Forum Discussion

S4K_HeadhunterEx's avatar
S4K_HeadhunterEx
New Vanguard
5 months ago

Please give us official 32/48 Players Servers (Portal is not a solution)

It really feels like you (Dice) are not paying attention to your community feedback. Or if you do, it is not coming from your core community. Going through the forums, I see hundreds and thousands of post, where people complain about BF6 feeling like Call of Duty. The constant pressure, no breathing room, always getting shot from multiple angles all add up to BF6 feeling extremely fast and CoD-like. 

There would be such an easy and straight forward solution: give us the exact same Maps with fewer players! There would be countless benefits like:

  • fixing all of the above
  • having more tactical rounds
  • less run and gun
  • a single squad could actually have an impact on the round
  • the hitreg/netcode/dying-behind-cover would not feel nearly as bad

The funny thing is, IMHO the overall balance (teams/classes/gadgets/vehicles) won't need adjustment. You can implement smaller servers without much/any attention to the overall gameplay. Why do I think that? Because in its current state, people rarely play according to the current circumstances. If you have a pilot or tank driver farming a server, he/she can often do so without noticeable intervention. So having less player just means less kills for them, but there won't be a shift in the balance "because fewer engineers are going to kill them".  They aren't right now either.

Since Portal is basically useless and the server browser is still intentionally hidden, it is not a solution. You won't believe how many people actually don't know (or care), that Portal/the Server Browser even exists.

I know there is a ton in your backlog, but every patch feels like a face slap and is sending weird signals by constantly leaving out huge issues/bugs the game still has. Even the little feedback this forum seemingly receives is still not implemented (speaking of the confirmed but yet to come class rework...).

Please show any sign that you actually listen to the core community and to people who play BF since the beginning.
Also, if it is too hard to envision a way for BF, take a look at some old developer interviews. Just dropping one citation here: "BF was never meant to have 64 Players as a default". There is such much more that would catapult BF6 to a better state, but I leave it at the player count for now.

Thank you and best regards.

2 Replies

  • Twordy's avatar
    Twordy
    Seasoned Ace
    5 months ago

    Old devs are gone. I would not expect any improvement in that aspect.

    You are dying behind cover because there is a packet loss on one of the gates connecting you to a game server. You cannot fix the lag on one gate that pings you high if you are randomly thrown to a new lobby. Rentable servers have been much better, and you could find a workaround by yourself with broken gates and higher delays. Some of my mates have 20% packet loss in certain lobbies... simply amazing.

    S4K_HeadhunterEx wrote:

    Since Portal is basically useless and the server browser is still intentionally hidden, it is not a solution. You won't believe how many people actually don't know (or care), that Portal/the Server Browser even exists.

    Honestly, Portal should have been removed due to pointless XP/Unlocks farms.

    If EA does not have a will or patent to sell/provide a ranked server certificates with presets to server providers... then what is the point of having a Portal except for AFK/overnight XP farms?

    Players should never have a free hand with tampering with XP multiplayers or TTK/TTD, then slapping their server with fully ranked official mode.

Featured Places

Node avatar for Battlefield 6 General Discussion

Battlefield 6 General Discussion

Join the Battlefield 6 community to get game information and updates, talk tactics and share Battlefield moments.Latest Activity: 38 minutes ago
12,753 Posts