|
|
| (8 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | ==Typing== | + | {{Talk archive |
| − | Stuff like "click jump" or "click crouch" does not sound right. You don't click keys on your keyboard. You PRESS them. --[[User:Sadface|Sadface]] 00:43, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
| + | | arc1name = Archive 1 |
| | + | | arc1link = Talk:Exploits/Archive 1 |
| | + | }} |
| | | | |
| − | I agree [[User:Pierow|Pierow]] 19:55, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
| + | == Keep this page? == |
| | | | |
| − | == Outdated? ==
| + | It seems kind of weird to have a whole page documenting unintended ways to gain advantages, now that it's explicitly not allowed under the Bugs guidelines. I suggest we either delete this page (as many of these seem very outdated) or merge it with [[Glitches]] to form one "Bugs" page. I'm not in favour of this, though, as each page has a bugs section and all bugs should be there instead.<br>[[File:BLU Wiki Cap.png|20px|link=List of Wiki Cap owners]] | [[Help:Group rights|<span style="color:green;font-family:TF2 Build;">s</span>]] | [[User:GrampaSwood|<font color="DB9C1F">GrampaSwood</font>]] [[File:PraisetheSun.png|20px|alt=Praise the Sun!]] ([[User talk:GrampaSwood|<font color="DB9C1F">talk</font>]]) ([[Special:Contributions/GrampaSwood|<font color="DB9C1F">contribs</font>]]) 00:33, 27 October 2023 (UTC) |
| − | | |
| − | Many of these exploits are patched but they are still present on the page. [[User:Ond kaja|Ond kaja]] 20:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | : If an exploit has been patched, please move it to the "Patched exploits" section -[[User:Firestorm|<font color="#FF6600"><tt><big><u>'''Firestorm'''</u></big></tt></font>]] {{mod}} 20:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Documenting current exploits ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | ...it looks like there hasn't been a problem with it previously, but how do other people feel about it? Personally, I'm torn; yeah, we should be documenting as much as possible, and yeah, it is relevant, but we shouldn't be providing potential 'sploiters with ammo for their arsenal. I dunno. Thoughts? ~ <code>[[User:Lhavelund|<font color=red><span style="font-size: 1.2em;">'''lhavelund'''</span></font>]]</code> <sup>([[User_talk:lhavelund|talk]] ▪ [[Special:Contributions/lhavelund|contrib]])</sup> 01:36, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :I've always wondered why there were step-by-step tidbits on how to perform these exploits, or mention unpatched exploits. Civilian I'm fine with but others just don't need to be revealed for information's sake. Same for glitches/bugs. --[[User:Vaught|Vaught]] 01:39, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::I'm not sure we should be documenting how to do perform the exploits until they are fixed, but I don't see why they shouldn't at least be reported here. Usually the server owners report the bugs quickly to Valve and anything of a significantly game-changing nature is usually fixed within a few days, so harm would be kept to a minimum. Also, anything written here will have likely already done its tour on SPUF, so I doubt we could spread any information as quickly as they can. -- [[Image:User Alex2539 Sig.png|link=User:Alex2539]] -- 02:08, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::{{c|support|I agree}} with this solution. Note that they exist, without posting specific instructions on how to do them. ~ <code>[[User:Lhavelund|<font color=red><span style="font-size: 1.2em;">'''lhavelund'''</span></font>]]</code> <sup>([[User_talk:lhavelund|talk]] ▪ [[Special:Contributions/lhavelund|contrib]])</sup> 02:10, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::{{c|oppose}} If we say "these things are exploitable", some users are going to find out how to do them (whether by searching or experimenting in game). We don't want to be responsible for certain players having a bad experience because of information we've decided to list.-[[User:RJackson|<span style="background-color:#FF0000;color:white;font-size:0.7em;padding: 0 2px;">RJ</span>]]{{mod}} 02:18, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::{{c}} So your opinion is that we should leave current, active exploits out of the game (at least for the PC version) entirely? ~ <code>[[User:Lhavelund|<font color=red><span style="font-size: 1.2em;">'''lhavelund'''</span></font>]]</code> <sup>([[User_talk:lhavelund|talk]] ▪ [[Special:Contributions/lhavelund|contrib]])</sup> 02:20, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::::{{c}} We can't really document past exploits since some tend to make their returns, such as the sentry exploit. --[[User:Vaught|Vaught]] 02:22, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::::{{c}} So you're saying we should delete the [[Exploits]] page entirely? ~ <code>[[User:Lhavelund|<font color=red><span style="font-size: 1.2em;">'''lhavelund'''</span></font>]]</code> <sup>([[User_talk:lhavelund|talk]] ▪ [[Special:Contributions/lhavelund|contrib]])</sup> 02:25, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::::::{{c}} Honestly, this is a double-edged sword here. Keep it and risk being a catalyst for griefers or delete and leave people in the dark. That or water it down so it keeps the basics like "Exploit A did this and was patched this day." while keeping it brief and simple. --[[User:Vaught|Vaught]] 03:29, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::{{c|support}} People will find out these exploits one way or another. I figure it's reasonable if we document them, but not how to do them. [[User:TheMedik|TheMedik]] 02:24, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::::We shouldn't list active exploits that can have a negative influence on game-play, that's my opinion. <small>--''The preceding unsigned comment was added by'' [[User:RJackson|RJackson]] ([[User talk:RJackson|talk]]) • [[Special:Contributions/RJackson|contribs]]) </small>
