cheat measures like punkbuster, server admins who hunt cheaters, and random accusations about aimbots are all common among modern first person shooters; there is no reason why any of that would warrent particular mention here. Aquillion 03:30, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Frankly because out of all the online games I've played, I never saw so many cheaters as on ET. And I've played it on and off for over 2 years. While that may not prove much, and I don't know which other online games articles have cheat sections, maybe more should, I'm not giving an opinion on that, I just think one is needed here. Elfguy 03:50, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • I played it years ago, and I never found many cheaters. Maybe I'm just naive, and the few players that were better than me were actually cheating, but I never found any outrageous acts that weren't apparently due to skill. In any case, I don't think that cheating warrants more than a couple sentences at most in this article. Mentioning that cheating exists in the game, and there are measures in place to try to prevent it should be enough. --Ignignot 21:00, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
  • Er, Elfguy, why did you suddenly come back and revert the cheats section without comment after an entire month? I was under the impression that you were alright with that version, and the limited discussions here don't seem to support the one you reverted to. --Aquillion 15:37, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Because the section went from 3 paragraphs saying it's an issue to 1 paragraph saying it's a non-issue. Elfguy 19:14, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, but so far we have at least two people on talk saying it's a non-issue, and only you claiming that it's an issue. Please at least cite specific sources showing that it's such a significent issue before reinstating your version of that section again; you certainly can't claim that cheats are a huge issue based exclusively on your own experiences. If you want to claim that cheats are "particularly present", link to articles addressing the prevalence of cheats; if you want to claim that they impacted the game's popularity, link to (at least) forums with huge numbers of people complaining or unfavorable reviews or something like that. Even sources that wouldn't usually be good enough (like random internet forums) might be OK for a freeware game; but you can't just use your own experience as the basis for controversal claims like that. --Aquillion 20:43, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • I went and dug up some reviews myself; here are the current top five Google hits for enemy territory review, in order: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] Not one of them names cheats as a problem (if it's as bad as you say, it would top a reviewer's list of complaints); one, the Gamespy one, even says about the kinds of players you encounter: "The game features Punkbuster anti-cheat support, callvotes, and a mini-grief system that allows players to lodge complaints against team-killers (friendly fire is almost always on), and is a bit more robust than most games in this regard." Although it goes on to note that some problems still do exist, that hardly supports your assertion that cheats are a "particular problem" in ET. --Aquillion 22:03, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • I don't care about 3 years old reviews of the first version. Have you played the game on 2.6 ETpro servers? Did you see the people with consistant 100+ kills spamming a spawn point with nonstop artilery fire every half second? Have you seen the snipers in open maps kill you in 2 shots from a distance so far away you can't even see him? How about that guy who can jump around non stop yet kill 5 enemy players one after the other without even looking. Just playing the game on non newbie servers will show you cheaters in a matter of hours. Elfguy 16:48, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
          • I have both seen and done most of the things you describe without cheating (although not regularly.) Arty spawn spam is a map-design issue and a server-settings issue, not a cheat; some spawns are out in the open, and many servers manually tweak fop command energy regeneration in unfortunate ways. Any sniper who, with a good position, can't kill someone in two shots from outside their view every now and then shouldn't be using a sniper rifle at all; and people who jump around non-stop and kill five people in a row are almost certainly medics high on adrenaline. The best of them can rack up kills like that, and even weaker players can manage it now and then. All these things are features, not cheats. Furthermore, all of them are just your experiences; you can talk as much as you like about old reviews, but you yourself have yet to cite a single source. You cannot base an encyclopedia entry entirely on your own experiences, no matter how bad they were. If you want to write an encyclopedic section on cheats in ET, you must find a source for it. Any reputable source will do, I don't care at this point; but you can't attack the five reviews I cited as out-of-date and then provide nothing but your own hearsay as a response. As it stands now, those reviews are the only sources we have on the cheat situation in ET, and the encyclopedia article therefore must reflect what they say. --Aquillion 03:11, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
          • Additionally, as far as I can tell your analysis of PunkBuster is not in line with how PB actually behaves. According to their documentation (and their Wikipedia entry), PunkBuster updates automatically while the game is running; the ability to leap into a game with an outdated version of PunkBuster is therefore a feature, not an error, and does not reduce its effectiveness. --Aquillion 03:21, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • As far as I can tell, the most recent revert only changed the tone, and got rid of the section on how punkbuster isn't all that good. (Which I personally think is accurate. It attempts to slap a bandage on an essentially unsolvable problem, which just makes people trust when they should not.) Just because other games do not have sections on cheats does not mean that they should not, because in my experience almost all games with a dedicated fanbase will have them, and it will be an issue on all levels of play. In particular, the hardware cheats that allow you to see through walls would work for almost any first person shooter, and in another game, Quake 3 Fortress, also by Splash Damage, there were people that got caught using them in clan matches. There were certainly other people who did not get caught for it. Suggesting that it is rampant is unaccurate, I would say that it has cheating similar to other quake 3 engine games. I agree that many things that seem like cheating are in fact normal play, much to the amusement of the accused player. It is occasionally said that if you aren't being accused of cheating on a public server, you aren't any good. However, for every single method of detecting and removing a cheat, there is a way to get around it. For example, in ET when you are observing someone your ping matches theirs. If I made an aimbot (which I don't know how to do, but I do know this much) it would be smart to make it stop working when someone had an identical ping to me. Punkbuster's automatic update can have its bandwidth capped at such a low level that it would never actually update itself. Personally, I think the slightly apologist tone should be removed from the current edit (but don't put in the "everyone is cheating" tone of elfguy's edit) and just say that there are cheats, these are the cheats that might exist, here are the measures to combat them. Also, the article on online cheating needs to be reworked, but shouldn't be discussed here. --Ignignot 14:14, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh and in addition to what I wrote above, I would like to add that reviews on online sites are not, in my opinion, journalism or expert sources. With few exceptions the reviewer does not have a degree in journalism. Also the cheerleader style of writing is so pervasive in game reviews that I would be extremely suprised if they mentioned cheating at all, as I have seen no review ever do so for any game. Finally, the review is usually written when a game first comes out, before an online community has time to really develop. Basically, what I think it boils down to is the reviews you have cited as sources are no more expert than any random jerk who has played the game and can write on a website (for example, me or you). True, we should not do any original research, but there is some give in that rule. For all intents and purposes, we are experts on the topic, and the only sources I would give any credit to are either news sites about ET (for example, gaming leagues) or the splash damage employees themselves. --Ignignot 14:36, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, but its free! You have to note that at least! 68.223.198.100 16:09, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editing[edit]

