Nerf sliding-jump is always echo chamber
The ongoing push to nerf sliding is largely an echo chamber of players who prefer camp. Movement has always been a core part of Battlefield. Just look at BF4—it didn't have sliding, but it had hi...
Forum Discussion
Finally, to the people constantly telling active players to "go play COD": be careful what you wish for. The player base has already hemorrhaged from its 750,000 launch peak down to 50,000, and 10.000 is clearly the next milestone if active player is leaving for "COD".
You may want to think about what you wrote there.
BF6 was more “COD-like” at release and during Season 1, exactly when the player-base crashed. The sliding and hopping were stronger, the initial maps were small in size and promoted constant action, sniping was easier than ever, etc. That was the attempt at catching a new generation of players and it did not go well.
Making the game more like COD not only peeved off the legacy fan base, it did not bring in the throngs of new players they would have wanted. And it’s not surprising: if BF feels too much like COD, then it’s just another modern FPS with nothing special about it. People will come and try it when they’re angry at Black Ops 7, but will move on quickly enough. I think there are plenty of things BF can do to attract new players, but it has to do much more with making the core formula more accessible and promote team play, not trying to swap DNA.
And your complaints about not being able to attack a reinforced position just by your lonesome tells me there’s a lot of work to be done to explain that formula.
Fair points, bro. The drastic player drop numbers were definitely phrased a bit aggressively to make a point, so if you had doubts about that, you're totally right.
To be clear, I’m definitely not a fan of brainless arcade laser-guns or CoD's exact gunplay. If you remember my previous post on gunplay models, I actually favor the BF style over CoD’s approach (though I kept it neutral back then for the sake of discussion).
That said, I still think there are aspects where BF can learn from CoD without losing its soul. Since BF4, the franchise has always hit that sweet spot of high-mobility arcade mechanics blended with massive, immersive sandbox battlefields.
My main issue is that BF6 has actually become far too non-arcade (it's not a really mil-sim game) and overly shifted toward passive play. There are way too many tools designed for camping, and way too few tools for breaking a defensive setup. It’s not about wanting to be a "lone-wolf hero"—it's that creating an opening for your team, has become excruciatingly painful. You take all the damage, get completely shut down by campers, and get little reward for it.
As a side note on the team play design: anti-vehicle efforts suffer from the exact same problem. The score you get for taking out vehicles is ridiculously low—I have no idea why DICE is being so stingy with XP. Playing objective/team play by destroying or repairing vehicles gives almost little return, while camping in a corner to collect kill-tolls all match is far more rewarding. That’s my biggest gripe with the current design direction.
Featured Places