| |
| − | ::::::{{c|support|I agree}}. It'll make the page actually useful for people checking if what they recently saw in-game was an exploit or is legal. [[User:ShunyValdez|ShunyValdez]] 03:30, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::{{c|support|Agreed}} Maybe stick a notice if something can be triggered by accident, but that's it on the details. --[[User:CruelCow|CruelCow]] 19:23, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :{{c|Oppose}} Great now, everyone can know all the exploits. -- [[User:Nightbox|<font color="#008000">Nightbox</font>]]<sub> ([[User_talk:Nightbox|t]] <span class="plainlinks">[http://www.steamcommunity.com/id/nightbox s])</span></sub> 20:59, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :So...what's the word? How are we going to deal with this? --[[User:Vaught|Vaught]] 20:55, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::I think the conclusion is that we document exploits, but ''not'' how to do them. Tally-ho. ~ <code>[[User:Lhavelund|<font color=red><span style="font-size: 1.2em;">'''lhavelund'''</span></font>]]</code> {{mod}} <sup>([[User_talk:lhavelund|talk]] ▪ [[Special:Contributions/lhavelund|contrib]])</sup> 17:45, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | {{c|support}} TF2 Wiki is everything Team Fortress correct? Everything Team Fortress is everything in team fortress... <small>— ''The preceding unsigned comment was added by'' '''[[User:Pierow|Pierow]]''' ([[User talk:Pierow|talk]]) • ([[Special:Contributions/Pierow|contribs]]) 09:19, 23 March 2011</small>
| |
| − | | |
| − | == References? ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | A lot of the current listed exploits are ''completely'' new to me, and I have never seen them referenced anywhere. I think I could easily remove half the currently-listed exploits, because there's no documentation to back them up, and I've never seen them anywhere. What do we do? I'm itching to re-write this thing. ~ <code>[[User:Lhavelund|<font color=red><span style="font-size: 1.2em;">'''lhavelund'''</span></font>]]</code> <sup>([[User_talk:lhavelund|talk]] ▪ [[Special:Contributions/lhavelund|contrib]])</sup> 03:06, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | : I agree. It'll make the article shorter if we can remove patched exploits. That said, I would like to preserve the history of TF2's exploits. Maybe as a new page? [[User:ShunyValdez|ShunyValdez]] 03:22, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Many of the exploits listed here are outright fabrications. They have the quality of kids swapping stories about Pokemon secrets and uncles that work at Nintendo. My suggestion is not only that should we look for references, but that experienced contributors shouldn't hesitate to remove an exploit from the page unless someone else can verify that it is real. [[User:Zoolooman|Zoolooman]] 03:29, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::So basically, all exploits (new and old) are considered fabrications unless there's verification/references? [[User:ShunyValdez|ShunyValdez]] 03:34, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::I just don't see how we can trust them without references. ~ <code>[[User:Lhavelund|<font color=red><span style="font-size: 1.2em;">'''lhavelund'''</span></font>]]</code> <sup>([[User_talk:lhavelund|talk]] ▪ [[Special:Contributions/lhavelund|contrib]])</sup> 12:00, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :{{c|Agree|Agreed}}: I doubt that you'll find an exploit that wasn't uploaded to youtube at least once. --[[User:CruelCow|CruelCow]] 19:23, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | : {{c|Support}} Well if you keep the patched ones (because if they're patched it means they were true) for historical purposes, removing the unpatched one with nothing to back it up, seems pretty normal to me. You have to double check to see if it's true and remove fabrications. Or you could create a new section with un-verified exploits and another one for false exploits. [[User:Tturbo|Tturbo]] 20:51, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Cleaning up ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | As [[User:Ond kaja|Ond kaja]] pointed out, many of these exploits are outdated, and I have the feeling some aren't even real or ever were real. A focused effort to clean up the page would be appreciated. I'm attempting to do this now, but it would be much easier if others helped me. [[User:Uncle Richardson|Uncle Richardson]] 01:27, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Yea this page is a major dump. I've looked it at a few times with no real idea where to start. I personally have no idea which ones no longer exist, or ever existed. Feel free to get started and O'll take your lead if you want. [[User:Moussekateer|Moussekateer]] 01:30, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Decided that instead of doing several small edits, it would likely be infinitely easier to write a mockup in a Word file and make one major update. I'm somewhat uncomfortable with this, since we can't test if something works in Xbox 360 or PS3 versions or what never existed in the first place. [[User:Uncle Richardson|Uncle Richardson]] 01:36, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::Upon further consideration, I'm not doing the mock up. Simply reorganizing existing content, and will then worry about filtering out the patched or false exploits. Wondering about "Terrain Exploit," since these are issues with maps themselves and not with programming. Should keep or move to appropriate map pages when possible?