Feedback: Air dominance in BF6. And why BF6 still needs to be rebalanced.
We all love Battlefield for its combined arms experience, but air vehicles have always been a huge balance issue. In previous titles, we’ve all seen matches where pilots walk away with 70–120 kills and just 1–2 deaths, completely ruining the fun for the rest of the lobby. During the BF6 betas, this problem already showed up again. Even with two RPGs available, experienced pilots were still farming massive scores. If Engineers are limited to only one RPG in the full game, it’s obvious that air vehicles will once again become nearly untouchable. And this is crucial: the Engineer class should always be able to meaningfully impact and destroy any kind of vehicle. Otherwise, what’s the point of picking Engineer? In both betas, I noticed classes were used much more evenly, especially on vehicle-heavy maps — and I truly believe that giving Engineers 2 RPGs played a big role in making this happen. I’m not saying aircraft should be nerfed into the ground. Quite the opposite: their damage and impact could even be increased. But the key is vulnerability. Planes and helis should always feel at risk when attacking within their flare cooldowns. My ideas for a healthier balance: 1) Higher damage, lower survivability. Bring back 2 RPGs for Engineers. This would make aircraft devastating, but also ensure rotation. More players would get a chance to fly instead of just 1–2 dominating the entire match. The ground game would feel fairer and more engaging. 2) Lower damage, same survivability (with 1 RPG for Engineers). But this option likely means the same pilots will camp in aircraft all match long with little rotation, frustrating the majority of players. Personally, option 1 feels best: keep air vehicles strong, but make them vulnerable enough that infantry has real counterplay. And here’s the big issue: decisions like these seem to prioritize the tiny minority of dedicated pilots over the vast majority of infantry players. When regular players suffer because of balance tuned for a niche group, the whole experience gets worse. That’s why, as much as I love Battlefield, I won’t buy BF6 at full price or preorder. I’ll wait for a sale — because right now it feels like air balance is being designed for a few pilots instead of the community as a whole. I really hope I’m not the only one who sees this as a problem. Because beyond this, there are other issues too that worry me — but not many people even mention them.
We need the return of a two man fighter jet
Dear production team, hello As a loyal battlefield player,I have played almost all the series for a long time, but for the Modern Warfare series, I have played for the longest time and also my favorite. In terms of vehicles, my friends and I are very eager for the return of the two player fighter jet. This not only greatly enhances the immersion of the game, but also allows us to enjoy the chaos of the battlefield. We all know that armed helicopters can carry two players, but fighter jets cannot, which reduces the number of vehicles that can be used to play with friends in the air. In several modern war themed battlefields, only Battlefield 2 has two person fighter jets such as the F15. In addition, in the storyline mode levels of Battlefield 3, there is also a co pilot who plays the role of an F18 fighter jet, but unfortunately, the multiplayer mode does not have it. This is really regrettable, but it does not hinder the fun of Battlefield 3, and Battlefield 4 does not have it either. Do we know that a two person fighter jet may violate game balance?😳 But can we use some means to limit its strength, such as not being able to carry air-to-air missiles? Or extending the resurrection time? 😀We like teammates flying planes, while I am responsible for attacking and cooperating together, which makes it more immersive. We hope that there will be a return of two person fighter jets in future vehicles. I hope the production team can see and reply.
