Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Map Templates"
(→Attack/Defend vs. Invade/Defend: - Replying to myself) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Anyways, my point is that the descriptions of game modes should be made consistent throughout the wiki so as not to confuse people not familiar with them. If no one minds, I'd be willing to sort it out. [[User:Pon|Pon]] 08:38, 27 November 2007 (CST) | Anyways, my point is that the descriptions of game modes should be made consistent throughout the wiki so as not to confuse people not familiar with them. If no one minds, I'd be willing to sort it out. [[User:Pon|Pon]] 08:38, 27 November 2007 (CST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- ell, I figure I'll just go ahead with it, then. Changes can always be reverted. [[User:Pon|Pon]] 23:24, 28 November 2007 (CST) | ||
Latest revision as of 21:24, 28 November 2007
Attack/Defend vs. Invade/Defend
There seems to be inconsistencies with how these two game modes are referred to throughout the wiki. e.g. in the "map templates" category, they are called "invade/defend" and "invade/defend switch", but in the "game type" category, are lumped togerther under "attack/defend"... really, Dustbowl style maps should be referred to as "attack/defend", and Avanti/Cornfield style maps as "invade/defend". Perhaps a little pendantic on my part, but I hate seeing my favourite gamemodes being misrepresented by CTF players who never go near them :p
Anyways, my point is that the descriptions of game modes should be made consistent throughout the wiki so as not to confuse people not familiar with them. If no one minds, I'd be willing to sort it out. Pon 08:38, 27 November 2007 (CST)
ell, I figure I'll just go ahead with it, then. Changes can always be reverted. Pon 23:24, 28 November 2007 (CST)