[[User:Uncle Richardson|Uncle Richardson]] 02:36, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Terrain Exploits section ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | In my clean up, I'm considering moving or flat out deleting the "Terrain Exploits" section. Issues listed in this section are problems with map geometry and not with the game code. As such, these issues belong in map specific sections. [[User:Uncle Richardson|Uncle Richardson]] 03:04, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Patched exploits ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | When considering exploits patched in the PC/Mac version, but not the 360 and PS3 versions, should we include them in the working exploits section? [[User:Uncle Richardson|Uncle Richardson]] 03:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | : I think it should be in a new section. Maybe working exploiits in console version? [[User:ShunyValdez|ShunyValdez]] 07:30, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :: A brand new section would probably be good. How should we organize this? Working Exploits, PC/Mac Patched Exploits, 360 Patched Exploits? Can't really have a PS3 Patched Exploits section, no PS3 patches :P Must remember to put sig line next time. [[User:Uncle Richardson|Uncle Richardson]] 12:14, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::: Looks good to me. [[User:ShunyValdez|ShunyValdez]] 05:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Map Specific Exploits ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | I'm working on an organizational draft on my talk page and I noticed that the section that by and large takes the most space is the Map Specific Exploits. I propose we move these to the appropriate map pages, so as to put substance on those pages (let's face it, some are pretty empty) and to clean this mess up some. [[User:Uncle Richardson|Uncle Richardson]] 23:10, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | : Agreed. A new page for map exploits would be cleaner. Maybe we can rename this as Gameplay Exploits. The current Exploits page can just have an introduction and a link to the two pages. We can even move patched exploits to a new page if it'll make the Gameplay Exploits page cleaner. [[User:ShunyValdez|ShunyValdez]] 05:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | I don't really think that it is entirely necessary. (sorry) It wouldn't be a very big page at all and seeing as all the information is already on the page it would be quite redundant. [[User:Pierow|Pierow]] 08:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Halloween Gift custom texture 'hack'? ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | I have heard of players who used '''custom Halloween Gift texture files''' to make the gift more easily visible when it spawns in order to gain an advantage in finding it. I can confirm that such files exist, as I saw them available on FPSBanana before they were taken down for being hacks. Would information about this be suitable for the Trivia section in [[Haunted Halloween Gift]]? Or should it go into [[Exploits]]? Not quite sure where it belongs, and would like to check if it belongs on the Wiki at all. -- [[User:McWang|McWang]] 05:04, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Boston Basher exploit ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | There is an exploit with the Boston Basher.It is using the Boston Basher to achieve "I'm Bat Man" without fighting. It is constantly missing your Boston Basher to bled yourself and returning to a resupply locker. I saw someone did that and achieved "I'm Bat Man quickly! I think it is an Exploit. [[User:Mardamien24|Mardamien24]] 02:34, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :That's a bug, not an exploit. A lot of achievements are buggy. '''<span style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:83%;">—[[File:User Moussekateer signature sprite.png|31px|link=User:Moussekateer]][[User:Moussekateer|<span style="color:black">Moussekateer</span>]]·[[User talk:Moussekateer|<span style="color:black;font-size:82%;">talk</span>]]</span>''' 02:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Then we must place it in the "Bugs" section of Boston Basher. [[User:Mardamien24|Mardamien24]] 04:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Soldier Exploit ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Is the soldier kamikaze survival with the rocket jumper really an exploit?
| |
| − | I thought it was meant to be like that....
| |
| − | Valve could easily fix it if they considered it an exploit. [[User:Pierow|Pierow]] 19:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Well in my opinion it's not exploit. Becouse u using fake Projectiles. [[User:Rins|<span style="color:#0e5c76;font-size:13px;font-family:'TF2 Build';text-shadow:#e3e3e3 1px 1px 0px;">Rins</span>]] <span style="font-size:10px">[[File:User_Rins_minioface.png|:O]] ([[User talk:Rins|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Rins|contribs]])</span> 08:01, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::IMO it's an exploit, but not a bug, see where I'm going with this? [[User:Turboplant|Turboplant]] 18:50, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | So we Both agree on it. That is good. Can I remove it?[[User:Pierow|Pierow]] 08:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Guidelines. ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | I think there should be some guidelines for exploits. Some of the exploits listed , i think, are not exploits at all because they are so simple to do and don't have any real effect.
