Battle of Round Mountain

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Video games Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Hi. At the reception part of the article it says "often complain that the game has no depth". But if you follow the link (#9) there no mention of it at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.217.189.4 (talk) 11:14, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the player rank list can be put in the article... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.47.50.17 (talk) 12:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Nope, see WP:INDISCRIMINATE, plus, they could change everyday. Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 21:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Would it be possible to add it on a seperate page and link it to this page to reduce the statistic bit? Because I have the information and am willing to do it if it is allowed. --Destructo^{Talk to me} 00:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you guys know, there's a European version, the info here is only for the Nexon version. Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 21:14, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• There game is only produced by Nexon and therefore it would have to be a Nexon version. But yes I have heard of that as well. --Destructo^{Talk to me} 00:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't this sound similar to WarRock? Is that on purpose? Jedibob5 (talk) 00:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes it does sound like WarRock. But Combat Arms is more realistic. And I dont think this would have been on purpose. --Destructo^{Talk to me} 00:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• The two games are competing. WarRock is getting alot of criticism for many reasons so it is believed that Combat Arms is received better overall by critics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.128.65 (talk) 02:44, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Its kind of like the entire online mode of Call of Duty 4. The main difference is that on COD4 you don't buy weapons and stuff. But the clans the actual way it plays during a game, it just like COD4. Madadude^{My Talk Page} 01:01, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe that this article is largely based on North America as they are bringing it out in Europe and it is already out in Oceania as I am an Australian and can play perfectly fine. --Destructo^{Talk to me} 00:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the tag. To say the article is largely based on a North American view is false; the game is available in North America, South America, Oceania and being rolled out in Europe. We have reported as such as well so it's a non-issue.. Chan Yin Keen | ^UT_C 15:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone got any idea when the European Servers will be up

Thanks My TalkThe GuyThe Job. —Preceding undated comment was added at 17:15, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There will be a stage called Sand Hog released soon. That takes the stage count to nine. Me, GKT5 04:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Who removed the "Reception' part? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.178.145.242 (talk) 09:24, 5 October 2008 (UTC) Sand Hog is already out, and they just released a new map for the North American server from the Korean one; its called Rattlesnake.Mariluxia (talk) 14:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC)Mariluxia[reply]

On the downed C-131 in Brushwood there is a logo that says something like 'MATO' possible refence to NATO? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.219.94.161 (talk) 07:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MATO: Military Air Traffic Operations.[1]--Conor Fallon (talk) 03:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Throughout the game there are only 3 camo's Urban Desert and Arctic i find the desert useless because it is bright and stands out even in the sandy levels "Junk Flea" and "Pump Jack" the addition of Sand Hog will hopefuly fix thsi problemb the reguler green forest camo was made effective by the Brushwood level but the Desert camo must be made useful in some way or it risks staying obselete.74.84.9.226 (talk) 18:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC) formerly Smashingwilddogs[reply]

on the level grey hammer next to the bravo teams spawn if you went to the corner of the container by the trash dumpster you could get inside of it and shoot from within they fixed thsi by taking the floor out so the person will fall and also in the one in the trench and cold seed by the storage place with the forklift warhead you could walk into the wall from the vent and in pump jack were you got under the pile of crates leading to the hole in the wall by the upper part of the level 74.84.9.226 (talk) 18:44, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Work on your grammar. =P WinterSpw (talk) 21:53, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the harassment section of the artical has some incorect information. if a person repeats the same message more than 5 times it will block the person from chatting for a minute —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.84.9.226 (talk) 18:49, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article has serious neutrality issues. This is wikipedia, not Opinionpedia. statements like "we aren't sure...its not fair at all." This isn't fair to the other side of the issue, but wikipedia isn't about taking sides at all. Its about facts and information. Simple facts. The person who originally wrote it should clean it up or I'll fix it for them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.141.189 (talk) 03:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed and relocated a lot of stuff within this article. Bring it up here if I was too bold, but I think it turned out ok. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.92.244.246 (talk) 11:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the same user who wrote this. Anyway, I just removed some stuff that seemed way too superfluous for an encyclopedic article. For example: The "stages" section.Eik Corell (talk) 17:05, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the modifications section. It's way too specific.Eik Corell (talk) 02:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've merged a cut-down version of the modifications section with another paragraph, and removed the Events section for now. I removed the Events section on the basis that it's way too technical. You're welcome to add a new generalized version of it. Also, a question: Is "GP" and "NX" the same thing?Eik Corell (talk) 02:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GP is the ingame currency gained for playing fireteam and other modes. GP can be used to rent weapons and equipment. NX have to be bought and can be used to buy stuff from the 'black market', which can not be attained by GP, e.g. permanent weapons and special items. Anonymous 06:03, 10 February 2010 (GMT+1) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.145.120.68 (talk)

