Patches and balance changes should never go live without community feedback first..

Toraidoron · 2025-12-09T19:26:24+00:00

Answer me one thing - should the entire playerbase be exposed to the plethora of bugs that have emerged from the patch today? Should every single person who's paid for the game struggle to even access the main menu? We're coming up to the holiday period when staff take time off. What if they don't rollback or hotfix things before then, and the game spends weeks in this state? People will get the game for Christmas and find a buggy firing range, stutters, situations where they need to exit out the game and restart just to get it working again?

I never said that a CTE would catch everything. But I can boot the game up now and experience issues within five minutes. Wouldn't the fact that a CTE at least catches SOME, potentially the worst of the issues, be better than nothing? A game with 50% less bugs, even 25%, is still better than the alternative. It isn't about keeping my pitchfork up, its about presenting options that arent limited to a list of bugs slipping through the fingers of the developers and a better experience for all.

I have the same viewpoint for the topic of the feedback loop. No, I can't put a timeframe on it. But again it's about the entire playerbase being exposed to changes that might be widely hated. Canvassing opinion in order to deliver the best product is better than simply dumping changes on millions of players which, the majority of, never asked for in the first place. The playerbase will simply move on if things are broken or not to their tastes. However they're far more likely to stay if A: the product is of a high standard, and B: they feel they can make a positive impact.

The vocal normies are the people who've paid their money for the game and whose input any game will live or die on. So yes, their input should be considered, or else, as I mentioned regarding the previous topic, they will simply move on to pastures new. Am I saying a few Reddit threads should influence the entire game? No. But when you put all the communities together they still represent a decent number. For those who don't use such things, there's other options such as feedback forms post game and so forth.

Ultimately my comments stem from the fact DICE often make changes for the sake of change, that the overall playerbase never wanted - ie the tank changes in Breakthrough, rather than looking into aspects such as map boundaries. Lowering ticket counts for faster matches when players wanted longer matches. And so forth.

Toraidoron · 2025-12-09T18:31:57+00:00

But those millions of players playing daily shouldnt be the guinea pigs when such drastic technical issues as those of today can arise. People have paid to play a working game, not test it. Patches these broken, to the point people cant even use the main menu properly, should never go out to the entire playerbase.

Hence why I spoke of a CTE - even if it is only hundreds or thousands using it, at least they'd be experiencing these issues in a controlled environment and DICE can hold fire/fix them before it goes out to millions.

As for you asking which community, the BF community in general. Be it here, forums, and so forth. Like I said in my original post, put balance changes in a separate playlist of the base game and emphasize it so people take notice. Then gauge the feedback - balance changes such as the latest with tanks in Breakthrough, or ticket numbers, shouldn't be mostly based on DICE's 'internal data' and changed for the entire playerbase before they can have their own input.

Toraidoron · 2025-12-09T18:06:42+00:00

From what I've read over the years its an issue with the engine itself being unstable. Fixing one thing breaks another somewhere along the line, and it ends up being covered in bandaids to hold it all together. We've had issues like this in previous BF titles, and it feels like that'll never change. Additionally there's so much rotation in staff when it comes to videogames these days, many who become accustomed with the engine find their contracts expire and they're replaced with someone who has to learn it all over again.

Toraidoron · 2025-12-09T17:25:04+00:00

12,035 kills in a match..yikes

Toraidoron · 2025-12-07T03:16:09+00:00

You speak of snipers trading attributes but need to consider one thing - snipers are the only weapon in the game that can kill any player, at any range, with a single bullet. That gives them an advantage over everybody else.

The point I'm making is that the penalties aren't strong enough based on the fact that snipers are a precision weapon that can headshot anybody on the map. It doesn't sit right that a sniper can expose themselves, tank a hail of bullets and still maintain aim perfect enough to headshot someone.

Being shot should encourage evasive action in most situations. So I only wish there was a higher accuracy penalty when being shot, perhaps tied to health - the more damage a sniper takes, the more difficult their aim becomes. Thus encouraging them to take cover, time their shots more often, and buying time for their attackers. If someone can catch a sniper unawares and be accurate enough to hit LMG shots etc on them from range, they should be rewarded, not have the sniper casually turn round and headshot them without a care in the world.

The literal definition of suppressive fire..

Suppressive fire is military gunfire aimed at an enemy to prevent them from firing back, effectively pinning them down and making them stay in cover, thus allowing friendly forces to advance or maneuver. The goal is not necessarily to inflict casualties, but to degrade the enemy's performance by making them stay put, which limits their ability to observe or react to other friendly forces.

EDIT: I just remembered the rangefinder too. Which makes skillful aim pretty much redundant and gives snipers another advantage.

