Meet the Community Managers of the EA Forums

Hyped for BF6! :)

Dear Battlefield 6 Planners,
I’m a long-time Battlefield enthusiast who has purchased nearly every installment in the series—even the lackluster Battlefield 2042.
After testing Battlefield 6 for several days, I’m genuinely impressed by its current performance. It’s already excellent, and I’d like to share some thoughts based on my experience.
First, let’s address the current shortcomings:
The issue of infantry ammunition resupply. I understand the intention is to encourage infantry to stick together and coordinate, but in practice, players often choose classes based on personal preference, making ammo resupply difficult. Additionally, the icons for ammo crates are not prominent enough, worsening the problem. Moreover, vehicle supply stations can’t resupply infantry. I hope you’ll reference Battlefield 5’s approach: add appropriate fixed supply points and adjust the display of personal supply crate icons.
There’s also a minor bug: on the “Siege of Cairo” map, there’s an inexplicable light source model that’s extremely 刺眼 (dazzling) and can’t be destroyed. Please relocate it or remove it entirely.
Now, my main focus: vehicle balance.
Across Battlefield titles, overpowered vehicles have always been a persistent issue. It seems planners often resort to nerfing vehicles or increasing their difficulty to operate, which isn’t a good solution. Vehicles are a crucial part of Battlefield, not mere decorations.
The root of overpowered vehicles lies in unbalanced interactions—between vehicles themselves and between vehicles and players. I believe vehicles should have distinct advantages based on their combat roles.
Ground Vehicles
Take tanks, for example. Tanks should offer two specialization paths: anti-tank or anti-infantry, determined by the player’s choice of ammunition. Players could opt for armor-piercing rounds (AP) or high-explosive rounds (HE).
AP rounds should deal significantly more damage to vehicles but pose much less threat to infantry.
HE rounds should have greatly increased splash damage, higher damage to infantry, but drastically reduced damage to vehicles.
This “natural enemy effect” must be pronounced—so significant that skill or proficiency can’t compensate for the gap.
The customization system is a great idea, and vehicles should also benefit from it to create differentiation. For tanks:
Choose between armor thickness or mobility.
Choose between AP or HE rounds.
Choose between turret rotation speed or reload speed.
Choose between thermal imaging or magnified scopes.
This would create a checks-and-balances dynamic, with both teams adapting to the battlefield.
For support vehicles like infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs), their core traits—high mobility and low armor—should remain. However, players should choose between anti-armor or HE rounds (for anti-infantry). The statistical gap between these options must be large to avoid “jack-of-all-trades” IFVs, which would disrupt balance.
Aircraft
The same logic applies to aircraft, which should specialize in one of three roles: anti-ground armor, anti-ground infantry, or air-to-air combat—only one advantage per aircraft.
Anti-ground aircraft should have far lower mobility and speed than air-combat-focused ones, creating mutual 克制 (restraint).
I suggest limiting aircraft to one base type, with 2 per team. Players would customize them via parts to fit their role: air superiority fighter, anti-ground vehicle, or anti-ground troop. The choice is theirs.
Attack Helicopters
Their high mobility and vulnerability should stay, but players must choose between anti-vehicle or anti-infantry loadouts—no middle ground.
The goal of these changes:
To balance the battlefield, preventing a single player from dominating infantry with a one-size-fits-all vehicle while the enemy has no counter. If you’re using an anti-infantry tank to mow down soldiers, you’ll fear the enemy’s anti-armor tank (your natural counter). Conversely, an anti-armor tank bullying enemy vehicles will be vulnerable to infantry, as its loadout poses little threat to them.
That’s all for my suggestions. I hope you understand and look forward to discussing them further. Please stop nerfing vehicles mindlessly—it’s unwise and doesn’t solve the problem.
Note: The author is not a native English speaker. This message was written in Chinese and translated via software, so there may be inaccuracies. Please interpret as needed or contact the author for clarification.

I seriously don't give a #$_& who you are or what capacity you work with EA, all I'm hearing is more of the same. This new Battlefield title (which is I'm Beta) already sucks, your Javalin anti cheat is garbage so many cheaters on the Beta no one can honestly give you a good rating, and again it's just the Beta , what will the release be but more of the same stuff. For me I loved Battlefield 2 up to 4, but ever since then Dice and EA have sold out to greed and not to quality and compassion for the game. I won't be buying this disgrace to it's memory.

sup team :) 

Hey, how about your Steam Moderators follow the Steam Guidelines and stop banning people for no reason. All because I didn't use a proper pronoun? I'm taking my 129.99 back until I'm not permanently banned anymore.