Does this game allow voice chat, or will I have to use something like Ventrilo to talk to other players in game? Link 486 (talk) 01:50, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The game has no voice chat, but certain commands that give a somewhat 'order' to the other players. User: Code2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.103.14.163 (talk) 01:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Using Programs like Ventrilo, Teamspeak, and X-Fire you can use voice chat. The game doesn't come with voice chat thought. I'm afraid to say your incorrect Code2008, considering most chat programs dont interface with the game like X-Fire. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.218.34.10 (talk) 23:05, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Combat arms now have there own "Voice chat ingame," All you need is a Microphone.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.116.17.91 (talk) 23:46, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How do you join a clan on Combat Arms, I cant figure it out, I am a Private so I should be able to. Madadude^{My Talk Page} 01:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just changed the designation in the "Gameplay" section, cause Combat Arms is not a MMOFPS. there's nothing "MMO" about it, and people reading this wikipage will try it thinking it is similar to Planetside(a real MMOFPS) and they will feel misled. Just like I did. JMWhiteIV (talk) 00:19, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the description of each game mode. Unless someone can present a very short and adequate description of each, I see no reason to have the article crawling with this filler stuff.Eik Corell (talk) 03:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed the "hacks" section again. It was POV, and it was out of place. If someone wants to add something on the apparent problem of hacks in the game. I'm going to make a "criticism" section on this article, and let's see if we can't address this often-raised issue without POV, and without over-elaborating on it. Eik Corell (talk) 21:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see a lot of anonymous IPs trying to make this article POV on the Cheating section. The "Cheating" subsection of the Criticism tab was added to find some middle ground between the near-constant edits primarily consisting of complaints about hacks in the game. Clearly this is a frequent complaint, but it's not Wikipedia's job to decide whether or not it's valid. I hope you anonymous users who are obviously not reading this will take this into consideration before using this article to vent your frustration. Eik Corell (talk) 22:12, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever played Combat Arms before, Eik Corell? I have, and still do. Servers are filled with Speed Hackers, Wall Hackers, Glitchers, and worse. It uses HackShield "Pro" when it should use PunkBuster if it wants to keep ahead of hackers. While the HackShield Pro may deter some hackers, many of them get through. Then it's up to moderators, or those who can kick, to kick hackers. Simply put, hackers are a major problem for Combat Arms developers and players.

Let's not understate the problem, shall we? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.127.49 (talk) 20:14, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No one's disputing the existence of cheats and hackers, but we want it to be worth reading and come from a neutral point of view. I almost just deleted the entire section because the grammar was so atrocious. Funkeboy (talk) 16:43, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see it was removed, and I can understand why; the "patches" section mentions it, but in my opinion it is a common enough complaint that the section should be kept. What do you guys think? To repeat myself, I added the Criticism/Cheating section to find some middle-ground between the near-constant POV edits. To be honest, I think this article should be protected. I can't watch the article often enough to deal with this repeated vandalism. Eik Corell (talk) 21:11, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