this is starting to annoy me you all edited this artilce and didnt even place the needs, like Graphics Engine, Developled by, Published by, Ratings, Modes ect even if that isn't there There isn't any part for Requirements like graphics card, memory ect:-( ><ino 08:08, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Self-contradicting paragraph[edit]

The submachine guns paragraph first states that the Thompson and MG40 are identical, and then it goes on to specify how they are actually different. Which is it? I would change it, but I don't know which story is the correct one.Tommstein 10:27, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed some time ago. They are identical in ET, but were different in Return to Castle Wolfenstein. Mystman666 14:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sequel?[edit]

There is a small paragraph claiming that Enemy Territory: Quake Wars is a sequel to ET, however other than the two words in the name, the class-based gameplay and the same developer there is very little to tie them together. Generally, a sequel continues on within the same universe or with the same characters, however the paragraph itself notes that 'It will not carry on the location or the time setting from RTCW:ET but it will be set in the Quake universe.'

Is this paragraph even necessary? Chirikov 01:58, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External Links[edit]

I think the external links section has too many community boards in it. First off, there should be only English boards on the English wiki. Second, sites like these are often advertising driven, and could easily be ad spam. Any thoughts? --Ignignot 15:36, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The external links should be cleaned up, yes. While a tutorial on how to use the mortar might be useful for no the visitor of this page, allowing one such tutorial will open the floodgates to hundreds of such tutorials. Allowing one link to an ET community opens the floodgates to tens of community sites. I think we could condense it to just the official links, and maybe something like Planet Wolfenstein. -- Mystman666 (Talk) 08:26, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up the links again. There were about 5-6 links to sites with tutorials and such like was mentioned above. I think some unofficial sites might be warrented but I would want to discuss them here first. Planet Wolfenstein is quite possibly one of the best around and if there are no objections I will probably add that sometime this week. Sir hugo 12:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Back to this topic again. Below are the current links. I wish to remove the unidownload and zerowing.idsoftware.com(i know this might be official) because we dont need to tell people where to download a game, also I beleive the punkbuster and etpro links are better left in their own articles. Please voice an opinion.--Sir hugo 12:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO if you are going to include the et-pro mod link here then you should also include other major mods and mod sources like the bot community (http://forums.bots-united.com/index.php). On the otherhand create a seperate mod page for external lists to all mods, their communities and wiki's. -- TomTom

