Battlefield 6 Outage Map

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Battlefield 6 Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Embark006 (@embark006) reported 3 minutes ago

  @Battlefield Fix the matchmakingggggg

• 
  PaulsCorner-VerseQuest (@TNTJohn1717) reported 5 minutes ago

  Chapter 3 Early Does Not Mean Pure The early church was not a golden age of perfect doctrine. That fantasy is one of the great tricks used by Rome and by many others who want to appeal to antiquity. The apostles themselves warned that corruption would come early, not late. Paul said in Acts 20:29-30, “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.” That is not a prediction of purity for five hundred years followed by trouble. That is a warning that danger was already standing at the door while Paul was still alive. The idea that the earliest post-apostolic period must be treated as a pure doctrinal fountain is not Bible. It is romance. John said, “even now are there many antichrists” (1 John 2:18). Paul said, “the mystery of iniquity doth already work” (2 Thessalonians 2:7). Jude told believers to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3). Peter warned that “there shall be false teachers among you” (2 Peter 2:1). The New Testament does not end with the apostles handing a perfectly protected institutional machine to Rome. It ends with warnings, rebukes, apostasies, false teachers, seducing spirits, corrupted words, and churches being judged by the risen Christ in Revelation 2 and 3. If you read the New Testament honestly, you do not come away expecting every early writer to be a doctrinal safe zone. You expect to find mixture, battle, courage, confusion, truth, error, and the beginning of long corruption. That is exactly why ancient witnesses must be handled carefully. They are valuable because they show us the battlefield. They are dangerous when men confuse the battlefield with the final authority. A man writing in the third century may be a useful witness against one heresy and a poor guide on another doctrine. That should not shock anyone. The apostles were already fighting doctrinal fires before the ink was dry on parts of the New Testament. The Holy Ghost did not tell us to trust the post-apostolic stream as though it were pure. He gave us Scripture. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). Scripture gives doctrine. Scripture gives reproof. Scripture gives correction. Scripture gives instruction. That is the equipment of the man of God, not a stack of contradictory fathers. Chapter 4 Near the Apostles But Still Capable of Error Rome’s appeal to the fathers often depends on confusing historical nearness with doctrinal correctness. The assumption is simple: because a man lived closer to the apostles, he must have understood the apostles better. That sounds reasonable until you read your Bible. The Galatians were much closer to Paul than any church father, and Paul said, “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel” (Galatians 1:6). How soon? Very soon. Close enough to have heard apostolic preaching. Close enough to have known the truth firsthand. Yet they were already drifting into another gospel. So much for the fairy tale that nearness guarantees purity.

• 
  Dan Gainor (@dangainor) reported 6 minutes ago

  @judgementdaze @LeighWolf There were people on both sides who felt that secession was legal. No matter what your view of the issue, it was decided on the battlefield and not in the Courts.

• 
  Toxic Barbie (@sadieshinigami) reported 6 minutes ago

  @Battlefield Does marina and downtown still have lighting/ red issues? Do packages and mission rewards still drop empty?

• 
  Matthew Bromwell (@Quicksilvergoat) reported 7 minutes ago

  @Battlefield Can you not fix REDSEC so I don’t get blinded? It’s been broken for weeks. This is @CallofDuty level nonsense.

• 
  一番 (@Sp4cePigz) reported 7 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldComm Easy fix, have the option to separate consoles from PC for cross play

• 
  Robbie K (@OSINToffenders) reported 7 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldComm @Battlefield You guys need to fix these cheaters and glare glitches on ranked red sec!!!! We have cross play off and waiting 20 minutes for a match! Get rid of pc players!

• 
  Hieb (@HiebDE) reported 10 minutes ago

  @TheTopMostDog @JimmyMack0320 @Battlefield Yeah the trees are an issue but realistically the physics engine has so many variables to compute to generate an outcome and changing them a little bit generates a massively different outcome. Every BF has that problem its unavoidable. Try crashing helis on bf6 into each other

• 
  Trollaria (@Trollaria) reported 10 minutes ago

  @JrAntill @Pirat_Nation Campers are a bigger problem then cheaters in battlefield 6 for me. Because the working anti cheat i havent seen one in first few months i played. But the game was plagued with camper losers. Ofc cheaters are bad. But with good anti cheat i barely see them. Or not even one.