Consider adding a toned down version of the UH-79 heli to infantry maps
By toned down, I mean the UH-79 shouldn't have miniguns or windows to shoot from on the infantry focused maps. This gives pilots the opportunity to fly, adds another degree of strategy and having weaponless aircraft can only add to the atmosphere on these maps. This would only work if the UH-79 has its firepower removed on these maps otherwise it will defeat the point of infantry focused maps. I feel like this "air support" 'experience' is something earlier Battlefields missed out on, due to them being limited by the technology of their time. Imagine for example BF3's Tehran Highway and Grand Bazaar but with close but limited air support. Basically, I want the UH-79 on every single map possible but it must be added in a way that it does not negatively affect the design philosophy of the map itself. I want the UH-79 on all the New York maps, I want it in Metro, I want it EVERYWHERE! When I look up, I want to see a UH-79 flying overhead, when I look down I want to see the fiery remains of a UH-79. When I look out the window, I want to see a UH-79. Here's the UH-79, so you too, can see it.Hard swap (old feature)
This is a feature that I would like it to be brought back in some manner (from BF2 modern combat). I don't expect this be included on BF6 but hear me out. Hard swap allowed the player to change control over a unit that is nearby by pointing at it and pressing a button. I understand that this feature worked well for single players only but with proper tweaking this could make the game more immersive. This could allow players to traverse huge maps without dying or even the need of vehicles. I'll explain what I mean When we take bases, there are times when those bases feel empty as players usually push forward and don't defend until its too late. I prefer they push but I would like the secured bases to have a little more of a resistance aside from the time it takes to take them over. For this i would like to place 4 bots or a bot squad that will move and guard the bases that have been secured. This will provide players an empty vessel to take over and allow to traverse the field simlessly. The catch is a single squad can change quickly and your old vessels will retreat to the nearest secured base (bots will avoid combat). bots will reposition to cover all bases and if more bots are needed, they will be deployed from the HQ, if there are too many the extra will return to HQ. This will allow respawn to foward bases be limited until more bots arrive but also to quickly repositioning your team or self with out killing yourself. Can't hard swap while under fire. This would make the game more immersive for troop movement as you will have less enemies popping out of the blue. If there are no bots, you'll have to deploy from HQ or wait for bots to fill in Respawn to allies or beacon will not be removed however the respawn delay to allies will be significant while respawn to a beacon won't have a delay (beacon has limited uses and destroy itself if the player who set it respawns) Extra/optional Leader of the squad or recon could "radio or use a gatget" to call the bot squad otherwise they won't deploy from HQ Players can take over bots that are retreating to base or HQ Bases and HQ will allow players to swap their class, but new vessel will automatically swap to players last used class Bots will count towards point system so you have be careful when deploying them as bots focus on defending bases, they will shoot and take cover but will prioritize avoiding combat Bots are pin down, they could send a distress signal to be rescued. Could be a fun feature for vehicle players to transport units. it could also speed up the movement of bot squad allowing for faster respawn
barricades
Can we get bullet proof/wood barricades for door ways/windows?! it would add some diversity for imersive changes as matches progress. it would be similar to BF5 where you could build most structures outside of engineer class. Another thing I would suggest is adding a deploy slot item for emergency armor patch to give a med/large chunk of repairs for yourself/team when riding around in light/heavy armor vehicles?! are we going to get super shorty as secondary in this game without buying a battle pass?! it would be nice to not have a paywall for such an essential CQC secondary…"Xbox console language dubbing.
Dear EA official, game production team and community manager: We sincerely hope that the Xbox platform can further value and optimize the game language and voice customization functions on the console. At present, many games (such as Battlefield 2042) force dubbing to be bound according to the system language, which deprives players of the right to make their own choices. We expect the game to provide independent customization options, allowing players to freely switch interface language and voice over language in the game, rather than being limited by mandatory settings in system regions. This move will greatly enhance the gaming experience for players worldwide and meet the needs of users with different language preferences. Thank you for your attention and support!
Jets and helis seem terrible once again
The helis are seem obviously heavy, floaty, and extremely vulnerable to everything—stationary AA, AA tanks, Stingers, jets, even RPGs. Their weaponry is just weak, and the flight model just seems off. But as bad as helis are, jets are somehow even worse. Jets in BF6 are straight up atrocious. Sure, they can instakill other jets and maybe shoot down a heli (if you ever find one alive), but that’s literally it. The jet can’t repair itself (which might be a bug), its guns are useless against ground targets, and the laser-guided missiles are a complete joke. The bombs are totally ineffective too. The flight model is a near copy-paste of BF2042 which nobody wanted. People wanted the skill and feel of BF3 or BF4, but instead we’re stuck with another floaty, weightless mess with worthless weaponry and no effect on the battlefield. Every experienced pilot is saying a similar thing: the jets are bad, even the top players are consistently at the bottom of the scoreboard, game. If people like Silk, one of the best pilots of battlefield imo with 200+ kill games in bf4, is scoring literally last place on the scoreboard playing jets, there’s literally no hope for anyone else. I’m obviously basing all this on lots of gameplay footage and I may be making assumptions as it hasn’t launched but it’s not looking good. It’s honestly like DICE wants air combat to be a non-factor. Ever since BF2042, jets are basically just toys to let players jump in, crash in 20 seconds, and go back to running on the ground. This is not healthy for the game, and if BF6 keeps going down this road, the game is doomed to repeat 2042’s failures. We use to be excited to fly the powerhouse in bf3 and 4 felt almost like a kill streak. Now it’s a cinema and the helis are following suit.
M1 ABRAM VS T-90 IS NECESSARY
Battlefield 6 is a great game, but I feel that regarding the vehicles they have fallen short, repeating the same Abrams for both teams, the classic Abrams vs T-90 from Battlefield is missing, as well as the MBP-3 as a counterpart to the Bradley, the Mi-28 for the Apache and the Su-27 for the F16, thank you very much guys
