The dumbest cosmetic designs in BF history
I have no clue why EA insists on "operator" esq skins and designs. It's like they either want to **bleep** off true fans or want to pander to a crowd that will never want to even try their game. I thought I saw it all with CoD but here EA comes with miles teller. The design choices were already buns (i.e. engineer always having RPG rockets on their back even without running an rpg for some unknown reason) before they wanted to do celebrity cameos but this is insane. Take me back to the days when games wanted to immerse you instead of double barrel blast you with money grabs.Matchmaking creates unnecessary new lobbies instead of filling existing lobbies
I’ve observed this issue for months, and finally decided to write it up in a detailed calm way, JUST IN CASE devs don’t fully understand the scope of the problem. I’ve gathered opinions from several Multiplayer mains, and this issue is universal across all game modes, but is the most prominent and easily replicable in Battle Royale. My region: NA West Battlefield 6 matchmaking appears to be creating multiple partially filled lobbies in the same region instead of prioritizing existing lobbies that are still below the minimum player count required to start. This is especially easy to reproduce late at night when the regional player population is lower. With the network graph enabled, you can see the Session IDand ping for each lobby at the top. For example: Join a lobby showing 25/80 players required (100 max). It sits there and struggles to gain players. Leave and immediately re-queue. After 1 to 5 repetitions, you will be placed into a different Session ID, at the same ping, but this lobby has 45/80 players. That means there are roughly 70 players split between two separate lobbies in the same region, while neither lobby can start. Those players could instead form one active lobby. An even clearer example happens after finishing a match. From the end-of-round screen, press A to matchmake again. Sometimes the game puts you into a newly created lobby with only <10/80 players, where it sits waiting. If you quit to the main menu and immediately re-queue, you can then be placed into another lobby in the same region with something like 60/80 players. Why were those <10 players placed into a nearly empty new lobby instead of being sent to the existing 60-player lobby? This suggests the matchmaking system is not sufficiently prioritizing filling existing viable lobbies before creating additional ones. During low-population hours, this fragments the available player pool across several sessions and can prevent matches from starting even when enough players are online. This should be reproducible using the network graph to compare Session IDs, ping, and player counts during lower-population hours.Dynasty Bug: Players Losing Redshirt Years & Seniors Disappearing
There appears to be a major Dynasty eligibility bug happening specifically during the Players Leaving stage of the offseason. It is extremely noticeable once you get to that screen. Players are being advanced incorrectly and appear to be losing entire years of eligibility. For example, players who were true freshmen last season and redshirted should be entering the next season as Redshirt Freshmen. Instead, they are showing up as Redshirt Sophomores. That means they are effectively losing an entire season of eligibility. In some cases, it appears players may be losing even more than one year depending on how their class progression is being processed. I noticed the incorrect classifications during Players Leaving, but initially assumed it was just a display issue and would correct itself once the offseason was completed. It did not. The incorrect eligibility/class progression carries forward. There is also another major issue happening at the same time: Senior players are disappearing. Players who should still have eligibility remaining are no longer appearing on the roster after the Players Leaving/offseason progression. This creates a serious problem for Dynasty roster management because redshirts and eligibility directly impact: Recruiting needs Scholarship management Depth-chart planning Position changes Encourage Transfers decisions Long-term roster construction If a true freshman redshirts, he should not suddenly become a Redshirt Sophomore the following season. That defeats the entire purpose of the redshirt system and can shorten a player's career by a full season. Easy way to reproduce/check it Before advancing through Players Leaving, take screenshots of: Your freshmen who redshirted. Their current class/year. Seniors who should still have eligibility remaining. Your roster before advancing. Then compare everything after advancing through Players Leaving and into the next season. The class-year changes are very noticeable. I initially thought the game would correct itself once the offseason finished, which is why I didn't immediately assume it was a major issue. Unfortunately, the incorrect eligibility appears to remain. If anyone else is seeing this, please post examples so we can get more visibility on it. EA, please investigate the eligibility/redshirt progression logic during Players Leaving, as well as senior players unexpectedly disappearing during this stage. This can fundamentally alter a multi-year Dynasty. Attachments below. Kight played as a true freshman. Stumps was a freshman that should be a Redshirt freshman. One is a junior now and the other is a redshirt sophomore
Battle Pass Suggestion – NATO Nations & Special Forces
Suggestion: NATO Nations Battle Pass Hello Battlefield Team, I have an idea for a future Battlefield 6 Battle Pass. Since the current Battle Pass shows that themed collaborations and content can work very well, I think a NATO-themed Battle Pass based on real-world nations could be a great future concept. The Battle Pass could focus on four major NATO nations, for example: 🇺🇸 United States 🇹🇷 Türkiye 🇬🇧 United Kingdom 🇫🇷 France Each nation could receive its own small themed package within the Battle Pass, featuring four Operators inspired by real-world special forces and military units from that country. For example: United States Operators inspired by U.S. special operations units Türkiye Operators inspired by Turkish special forces, such as Özel Kuvvetler Komutanlığı United Kingdom Operators inspired by British special forces France Operators inspired by French special forces The Operators could have authentic-looking uniforms, camouflage patterns, helmets, tactical equipment, patches and other cosmetic details inspired by their respective countries. Most importantly, these should be cosmetic only and provide absolutely no gameplay advantage. Players who do not buy the Battle Pass should never be at a disadvantage. The Battlefield Pro Battle Pass could additionally expand the concept with more European/NATO-themed cosmetics, weapon skins, vehicle skins, charms, player cards and similar rewards. I think nation-themed Battle Passes could become a whole series. A later season could focus on other NATO members or a different group of nations. Battlefield is built around large-scale military warfare, so giving players more ways to represent different real-world armed forces could fit the game extremely well and add much more variety to the Operators. Thank you for considering the idea!