Someone re-added some German community site. That link has no place here (maybe it has a place on the german wiki, but most visitors here can't even read the link :S). I would say that a download location is very relevant to wikipedia, but that might just be the way that I use it. If I hear about a potentially interesting program, I check wikipedia for some info on it and a good place to download it (google also works but will probably return a lot of file-mirrors that are just crappy). Punkbuster is an integral part of the game so deserves a link. The ETPro link might be deleted, but in my experience (when I last played the game was some time ago..), the majority of servers were ETPro. Back in the day it felt as if having ETPro installed basically was a requirement to fully enjoy the game, so in that case a link is good, in my opinion. If the current situation if different (say... if less than 30% of all servers are ETPro), then the link might be removed. -- Mystman666 (Talk) 06:14, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up the links, if a mod is that notable it should get its own section and link from there. BJTalk 01:09, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hey guys, im not sure if im at the right spot (if im not, i apologise) but i would just like to request to put an external link to our clan page here on wiki, on the external link section of the Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory page ...it would be as follows: Lone Wolf Clan

i plan on making it fairly extencive, but dont have the time to finish it today...for the record, {LW} enforces a strict non swearing rule and cheaters are not allowed (as they are banned by both us and punkbuster) hence the reason G!X clan members are banned from our servers. well ok, thanks a lot guys.Lone Wolf Clan 21:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added links because I merged the article Enemy Territory Fortress into this article. -- Matthew Edwards 01:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

jaymod[edit]

the jaymod has lots more maps the the six here 65.87.45.242 20:44, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikify[edit]

I am going to tag this article as needing wikifing. It is excessively strategy guide oriented at the current time. I think it is a decent article but in no way a good article. Sir hugo 15:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Alex Schubert's fan site[edit]

I have twice removed Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory - Help Site by Alex Schubert from the external links section. First, Wikipedia is not a collection of links. Second, it is Wikipedia policy to not include fan links or, when necessary, include at most one or two. Finally, the specific link in question has virtually no content. It's completely non-noteable. --ElKevbo 04:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And that's my 3rd revert - I'm done for today. Add it again Mattrock1988 and you'll be in violation of the WP:3RR and I will report you. I apologize for threatening you but your unwillingness to even discuss this change is quite frustrating. :( --ElKevbo 19:05, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


ET Strategy Guide[edit]

http://velocity.lunarpages.com/ - "favorite" stategy guide often used as source of information in our clan ... should it be added to links? I think it might be good source of extra info/tips/tricks, as they are not in the article, at least not all of them :)Bilboq 17:28, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not for strategy guides or link farms. External links should used for information useful to the article such as one that talks about the history the influence ect. Other then those sites the official links will suffice for strategy information.Sir hugo 17:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, but this is by far the best resource. At the very least, it belongs more then the list of slang. I've played the game for countless hours, and I've never heard some of those terms. Backrape? Axeman89 00:17, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the slang should take a hike too. But I havent yet had the time to police it to see if it needs cleaning or to be shown the back door. I haven't looked at this guide yet so if we want to take an informal vote on the topic go ahead. I will stay out of the voting till I get a chance to see the guide. If you are for it then just state something to that effect.Sir hugo 12:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the slang should stay... I was the one who added it! Almost every term on there I have seen used inside servers. Some do need to be corrected, like the proclaimed difference between spawn camping and killing. However it is genuine info and if you haven't heard the terms you haven't had experience in popular ET servers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.5.177.46 (talk) 08:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

new wep[edit]

there is a M97 shotgun now in the game ````

Is it in the regular game or one of the mods? If it is in a mod it doesnt warrent addition to this page just to that mods page if it has one. Remeber this should be encyclopedic.--Sir hugo 11:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a mod, but most servers are adding it now so it might be worth a mention. Code E 01:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should create a small section for notable mods then? Have their name and a brief description. All mods that will be added must be discussed and some sort of verifiable link needs to be provided for each one, hopefully that mods official page.Sir hugo 12:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think listing the mods with links to their respective Wikipedia page is sufficient. If we start listing mods and their "features" it will quickly grow into something much larger than a "small section". Just IMHO. As for the shotgun, it's a jaymod-only thing (although no quarter has something similar it isn't really finalized yet), and "most" servers aren't adding it. ETPro/ETPub (no shotgun) both have more users and servers than Jaymod (http://et.tjw.org/ets/stats/current/mb/mods.html). 67.184.132.1 23:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Player names[edit]