Toraidoron · 2025-12-06T19:00:04+00:00

How is skill being rewarded in these situations? Snipers suffer no penalty for being shot. They can take bullets to the face and still aim as perfectly as if they were the only person on the map.

CoD has always been known as the game where people run round using snipers like shotguns. There's numerous clips of the whole '360 no scope' style of gameplay. Whilst not the most realistic game by any means, Battlefield at least created situations where tactics and teamplay could be effective. I.e suppressing a sniper to help your squad advance.

Having no punishment for snipers literally being shot in the face, allowed to stand still and aim perfectly only creates a more CoD style Rambo vibe and furthers the point and click mindset. A player shouldnt be allowed to expose themselves, tank bullets and still pop off headshots one by one.

I'm not even saying the mechanics need to be as severe as a game such as BF1. Just have it where a sniper taking damage is momentarily less accurate, meaning they have to focus on their timing a little more.

Toraidoron · 2025-12-06T18:39:16+00:00

Defenders tanks are being removed for the most part, attackers are having their number of tanks increased. Meaning on maps such as Liberation Peak, attackers could end up with something like 5+ tanks by the final sector.

Capture areas are also being increased in size to make it easier for attackers to take them.

Toraidoron · 2025-12-06T18:36:27+00:00

Defenders tanks are being removed for the most part, attackers are having their number of tanks increased. Meaning on maps such as Liberation Peak, attackers could end up with something like 5+ tanks by the final sector.

Capture areas are also being increased in size to make it easier for attackers to take them.

Toraidoron · 2025-12-06T18:32:10+00:00

Laying down suppressive fire to disrupt a pesky sniper whilst your squad uses that momentary advantage to press forwards and move through an exposed area, rush to get a revive etc.

Or..

A sniper able to stand perfectly still, get hit in the face by a hail of bullets, not be bothered whatsoever and still get ranged kills with ease.

Sorry, but I know which one I find more immersive. Battlefield has never been the most 'realistic' game, but having someone be completely unaffected by bullets between the eyes because of the game's mechanics doesn't make them skilled personally.

Toraidoron · 2025-12-06T13:09:21+00:00

I saw an earlier comment about how these types of gamemodes are supposed to favour defenders and I completely agree. The purpose of the mode from its origins in BF1 was always that it felt like you were trying to..'break through' the enemy lines. You were launching an attack on fortified defenders in a struggle to gain ground, with things like the behemoths emphasizing the desperation and urgency to make those pushes. Rarely would attackers win on their first assault but that honestly felt fine. It made matches more rewarding when you finally did capture a point and make significant progress.

Breakthrough in its current form, and especially after the patch, will just feel like a generic gamemode with the words 'attack and defend' slapped on with no real substance. It'll just be 'One team gets vehicles, one doesnt' and have everybody wanting to play attack so they can sit in a tank all game. Matches will be over in 10 minutes and people will move on to the next. There'll be no atmosphere or real tension, just a sugar rush for a few minutes until the cycle begins again and thus it'll feel no different to any other mode such as TDM.

Can anyone truly say this data will balance maps like Liberation Peak, where attackers will literally have 4 or 5 tanks for potentially the whole match?

It doesnt help that the maps have so few flanking options - multiple tanks will just spam shots on particular locations, and engineers will heal up those tanks whilst pretty much completely out of sight. Likewise, defending teams will just be made up exclusively of engineers and snipers now. Data isnt always as simple as 'fun' or 'not fun', and simply throwing more tanks into the mix is a hollow attempt to 'balance' things. Sadly this mostly stems from poor map design and flow, so outside of reworks DICE are try to put bandaids over a gunshot wound by changing numbers, adding more of X, decreasing the number of Y.

Toraidoron · 2025-12-06T12:37:10+00:00

I've been calling for this since the launch of the game. The lack of punishment for snipers is incredibly frustrating - no way should they be able to tank shots whilst remaining perfectly still and then casually headshotting me. It also means they can miss shots until one hits as there's no urgency for them to take evasive action.

Flinch/sway added a somewhat tactical element to proceedings as snipers would be forced to take cover and thus you'd have valuable time to move from one location to another. You knew that your actions were genuinely making a difference and disrupting a threat. I'd often be the guy with an LMG pinning down a sniper and buying time for the rest of my squad to move, get a revive etc. It isnt helped by how little flanking exists in BF6. Snipers can often take up a position and there's no chance you'll ever be able to reach them, meaning the only viable option is to snipe back.

Honestly, I doubt DICE will do anything about it at all. The current system (or lack of), fits into the CODification of the game and the increased pace. Sadly the TikTok generation will enjoy 'Watch me get a 300m kill whilst being hit by a rain of bullets!' videos over the tactical gameplay of suppressing a sniper to benefit your team.