• 
  Steve in a Truck (@stevedeleeuw) reported 13 minutes ago

  @Battlefield Still no fix to downtown, mustard yellow buildings, ketchup red? Venom black? Happens to PS5 players more then anyone else. It’s been months. Empty crates being dropped still not fixed? Maybe you should not have fired everyone

• 
  Swaguley (@swaguley) reported 14 minutes ago

  Saying that players who don't like certain movement mechanics in Battlefield because they're just "bad at the game" is a non-sequitur. I agree, the movement isn't difficult, and killing players slide-jumping isn't either. That's not the issue. The real problem is this. - It changes the pace of combat and alters the feeling of gunfights to where they become less readable, and more annoying to play fundamentally; and more importantly: - It shifts the tone of Battlefield from the "grounded in authenticity" mantra Battlefield had, which players have come to expect from it in the market, to something much arcadier I'm happy to support more movement options as long as they fit an authenticity and believability line, but it seems even asking THAT is too much for some reason. We praise vehicle design when they move naturalistically, why is infantry combat an exception? The heart of the argument here is about Battlefield's tone, which affects how the gameplay is designed, not because some players can't "get good". You don't get players complaining about emergent movement mechanics in Rocket League, even from trash cans, because they expect it from the game's tone, Battlefield players do not. And no, citing bugs like BF3's aim stabilization jump, BF4's various movement exploits, etc. as prooftexts to justify any and all future crackhead movement mechanics in Battlefield, doesn't work either. Should we also then bring back Battlepacks just because they were in BF4 too? I get there are those of you that don't care about Battlefield's tone, therefore there is no "movement line" to cross, but you're ignoring massive swaths of players that DO care and will just straight up not play the game as a result, as you often recommend them to do. A vast amount of players come to Battlefield to play a combined arms military shooter with the "appearance of realism without being a simulator" gameplay loop that Battlefield UNIQUELY offered as a middle ground in the market, but EA and DICE have abandoned that middle ground to trend chase other games. This is why it's annoying and there's so much complaining about things like movement and skins. You can continue to attack the caricature of a 0.5 KD player crouch walking to bolster your position, but you still can't define a well-reasoned upper limit for movement mechanics because you DON'T have a standard. An appeal to the skill gap is not a standard, and it does not define an upper limit for movement whatsoever. What then would be keeping DICE from adding wall running, double jumps, or even phasing through walls if it can be argued those could potentially take a vague amount of skill to perform? The bounds are defined by Battlefield's supposed authentic tone, which has been erased in favoring of emulating other games. If you just enjoy Battlefield's metamorphosis into a movement slop shooter like every other FPS out there, that's fine. We can disagree. Just don't expect the franchise to be anything more than a cheap, more plasticky Call of Duty substitute going forward.

• 
  Zero Vladamire Whiterose (@zerovwhiteros) reported 14 minutes ago

  - front lines of whatever battlefield of the Empire expansion to ensure it happened without issue had seemingly locked himself away. The Demon King though knew why and sat within his study he rubbed his tired eyes, a back log of paperwork and other reports sat pilled on his desk-

• 
  volodmire (@_sarkaz) reported 20 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldComm some of these answers like "actively looking into reticle brightness" dog, they've been an issue since the game launched. tf you mean i know they've gave us the ability to change reticle color, but it didn't fix the brightness issue.

• 
  Abubakar Ameen (@AbubakarAmeen_) reported 21 minutes ago

  I understand, bro. My childhood was a battlefield too. But Allah taught me that broken roads do not lead to broken destinies. Some of His strongest servants were raised in storms, so they could become shelters for others.

• 
  TheApeOfGoldStreet (@TheApeOfGoldST) reported 23 minutes ago

  @Krisse_ There is no point discussing this issue as you have your reality and I have mine - let’s just agree that this needs to get solved through diplomacy and not on the battlefield. Cheers