---

I've expanded the criticisms section. Mentioning the game's vulnerability to hacking/glitching, the unfairness of NX (as well as explaining what NX is), and the unblaanced nature of weapons such as the L96A1. | Phillip Bromley (Talk) 17:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the changes to the criticism section, they were not in line with [WP:VG/RS]. Basically, the critique should be from notable sources, not the game's community, and certainly not about the same old trite complaints about one weapon being too powerful. Using notable sources ensures that a criticism can't serve to be a place for disgruntled fans to vent their frustration. Eik Corell (talk) 19:37, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What notable sources are there? Could I use Nexon forum threads of people complaining? I can't seem to think of anything else that would be a reliable source, except perhaps the Combat Arms Wiki. | Phillip Bromley (Talk) 17:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, per WP:RELIABLE, they aren't. This extends to forums, blogs, and community sites. At the same time, WP:EL forbids links to such sites unless significant notability can be established. For example, a blog on the internet say that Combat Arms has problems with hackers, but this is just a random player writing this. However, if a lead-programmer states the same on his blog or the Nexon website, then there's a chance that this is indeed notable if there's no dispute about the identity. Eik Corell (talk) 15:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Having recently quit the game due to the excessive hacking, I recall seeing an announcement from Nexon, possibly on the game's website, admitting that hacking is widespread and their "hack shield" software wasn't capable of keeping up with the advances in hacking techniques. There was also something explaining the support reporting function and expanded abilities granted to room masters to expel hackers/cheaters. Would that page be admissible, assuming I can find it again? We aren't talking about "old trite complaints about one weapon being too powerful," we're talking about people who use EULA-violating mods that grant themselves the ability to fly, teleport, become invulnerable, become invisible, and kill remotely anyone anywhere on a map even outside of weapon range. In short, cheating, and it is widespread (that's why I quit) and Nexon hasn't the resources to effectively combat it. 12.233.146.130 (talk) 22:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice if we could have a reference for this latest edit. I can't seem to find anything about it on the game's website. Eik Corell (talk) 02:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does anybody else think it would be a good idea to make a new page for detailed information on all the gear? Including the black market gear of course. - Kamakazai (talk) 23:26, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NOTGUIDE, that would be a bad idea. The article was full of stuff like that, but it's long-since gone since it didn't add anything to the article. You can help with two things however: People keep changing the number of GP you receive at the beginning from 2000, to 9000 and it keeps going like that. Which one is the correct number? Also, do you know any place where the new abuse system set up by Nexon was announced? I need a source for that claim. Eik Corell (talk) 03:47, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You Missunderstand me. I meant not just a new section but a new page dedicated to gear. Th ammound of GP currently gained at the start of the games is 2000. As for the "Abuse Report System" I will add the source momentarilly. Kamakazai (talk) 19:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. Sorry about my spelling.

My bad. As far as a new page goes, it's not notable enough. We're dealing with a long list of real-life weapons, and if it was allowed to make a separate page for the equipment available in every game, Wikipedia would be absolutely flooded. For an example of when it's OK to add a separate article, take this page for example: [[2]] An encyclopedic elaboration of something that was cryptic and at best only vaguely described in the game Half-Life 2. Because of its popularity, the need for an adequate explanation which was not offered by the game itself, and the cultural references of this fictional species, it warrants a new page. A list of gear in Combat Arms however would only serve as a game-guide whether in the main article or as part of a separate page. Eik Corell (talk) 20:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stragegy Wiki has guides on maps, modes and gear: Combat Arms on Strategy Wiki(external). Would adding this to the links/references section be enough? Anonymous 06:11, 20 February 2010 (GMT+1) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.145.120.68 (talk)

The reason the Snowball Fight and Scenario modes are kept out of the article is because they're not implemented in the global version. I don't believe there's reason to talk about upcoming modes until they've actually been added. Until it's actually implemented, I say we keep speculation out of the article. Now, as far as Snowball Fight goes, as far as I understand, it's an exclusive game mode that seems to be more of an easter-egg kind of thing than something worth listing as an actively-played mode. In summation, stick to what it is now. If you can find a reference to a source from Nexon that states that it will be added, feel free to add it again, as long as it's not under current game modes. Eik Corell (talk) 22:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if anyone could scale down the "spy hunt" section. The gameplay section flows nicely, but the Spy Hunt section is kind of long, but it seems to describe in acceptable detail how the mode works. So I'm wondering if there's anything in it that can be omitted; something that's not a major part of the mode and can therefore be omitted. Eik Corell (talk) 14:37, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"NX" is mentioned several times in the article but is never defined. 86.16.148.129 (talk) 12:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AFAI can tell it is made clear. Jwl12345 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