I don't think the mention of specific players in the slang section is really necessary. For instance, I've played ET since it was launched and I have never seen anyone use the term "h3rtillery." Naming specific players who are examples of a slang term is also unnecessary. Unless the player rises to the level of someone like Fatal1ty, they're hardly notable.216.24.2.130 14:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This game[edit]

Where can I order this game? I tried to search it in amazon.co.uk and also there this game didn't appear. Where can I buy it? Please help! Morris Munroe 08:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The game is free, and can be downloaded off the internet. Just search something like "Download Wolfendstein Enemy Territory" on Google or something. But please, for future reference, talk pages are for improving the page, not for asking questions 216.243.131.12 03:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grenade time delay[edit]

I changed the article to say that the time delay is four seconds, but was reverted (back to five seconds). I have now timed it with a stopwatch and it's definitely closer to four seconds than five seconds. Please check for yourselves too so that we can agree on what to write. Thanks. —Bromskloss 22:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you are correct. I was going by four "ticks" then boom, but the first is of course when you click the mouse to arm the grenade.-Pkaulf 23:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, nice to see that we agree. —Bromskloss 08:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think any ET player will agree that the only thing they need to know is that the grenade will take 5 clicks to explode, and that it is wise to hold it upto the fourth click before release to catch the enemy off guard :).BeSerKa-ScieNcE wielder 23:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slang section[edit]

I really think it should be removed. It's not at all encyclopedic. --Pkaulf 16:15, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

G!X Clan[edit]

Anyone notice the clans section? Think someone from G!X came over and edited it.

G!X is the worst clan ever.

Dont know if this is such a good idea. To maintain this is a lot off work.


I'm sorry, but G!X clan does not deserved to be mentioned in the clans section. First off, having a reputation as the biggest fail in Enemy Territory and the clan filled with the most noobs, hackers, and 5 year old retards who think they are skilled does not mean you have the right to advertise your team on Wikipedia. If you ask me, the clan section should contain teams such as MegaProGaming, Impact, idle, Overload, and other teams that have earned reputations as elite. Really, the 4 that I have mentioned are truly skilled teams (not like G!X, because honestly I don't know any that have successfully entered into a semi-competitive environment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstarznemesis (talk • contribs) 05:36, 17 May 2008 (UTC) -I doubt G!X wrote that, why would they advertise negativity?[reply]

Buggy[edit]

This game is full of bugs. After many hours of playing with it, i can say SplashDamage must improve the shots. For example, when targeting in face to face doesnt give you headshots. Only interest is a free game. nothing more. 84.5.39.119 (talk • contribs) Comment moved from main page by Sir Intellegent (talk • contribs)


u must be a bad shot, when u aim at the head, the helmet goes off at the first shot —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.149.188.104 (talk) 14:46, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually yea, the game is very stable in my experience. Maybe if you lead the shots a little that'll help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.175.63.11 (talk) 18:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Enemy Territory is not unstable at all, if the situation is truly as you say and you are 100% positive that you are not a bad shot (because I have watched many noobs at LAN whine about not getting headshots even when they aim on the head, in fact they are just aiming very poorly and not following their shots)... the chances are that you are playing on a server with high ping, or playing against players with high ping. This is called "unhitable" which means that even when you aim perfectly on a guy's head you may not hit so it is smart to try and predict their motion. Though unhitability never occurs at LANs, so try going to some LANs (CDC5 is coming up soon) and try your skill against some of the other attendees ^^ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstarznemesis (talk • contribs) 05:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Game description excessive[edit]

This article does not follow the guidelines set forth by the Video games Wikiproject—the game description is excessive. "Articles on computer and video games should give an encyclopedia overview of what the game is about, not a detailed description of how to play it or an excessive amount of non-encyclopedic trivia." Someone needs to remove the extraneous information. ~MDD4696 00:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed this information. It was way too detailed for an encyclopedia article. We need general overviews like what I have left. Please don't revert it. TTN 02:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Enemy Territory Fortress[edit]

Old, lost merge proposal that has never been discussed. No opinion. Pairadox 00:40, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

XPilot[edit]

I added XPilot to the "See Also" section because I feel that there is a continuous line of progress between XPilot and W/ET. They are both open-source (I am aware that it is not 100% true in ET's case), are addictive FPS games (yes, XPilot is thrid-person, but I am trying to emphasize its pioneering aspects as an MMOG) and they both are driven by meta browsers. XPilot is now rather obsolete, but I think that it is very helpful to show the reader that there is a 15-year arc of development and innovation that leads to the W/ET we enjoy today.--Mightyms 06:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ET was originally going to be a commercial sequel to RTCW. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.182.139.210 (talk) 20:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV: Competition area, Genesis Knights text[edit]

