On the eye relief of low-power scopes.
Dear Battlefield Official Team,I would like to provide feedback regarding an issue in the core gameplay of Battlefield 6, and I hope you can take this suggestion into consideration. After multiple rounds of testing, I feel that the eye relief on low-magnification optics is currently too long. The sight picture appears too small and obstructs too much of the field of view, which feels very uncomfortable.Would it be possible to introduce an adjustable eye relief setting to accommodate different players' preferences? Many others have also been reporting the same issue, as this significantly impacts the gameplay experience for infantry combat players.Thank you for your attention. n.
The modification of the Phantom skin is frustrating
At the end of watching the promotional video for online mode, I saw pictures of the Phantom version. I was very excited about the unique night vision device of the Assault Soldier because I liked this style. I shared it with my friends, and they also praised it. So we decided to pre order the Phantom version and looked forward to the upcoming game. But today my friend shared a message with me that the skin design of the Phantom Squad has been modified on the official pre order interface, with the Assault Squad being the most modified. I found that the night vision device is no longer the same design as when I watched the trailer, which makes me very frustrated and angry. I feel deceived, just like what you have been waiting for a long time is fake, making my mood all day bad and even losing enthusiasm for the game. My friends are no exception. I hope the official can pay attention to this issue, give a clear answer to pre order players.
Sniper Zeroing Dilemma
This'll likely be my last suggestion before waiting on the release. The snipers shouldn't be able to zero-in to the exact meter on the press of a button using the range finder attachment. It allows players to set their aim bind to the zeroing bind so that the player never has to worry about bullet drop when aiming in. The range finder should act as an attachment to the scope that will let you know the distance in meters at which you are aiming at, and have the player use the zeroing on the sniper based on (100, 200, 300, 400, 500m) and control their bullet drop using visible cues from the bullet tracing, or on the scopes Ballistic Drop Compensating (BDC) reticles or holdovers that let the player know how high they should aim. It shouldn't act this simple as it removes a skill gap in the game and also removes the need for control over bullet drop in general. And if kept in the game, then the bullet drop should just be removed in general.
Why the "Portal-Browser" is not a Server Browser; a Defense of Common Sense
I've been seeing folks say that the Portal server browser is the same as or substantially similar to a proper persistent main-game server browser. Let me be clear, this is NOT the case. A portal browser is fundamentally different and a substantial downgrade from a server browser. EA SHOULD NOT implement this, and the community should absolutely be up in arms with this patch-work-empty gesture of a solution. It is NOT what they say it is, and I want you to know why. Before I start, I just want to be clear that I have been playing Battlefield for over 20 years since BF2's launch in 2005. I love this series and have put thousands of hours into it on PC. I don't at all claim my voice is somehow definitive on the issue, I just only note it because I want BF6 to succeed in for years to come like some of my favorites like BF2, BFBC2, BF4, and BF1. Okay, so back to it: BF2042's Portal Browser has been awful since launch, and for years has been filled with bot-XP-farms with very little substantive content. There are little to no consistent servers, the player population is miniscule, and portal has never provided anything remotely close to a server browser experience. Further, despite BF6's more customizable portal, there is nothing to otherwise indicate that the Portal browser will be able to properly replicate a server browser experience. There are few if any servers hosting popular Battlefield experiences, despite the player count being very high now. If you want the #1 reason, here it is, the last Portal Browser iteration failed and they have not fixed the core issues. It has not and will not be a server browser. In BF6, matchmaking will claim 99% of the player base, and the portal browser will not provide a populated experience. Despite DICE's "front of the main menu" claims, as with BF2042, the portal browser will be relegated to a distant 2nd place. Unlike r/Battlefield folks, most players in shooters simply use quickplay. Portal meanwhile is meant for unique, custom, and bespoke community creations. Mixing wacky portal creations AND the core gameplay experience into one mish-mash-server browser is confusing, tedious, and time-consuming. Imaging in Halo having to go to Forge just to play a couple rounds of Juggernaut? That'd be ridiculous of course and what would happen is no one would play Juggernaut until its put into matchmaking. That's what is happening here in BF6. The truth is most people have an hour or so to play in a day, no one is going to sort through a mess of creations, custom modes, and other new designs just to play a map or mode they want. Put simply, EA did not think this idea through and the Portal Browser was never meant to be an actual server browser. Previous matchmaking in BF1 or BF4 often fails despite thousands of players online. Battlefield has never historically had properly working matchmaking like Call of Duty. You can look at BF1 for example and you will often never be matchmade into an actual game, usually placed into completely empty servers. As a game ages, and the player-count inevitably drops, matchmaking will only get worse. Imagine BF1 without a server browser, it would be completely unplayable despite having matchmaking. In BF2042 this past spring for example was nearly impossible to find a matchmade game off-hours, despite plenty of players playing online. This issue will only get worse with time. BF matchmaking is horrid at map selection. Think back to the BF6 beta, how many times in a row did you play Liberation Peak? I counted 3 times in a row that I got Siege of Cairo. Even now in BF2042, I am constantly