They were reverted per WP:GAMEGUIDE. Eik Corell (talk) 01:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How is an average of approx. 7/10 considered "neutral to negative"?? Edited to "average." Also removed the part about it being "better" in later versions to "added more content," and also removed the numerous reviews and replaced with an aggregate review.

In addition, the rest of this page is a guide. Game modes, Patches, etc do not deserve entire sections dedicated to them. Needs major editing to sound like an encyclopedia article. This game is DEFINITELY notable and worthy of a page, but this is an encyclopedia. Jhonkaman (talk) 23:07, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you'll give me some help. I've kind of left this article in limbo, hoping someone would come along and give a helping hand. I might get around to it though. Eik Corell (talk) 23:29, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, had some free time, So I removed alot of stuff, combined alot of sections, removed the WOGL advertisement paragraph, and improved general readability. Some stuff could use some sources though. Try linking to more news articles, if possible, rather than the official Nexon website.Jhonkaman (talk) 23:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added some references to the Reception section. Needs cleanup though (dates, titles, etc.) Jhonkaman (talk) 23:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did some cleanup. Anyone feel free to add some content if it has encyclopedic value.    Jhonka 02:17, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the article says that Combat Arms can be played in South America, but to my understanding, Nexon specifically stated quite some time ago that they cut service to South America. Should this be edited? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.207.22 (talk) 18:38, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...should typically be kept out of articles per WP:GAMECRUFT because they don't add anything of value to the article besides making the article longer, which serves to make the article bloated in the long run and ultimately make cleaning the article up much harder. If weapons are to be mentioned at all, it should be in generalized terms, for example an M60 machine gun would classify as a heavy weapon or heavy weaponry. Something to that effect, one should avoid listing weapons because when you need to do things like that. Even if the weapons are an important part, as in Quake 3, only mentioned are weapons that have either made their way into popular culture like the [[BFG] weapon, and yet it is only mentioned in passing, also mentioning how the weapons balance out one another, which in turn shapes the gameplay and is therefore relevant. A typical arsenal of assault rifles from a modern-military-style game is just not important compared to that. I hope this gives some perspective. Eik Corell (talk) 12:26, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone should add the newly-introduced Elimination Pro mode to the list of game modes. 75.120.30.152 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:11, 30 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Nevermind, I have updated the page. 75.120.30.152 (talk) 18:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why dont we have a section dedicated to the different game modes? that would seem more compelling... just my opinion,. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imamgood (talk • contribs) 05:52, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, lists of gameplay features and other item are not included in articles. They don't really serve the purpose of the article, which is to inform people what Combat Arms is about, not how to play it. Although I do agree that it might give the reader an idea of what the game is like, lists like these are generally not added. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 22:34, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i have realized that combat arms is no longer regulated by Nexon...am i right? or am i wrong? because when i am redirected to the disambiguation page, it says "For the game by SAHAR, Click here"... can anybody inform me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imamgood (talk • contribs) 05:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That was vandalism. I've fixed the page Combat Arms. -Phoenixrod (talk) 06:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Combat Arms (video game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130325080407/http://store.steampowered.com/app/212180/ to http://store.steampowered.com/app/212180/
• Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/69tevk09b?url=http://combatarms.nexon.net/News/View.aspx?boardNo=101 to http://combatarms.nexon.net/News/View.aspx?boardNo=101&contentNo=005og&pageIndex=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150218212342/http://combatarms.nexon.net/home/newsdetail/?contentNo=00IJo to http://combatarms.nexon.net/home/newsdetail/?contentNo=00IJo
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100315131521/http://pc.gamezone.com/gzreviews/r35487.htm to http://pc.gamezone.com/gzreviews/r35487.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:56, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]