| |
| − | Also with a lot of the "Map specific exploits" the writing style makes it sound like a written tutorial as to how to perform said exploits. That is very contradictory to the quote at the top that looks down on exploits (by the Administrator). Pretty much, this page needs either a cleanup or guidelines. That's my opinion anyway. also should i post this in discussions? `[[User:Pierow|Pierow]] 08:18, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | I agree. The 'tutorials' are also at odds with the more formal tone of the rest of the page. Cranberry Jerk 20:26, 9 July 2012 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == 2Fort '''Entering Enemy's Spawn 3''' Exploit patched or not ==
| |
| − | I had a go at this exploit by jumping around like a looney around every plank i saw under both spawn rooms on my local server but no luck. Has this been patched yet? [[User:Bojjob|Bojjob]] 14:19, 23 December 2011 (PST)
| |
| − | :To be honest it probably is. *shrugs* Go ahead and try some more and if no luck then remove it. —[[File:User Rocket Ship BBQ Awesomepyro.png|24px]][[User:Rocket Ship BBQ|Rocket Ship BBQ]]([[File:Speech voice.png|20px|link=User talk:Rocket Ship BBQ]]•[[File:Intel neutral pickedup.png|20px|link=Special:Contributions/Rocket Ship BBQ]]) 14:49, 23 December 2011 (PST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == What does "broken" mean? ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | I don't understand this sentence: "An exploit is said to be broken if it is unintentional to the game's developers, because it is a broken feature of the game." Besides the fact that I think it's improper grammar, I think it's very unclear. All bugs are "unintentional"; developers obviously aren't intending to have bugs. What's the difference between the Mad Milk through the gate bug, marked "broken", and the Sandman through the gate bug, which isn't? [[User:Strange Quirk|Strange Quirk]] 17:04, 16 February 2012 (PST)
| |
| − | :The definition of bug is indeed "something unintended by the programmers". I agree that the way "broken" is used here is indeed unclear, since all exploits/bugs would be "broken" by that definition you said. {{n}} [[User:EpicEric|<span style="color:#5885A2;font-size:15px;font-family:'Trebuchet MS';text-shadow:#e3e3e3 1px 1px 0px;"><b>Epic Eric</b></span>]] <small> ([[User talk:EpicEric|T]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/EpicEric|C]])</small> 08:29, 11 March 2012 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Engineer Stored Crit w/ Gunslinger ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | There's one exploit to where if you hold certain keys, hit a team mate twice, continue to hold the key, then hit an enemy, it'll be a crit. Definite exploit.
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[User:KritzTheDrake|KritzTheDrake]] ([[User talk:KritzTheDrake|talk]]) 21:49, 26 March 2014 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == All Replay Achievement Exploit ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | There's an exploit where the player/user can render and upload their replay {i know that's already a game feature} but they can go to the replay files of the uploaded replay and edit the url of the video and change it to a popular/viral url video allowing the replay to have allot of views and likes making the game think the user earned those views causing them to get all the replay achievements
| |
| − | | |
| − | [i had to do the exploit in order to show proof]
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [[File:Exploit_proof.jpeg|thumbnail|Look at the views and likes]]
| |
| − | [[User:Zerox10|Zerox10]] ([[User talk:Zerox10|talk]]) 16:05, 15 September 2014 (PDT)
| |
| − | : And... how exactly is this an "exploit"? Its not "game breaking", secondly, they're just achievements. And also, there's other tools that literally just GRANT the achievement straight up. So honestly, this isn't really an exploit. Nothing game breaking that affects gameplay. [[User:Ashes|Ashes]] ([[User talk:Ashes|talk]]) 17:18, 15 September 2014 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Mini-crits with Minigun. ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | There was a patch on the 13th of November that:<br />
| |
| − | Fixed a bug that allowed weapons to be equipped in invalid loadout slots<br />
| |
| − | This allowed the user to equip and eat the buffalo steak sandwich, in which they could then they could use their minigun of choice and fire minicrit bullets. Should we add this to the exploits table? -- [[User:CoreDude98|CoreDude98]] ([[User talk:CoreDude98|talk]]) 16:46, 14 November 2014 (PST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Medic infinite uber #2 question ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Would a Medic using this exploit be able to switch weapons and still retain the uber? I know this has been patched and it doesn't matter, I'm just curious.
| |
| s | GrampaSwood 
(talk) (contribs) 00:33, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