placed into Breakaway over and over. Simply put, DICE has not figured out a proper map rotation algorithm. Even so, there is no way to exclude maps you don't like, or request maps you do like. You are stuck with whatever the matchmaking gives you, and its never what you want. DICE/EA can "remove" modes and maps from matchmaking, which in essence removes them from the game. Remember two weeks ago when they removed 24/7 Iwo Jima from matchmaking despite it being a clear community favorite? Remember when you couldn't play 128 player matches in BF2042 for a while, despite it being on the back of the box? Remember when you just straight up couldn't play Rush at all in BF2042? DICE matchmaking has always resulted in content being removed from the game until r/Battlefield gets into an uproar. BF6 will be no different, and Portal is NOT the solution to this. Matchmaking does not permit persistent teams, squads, or even squad leaders. Have you ever had a really great pilot in your squad? What about great chemistry with your squad all piling into a jeep and capping objectives together? Have you ever had a 5th friend try to join your team, even if they can't fit on the squad? Ever loved being a squad leader after winning a match? Matchmaking removes all of this. Your squads and teams are disbanded after every game, 5th-wheel friends are all-but unable to join your team, and your squad leader is always rotated out. Matchmaking KILLS teamwork, camaraderie, and community by constantly stripping you of your squad-mates and forcing you to play a new solo-match every time. Even squadding-up with your friends in the lobby will often mix you up in the game. Squads and matchmaking have never mixed in Battlefield, and it was there in BF6 as well. Matchmaking often places players into high-ping servers. In BF6, despite millions of players online, I played about 50-70% of my games on servers with a ping of over 100ms. I have absolutely no way to prevent this, period. Imagine half of your games getting shot behind corners. There is no solution to this problem, the matchmaking algorithm simply does not prioritize connection as a player does. A server browser however allows you to sort by ping, and pick something with a good connection. (this is my personal #1 reason) Battlefield moments exist because of the server browser. Why is Operation Metro on BF3 the legendary CQC experience that is is? Because of all the "24/7 5000ticket Metro" servers that ran it day and night! Why are BF2 Strike at Karkand or BF1942 Wake Island THE definitive legacy experiences? Because servers ran "24/7 Karkand INF Only" and "Wake Island 24/7" servers. Why are jet, helicopter and tank controls in BF3 & BF4 held in high esteem among purists? Because of the persistent "All Big Maps w/Vehicles" servers that allowed us to hone our skills for hours on end! Why are BFBC2 Arica Harbor, Valparaiso, and Port Valdez THE favorite Rush maps? Because community-run server browsers picked them over other less popular rush maps like Atacama Desert or Harvest Day. Where do you go if you want Battlefield naval combat in 2025? Of course to the BF4 Naval Strike servers that still run those maps, long after DICE has forgotten about boats in a Battlefield game. Simply put, Battlefield would not exist as it is today without a server browser; it is part of the DNA of the series. It must be included in BF6 At launch Portal "Experiences" deleted after the host (eg. your computer) leaves. BF2042 "experiences" always needed a host connected at all times, else they are removed. You can "load up" an empty experience, but Portal was NOT a persistent always-on, always-joinable game. This was 100% different than servers that anyone can join at any time, and not even close to a replacement. There were no rental servers in BF2042 or BF6 Portal. There is a "persistent" button now, though that is not on by default, and was added a year after launch after the game had all but died. Ranked & Unranked Servers already fix this Issue. In previous iterations of Battlefield, you can get matchmade into only the "ranked" servers, which is another word for vanilla-battlefield with no modification. This could be DICE official servers or community run servers. Then "unranked" servers are those with mods, changes, and other shifts in the gameplay that you have to manually select or opt into. Ideally, this implementation could allow constant influx of match-made players into ranked portal servers, and not the unranked ones. This has already been done in previous titles, I don't know why it cannot be done here. Just my though on how to split the baby as a potential solution down the road. This ideally keeps both matchmaking and the server browser alive & populated. To conclude, matchmaking has its place. Many folks just want to get home and join up in quickplay, and that's fine. But the more you play, a server browser becomes more and more necessary to hone your skills, increase map knowledge, squad up with friends, and play lag-free on the maps & modes you want. There is no reason DICE & EA could not include both as with previous titles. I sincerely hope that "Battlefield Studios" see this and provides a workable solution to implement a proper, full-featured, persistent, server-browser. BF6 has some great bones, and the browser is 100% part of the Battlefield DNA. (I also posted this under the r/Battlefield subreddit with the title name & username with over 800 upvotes & over 300 comments for further context & input from the community)No bad scopes, good scopes. Make sure has lines on the bottom please?
It’s up to their idea, and it’s not us, but I just thought this was a smart idea. I know it sounds like a lot but I’m so used to far away from the area on the battlefield just because am so used to it. could they bring it back please? I know it’s too much to ask for I forgot to bring that up. It’ll help in the game too.
Battfield4 Engineer Skin
It is a very unpleasant thing for players to have female characters play the role of Chinese engineers. This will lead to a decrease in players' sense of immersion in the characters. Not to mention that many players of 2042 were very disappointed upon learning this news, and their expectations for the new Battlefield will further decline. I hope Dice can solve this issue promptly, otherwise it will really disappoint many players.