Ranked Mode and Persistent Servers are mandatory for BF6
if DICE adds a proper Ranked Mode to the classic multiplayer (instead of limiting it just to REDSEC), it would be a massive win for the game. Here is why this is crucial for BF6: Long-term Motivation (The Grind): Right now, progression completely dies once you unlock all the weapons. Grinding through ranks would keep people hooked for months and seasons to come. No More Lobby Chaos: Casual modes always mix pro-level stacks with absolute beginners. A separate ranked system would finally offer balanced matches against players of equal skill (proper SBMM). True Squad Teamwork: Winning is everything in ranked. This will actually force players to use mics, cooperate, and play their class roles (heals, ammo, repairs) instead of just farming K/D. Perfect Fit for Tactical Modes: A ranked system would breathe new life into tighter, competitive formats like Rush, Domination, or infantry-only modes. In my opinion, this would prevent the game from getting stale and give the competitive community a dedicated place to sweat. if DICE wants Battlefield 6 to succeed, bringing back the Server Browser and Persistent Servers is non-negotiable. Here is why these features are mandatory for the game: Community Building: Persistent servers allow players to return to the same community every day, make friends, and build regular squads. Live admins can also instantly ban hackers, keeping the matches clean. Freedom of Choice: A server browser eliminates the matchmaking lottery. Players can choose their preferred map, game mode, ticket count, and exact ping instead of being forced into maps they hate. Game Longevity: Custom servers keep Battlefield games alive for decades after official support ends. This is exactly why Battlefield 3,4,1,V still have active player bases today. Custom Rulesets: Server owners can tailor the experience by creating infantry-only rotations, banning annoying weapons, or tweaking vehicle spawn timers to keep the gameplay fresh. Because of these missing features, you lost such a huge percentage of players in less than a year, and you continue to ignore what your players actually want. There are also still bugs that need fixing, which I hope you will resolve over time.
Feature Request: Persuade Players to Follow You to New Job
If you take another head coaching job, it'd be great if you could select players from your previous school's roster to follow you to your new job. This step could happen during the "Players Leaving" week. How I see this working: You have a set limit of players that you can bring with you depending on your coach level / prestige. This could range from 10-20 players for a relatively low-level coach going to a slightly better school, up to the entire roster if you're more highly rated. This could be structured like persuasions where you'd have a better chance of bringing players with you based on NIL, dealbreakers, and coach prestige. Every player on the roster should be targetable for chance to follow you to the new school. If the player accepts, they are automatically added as "committed" to your recruiting board and your needs list updates accordingly. I think this would mirror real life much better and add an additional dynamic element to rebuilding at a new school. Too often I'll take a new job and want to bring a bunch of my star players with me, but only like max 7-8 players from my old team enter the portal – many of which I don't really need or want, or are locked out of due to dealbreakers. Look at the massive roster plunders from North Texas to Oklahoma State or Iowa State to Penn State this past offseason. Many of these teams are now turning over entire rosters in a single offseason, and I'd love to get that type of scenario in CFB. Additionally, the "max transfers" setting of 30 should be bumped way up and probably include the entire roster max of 85, or more if rosters are expanded in the next game.