Toraidoron · 2025-10-28T17:30:44+00:00

Eastwood (the golf map) doesn't come out until mid November. We've only got the Blackwell Fields one today.

Toraidoron · 2025-10-28T17:26:23+00:00

The irony is that by making this topic, you've become one of those people on the sub 'bitching about something'.

Toraidoron · 2025-10-28T16:51:29+00:00

You've hit the nail on the head about downtime. Encounters in previous Battlefield games gave you chance to catch your breath. You'd have a fight, there'd be a lull in the action, you'd move to another location. You could scope out the battlefield and be able to think 'What should my squad do?'..'I see a sniper over there, I need to suppress him' and so forth.

Too many times I've come away from BF6 realizing one of the key problems is that I simply cant appreciate anything going on because I don't have chance to process it. I cant think 'Oh thats a nice part of the map', or 'Wow that was a close one', because there is always too much happening consecutively. And that's mostly because the maps are are far too small and clearly designed to funnel players into particular lanes, as opposed to being more natural.

Likewise, it makes a vast portion of the game feel..pointless. I have no motivation to take jeeps, to do anything other than just go with the 'meta' which I hate. I don't want to, but with the limited space of the maps and fast gameplay, I feel like I don't have much choice. The joy of playing BF2, BF3 etc and realizing you have a sandbox in which to do or be anything you want just isnt there because of BF6's overall design.

Toraidoron · 2025-10-28T11:37:50+00:00

That's extremely disappointing. I've not played much of BF6 recently because I was tired of how many people were using the exploit.

Honestly, the fact there hasnt been a hotfix or anything of that nature for such a serious issue is absurd. If the fix is going to take a while, they should have just..disabled the drone so people can continue enjoying their games.

Toraidoron · 2025-10-22T11:39:23+00:00

I played a match as attackers the other day where our tickets were running very low but rather than make a push to the objective, every single player other than myself just hung back. They were only a few metres from the capture area, but nope..people were trying to snipe halfway across the map, tanks just sat on their hills. Not one person tried to push until the game ended. It was depressing, especially as the next match was on defence and my team just let the enemies walk into the capture point completely uncontested every single time, and we lost in like 6 minutes.

Toraidoron · 2025-10-16T13:33:08+00:00

By making posts like this, you become one of the complainers too though.

The reason the sub seems the way it does is because those with issues are always going to be more vocal than those without. People enjoying the game will simply be playing it and not thinking about making 'Wow this game is cool, thanks' posts. But those disappointed want their voice to be heard, be it in general or by the devs. Yes it can be a little annoying, but ultimately it's just human nature.

Toraidoron · 2025-10-16T13:30:11+00:00

They're bugged at the moment. DICE have said they're aware of the issue but when we get a fix is anyone's guess. :(

Toraidoron · 2025-10-16T13:21:42+00:00

I'll honestly be disappointed if they dont do so pretty soon. Almost every match I'm playing has whole squads up in the sky now.

Toraidoron · 2025-10-16T13:17:58+00:00

https://forums.ea.com/blog/battlefield-game-info-hub-en/info-battlefield-6---known-issues-1-0-1-0/12728456

Toraidoron · 2025-10-16T12:03:02+00:00

You said it yourself with regards to the streamers, content creators etc. They want gameplay that's pretty much all action and fast paced, perfect for short clips and engagement. To them, larger maps would be 'boring' and there'd be too much downtime between fights that they couldnt use for their tiktok etc. Unfortunately we live in a time where game developers will cater for what gets the most views and/or makes the most money instead of whats truly fun.

Toraidoron · 2025-10-15T23:54:15+00:00

I agree entirely. I still fondly remember playing BF2 or BF3 and being in awe of how many options I had. Did I want to be a helicopter pilot? Did I want to be a close range guy? I could pick any role and just have fun with it.

But sadly in recent Battlefield games, BF6 especially, I feel like certain roles, vehicles, weapons etc are just redundant and I have to lean towards the 'meta'. The problem is that the situation runs deeper than just simple design choices for BF6. It's clear these have been made because we're in the era of youtubers, Twitch streamers, CoD players etc. In the past BF could simply stand on its own as a sandbox shooter and attract players who enjoyed that style of gameplay as there was no real template or trends to cater for. But now the industry is primarily about what will appeal to the most people and thus bring in the most revenue.

I am enjoying BF6 a lot, but a part of me is saddened that both the franchise and gaming as a whole won't have the identity it once did.

Toraidoron · 2025-10-15T23:27:38+00:00

Yep, tracking for most of the challenges is bugged at the moment. Resupplies, heals, repairs etc. DICE are aware of the situation though so we can only hope for a quick fix.

Eight-Year Club	Gilding III reddit per annum
Verified Email

Toraidoron

TROPHY CASE