Forum Discussion

BillDukes's avatar
BillDukes
Rising Rookie
17 hours ago

BF6 Battle Royale – Veteran BR Player & Battlefield Labs

Hey squad,


I’m BillDukes, IT all-rounder, and someone who’s spent years in the Battle Royale trenches. I’ve bought every Battlefield title, but I’ve never been blindly loyal. When BF stopped delivering the tactical depth I craved, I pivoted. BF1’s cheating issues and 2042’s lack of appeal pushed me toward Warzone — and that’s where I found something unforgettable.

Verdansk and Caldera were peak BR. The tension, the teamwork, the thrill of being the last squad standing. It wasn’t just about raw skill; it was about strategy, communication, and clutch moments. That first iteration of Warzone had a beautiful sense of causality: you could regroup, catch up, and win together. COD eventually moved away from that, and it’s never quite recaptured the magic.


Firestorm didn’t pull me away from Warzone, but if BF6’s BR can bring back that “we did it” feeling — I’m down for testing. I’ve signed up to Battlefield Labs and I’m ready to contribute. My background in beta testing (even outside of games), system diagnostics, and bug reporting means I understand the tools, the process, and the importance of clear, actionable feedback.


I’m also really glad to see BF6 leaning back into the gameplay roots of BF3 and BF4. The multiplayer in those days was phenomenal — tight, tactical, and rewarding. Playing the BF6 beta brought that feeling back. I walked away from some matches thinking, “that was awesome.” That’s the energy Battlefield needs to carry into its BR mode.


One thing I’m already cautious about: respawn beacons/stations. They risk undermining the finality and tension that make BR so compelling. I’d love to see revival mechanics that reward tactical play without turning the late game into a respawn carousel.


Also, SBMM and team balancing are critical. If BF6 wants to deliver that unforgettable moment to more than just the top 1%, it needs to create space for casual squads to shine. That’s what made early Warzone special — and that’s what Battlefield can reclaim.


Let’s build a BR that respects squad play, tactical depth, and the legacy of Battlefield — not just for the elite, but for everyone who plays to win together.


—BillDukes
“Verdansk vibes, Battlefield heart.”
“Beta-tested, bug-hunted, battle-ready.”
“Fueled by fried wholemeal and squad wipes.”

discussion
feedback
guides
maps
pc

3 Replies

  • R1ckyDaMan19's avatar
    R1ckyDaMan19
    Seasoned Ace
    17 hours ago

    Not gonna lie, I'm actually annoyed ea are making a battlefield battle royale, it doesn't need it and the core player base didn't ask for it, it is a giant waste of resources and anyone who wants to play a battle royale should just go play one if the many that already exist in the flooded market.

  • BillDukes's avatar
    BillDukes
    Rising Rookie
    16 hours ago

     Honestly, that kind of thinking feels a bit short-sighted. Battle Royale is a genre EA has already explored with BF Firestorm, and while that didn’t land, it doesn’t mean Battlefield can’t be a serious contender now — especially if it sticks to its core roots. Battlefield’s unique gameplay style could offer something fresh and competitive in a space dominated by very different titles.


    Let’s not forget, extraction shooters are emerging as a new genre too. I’d be surprised if EA isn’t evaluating all these formats from a business perspective. And let’s be real — most players don’t just play one game anymore. A BR mode isn’t going to cannibalize the main multiplayer experience. If anything, it complements it.


    One studio focusing on Multiplayer, one on Battle Royale, and one on Extraction Shooters? That’s smart resource allocation — as long as they don’t repeat COD’s mistakes and dilute the experience. The market is there, so why not build a Battlefield BR that serves both business and players?

    There are 9 major BR games out there, and the dominant ones — Fortnite, Warzone, Apex Legends, and Supervive — are nothing like Battlefield. That’s four heavy-hitters, but the genre isn’t oversaturated, and none of them offer the tactical, squad-based depth Battlefield is known for. There’s absolutely room for a Battlefield Royale.

    It’s good for business and good for the community. EA gets to retain its die-hard player base while building a new one within the BR sphere.

    I’ve played BF multiplayer, COD MP, Warzone, and PUBG. Apex and Fortnite just aren’t my thing — but if Battlefield drops a BR that captures the magic of its best years, I’m on it like stink on poop. Because when Battlefield gets it right, it’s unforgettable.
    And let’s be honest — are you really going to stop playing BF multiplayer just because they added a BR mode?

  • Anobix's avatar
    Anobix
    Seasoned Ace
    14 hours ago

    They tried an extraction shooter. It was called Hazard Zone in 2042 and was dead on arrival.

    I'm of the opinion that a BR mode has a higher chance to negatively affect the main multiplayer product, where balancing isn't kept separate between the two modes. Then you have the clown skins that are popular in BR games which I super dislike, but you can feel those would bleed into the main game as well.

    You now have the rumors that EA wants to make BF an annual franchise, just like CoD, where a lot of folks are very frustrated with Activision because so much more of their time is spent on warzone and then you have their annual releases.

About Battlefield 6 General Discussion

Join the Battlefield 6 community to get game information and updates, talk tactics and share Battlefield moments.741 PostsLatest Activity: 8 seconds ago