I feel that this sentence in the Competition area of the article violates NPOV:

"Also more and more clans have been started, one of the greatest clans on the planet hosting ET and many other games is Genesis Knights (www.gkclan.com)"

This strikes me as more of an advertisement for the Genesis Knights than informative text. It's also a grammatical nightmare. Thoughts?--Jiangyingzi 15:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've got to be kidding me if you're asking that. --nlitement [talk] 15:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jaymod & NQ?[edit]

I noticed there is no mention of Jaymod and No Quarter (NQ) mods. They a probably the two most common and probably should have some reference. 71.92.157.26 17:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is now. ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 12:19, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Et logo.jpg[edit]

Image:Et logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected from enemy territory fortress[edit]

Why does enemy territory fortress direct here without a single word about the mod? http://www.etfgame.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.253.205.70 (talk) 14:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article used to have a section about the Team Fortress mod, but it was removed by Pkaulf on January 26, 2008. I was looking for that information myself today and had to go into the history to see what the latest (and presumably final) version of the mod was. I guess said party didn't think it was important information. (BTW - Sorry if I'm responding to this incorrectly.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.108.99.107 (talk) 19:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is partly readded because it is relevant to the subject. Having played this mod I witnessed this mod was quite popular albeit for a relatively short amount of time therefore deserves a mention in this historic article. The info as-is is quite sparse tho. --Goatrancer (talk) 16:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There used to be a separate article with good information, just external links should be fixed, but at some point it was merged with this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Enemy_Territory_Fortress&diff=155321486&oldid=114206485. Since the info about ETF in this article has been removed, I'll try to contact the author of the merge Matthewedwards to undo it and we can fix the links (as far as I know ETF now lives here http://etfgather.blog.com, the full game can still be downloaded and there's a small community still playing). Gianluca Hotz (talk) 22:17, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

TeamWarfare League[edit]

The Enemy Territory ladder in TWL was removed a while ago (well, not removed, just made inactive so that official matches in the ET ladder are no longer monitored by admins). In my opinion, ClanBase and ESL are probably better examples. For the ETPlayers from North America, somebody could include STA or ETL... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstarznemesis (talk • contribs) 05:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quake Wars[edit]

Still not entirely sure why Enemy Territory: Quake Wars is even mentioned. The only relation the two games have is that they have the words "Enemy Territory" in it. It's sort of like saying Uncharted is a sequal to Barbie's Uncharted Island: The Game...the two are in no way related... —Mosif 21:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

They share the same attacker/defense round structure, as well as parallels in player classes, experience, and ranks. 173.72.138.169 (talk) 16:57, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Section Request[edit]

I think it would be a good idea to add a section about the maps (maybe not the Mod maps) and their objectives, as the other Wikipedia entries in different languages on W:ET has one. I don't have time to do this now, but if you call a vote I am in favor of adding it in. 70.15.212.110 (talk) 16:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GPL Projects based[edit]

I have added on WIKI section about GPL based projects. Currently there are two "active" projects based on GPL license. ET:XreaL and OpenWolf ... More information about that you can find on Splash Damage forum. Little info - ET:XreaL is updating only renderer engine, while OpenWolf is updating entire engine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Endless851 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Even Balance dropping support[edit]

It might be worth mentioning that Even Balance has dropped all support for W:ET.[7]--Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs) 16:51, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Singleplayer[edit]

"due to problems with the single-player aspect"

That's marvellously vague. Does anyone know what the problems were? Couldn't they think of a story, or couldn't they get the scripting to work right, or what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.81.0 (talk) 13:36, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Legality[edit]

Is it legal to note on wikipedia that a Quakelive.com style WolfET remake is in the works? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sklepmen (talk • contribs) 16:59, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

License[edit]

For discussion's sake, the license file for Enemy Territory states:

id-Software/Enemy-Territory is licensed under the GNU General Public License v3.0

The blog post For Clarity's Sake, Please Don't Say "Licensed under GNU GPL 2"! was published in 2017, whereas the repository is from 2012. It is not our job to fix Id Software's ambiguous license naming as we need to stick to what is verifiable. IceWelder [✉] 11:34, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wolfenstein:_Enemy_Territory&oldid=1198489960"