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:

• 
  Swaguley (@swaguley) reported 4 minutes ago

  EA fumbled their biggest opportunity to steal players from COD and retain them with BF6. Allow me to explain. When BO7 was first announced, I believe many classic COD fans were frustrated with Activision and chose BF6 because they wanted an arcade military shooter that: 1) Looked like an actual military game (no goofy skins) and 2) Had normal, boots on the ground movement Both of which are things modern COD largely abandoned chasing Fortnite and other games. Skins and movement are also hot topics in the COD community. These disgruntled COD players saw the announcements for BF6 and thought that Battlefield, a franchise historically known for being authentic, would at least adhere to its identity since Call of Duty would not. On first glance, the marketing seemed to bear this out. The backlash to BO7's announcement was the tipping point where COD players as a whole were finally open to giving Battlefield a serious look. BF6's marketing and beta then gave them the impression that it was going to be EXACTLY what they were looking for and expecting: a grounded, arcade military shooter that looked the part without the crackhead movement. That's why skins and clips of crackhead movement are the two things that blow up more than anything else with BF6. These were the two most important features to get right, funnily enough. Battlefield fans and classic COD fans actually converged in these areas, as they really wanted the same thing. EA then made jabs at Call of Duty: "No Nicki Minaj skins" and blew up Zac Efron to drive the point home. Battlefield was in a prime position to capitalize and finally steal the market from Call of Duty. However, once everyone bought BF6 and played it for a little while, they began to realize what it actually was: A cheap, more plasticky feeling copy of modern Call of Duty, just with GI Joe vs Cobra skins and its own version of crackhead movement. I think it's fair to say that both COD and Battlefield players alike felt rug pulled. Little did we know that while poking fun at Call of Duty with one hand, EA was literally copying COD's failing homework with the other. It seems that EA believed fundamentally that COD players just wanted a 1:1 copy of what "modern" Call of Duty was (they didn't) and told Battlefield Studios to make exactly that, with yearly releases planned in the future. They didn't understand the fundamental reasons why COD players were disgruntled with modern COD in the first place and why the franchise was going downhill. Battlefield 6 was not an attempt to be a classic Battlefield game. It was designed to be the "perfect COD substitute". To avoid backlash from Battlefield players by being upfront about this fact, they did everything in their power to evoke BF3/BF4 nostalgia instead of letting everyone know they were actually trying to build MW19/MWII just on the back of 2042's garbage version of Frostbite. The kicker here is, I think most COD players actually DID want Battlefield to simply be Battlefield, and they expected exactly that, just like your average Battlefield fan. Back in the day, these players may have dabbled with BF3, BF4, or BF1 and were now finally open to giving the Battlefield franchise a real chance because COD had repeatedly abused their loyalty over the years. It's actually quite interesting to see COD fans being completely spot on about what Battlefield's identity is or should be, even when some Battlefield players forget. Shortly after BF6 released, these COD players quickly became wise to what was actually going on, and put the game down when they realized that BF6 was not trying to be Battlefield, they were just trying to be what modern COD had become, even down to things like the menus and the overpriced store; the funny part is they couldn't even do it any better than Activision. These COD players didn't want Battlefield to just be a copy of modern COD, but EA didn't get this. When 2042 crashed and burned, EA just said screw it and applied a blanket approach to their copying because they didn't actually understand what COD players wanted, so they thought by copying everything they could, maybe something would stick. They even placed COD developers in charge to make sure of this. EA could've been the good guy here and used this opportunity to be the antithesis to what modern Call of Duty had become, but instead they misunderstood the assignment and just became little bro bad guy. It only took 18 days for them to bring in the stupid looking skins to their poorly designed customization system and boosted slide jumps became the meta. This is why BF6 ultimately had such a steep player drop off a month after release and why those hundreds of thousands of players won't come back no matter what updates come. Once the positive first impression was dashed by the reality of what BF6 was, these COD players didn't have a problem dropping the game and not looking back. Meanwhile, we Battlefield fans are now stuck with a Battlefield game that is really just a cheap copy of Call of Duty with some Battlefield lipstick applied and Battlefield Studios is having to go back and slowly put the toothpaste back in the tube to please the Battlefield players that are masochistic enough to stick around. Tiny changes to the gameplay aren't enough to change the overall flavor of the game, they need to drastically change it. Even after all the updates, it still tastes the same way it did at release. But the damage is already done, these COD players aren't coming back and EA has simultaneously pushed away a ton of Battlefield players in the process. It seems we did hold onto a few of the COD players, judging by the amount of people that instantly skip their revive when downed. You might say, "Well BF6 was best selling Battlefield of all time" and while that is true, because of the reasons I've stated above, Battlefield 7 will NOT come close to the sales of BF6 because COD players are now wise to what EA is doing and so are many Battlefield players. I question if I would even buy BF7 if they take the same approach again. I will certainly be looking at BF7 much more critically than I did BF6. EA's metrics for live service games rely heavily on daily active users and monthly cosmetic spend. That was the real goal and why they wanted all of those COD players. With the immediate player drop off, there's a high likelihood they missed their lofty internal revenue goals with skin sales, which is probably why Battlefield Studios saw a couple rounds of layoffs. Funnily enough, EA may also have inadvertently revived the COD franchise because the hype cycle BF6 produced scared Activision into making real changes that players were asking for, and now Activision actually listens to feedback from the COD community. So COD fans may now be eating good with MW4 and won't need Battlefield anymore and we Battlefield fans are stuck with Codfield 6, maybe even for a couple more years based on the announcements from today. Will EA learn from this? Probably not. I'm not confident the new leadership coming here in a couple of months will be any better, especially since they have $20B in debt to make up for when they bought EA. If EA had marketed Battlefield 6 as what it really was, I don't think I would've purchased it. You might disagree with my opinions here, but I think they are borne out. Here are a couple of community polls I conducted over the past several months on my YouTube channel:

• 
  C (@C8zyuk) reported 6 minutes ago

  Mayfeld's elite Imperial Army Special Missions service record is marked equally with commendations for combat and demerits for insubordination. Superior officers tolerated his impertinence because of his battlefield results.

• 
  Gatzestreicheln (@FabianSchu96203) reported 7 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldInte **** this game and **** @EA_DICE before ending new stuff to get in our pockets fix your ******* unplayable trash game Gunplay still sucks Sounds still sucks Maps are ******* horrible EA is right about fireing your useless worthless asses

• 
  BEN (@BiGBENNGTR) reported 9 minutes ago

  @ZagazOlaMakama Let’s talk about this with the little experience I have. First, the landing could have resulted in a crash. You only make a landing like that during an emergency, especially when you already know the helicopter will no longer be of any use. Second, why were they all facing the same direction without anyone watching their 9 and 3 o’clock positions? After the rescue, again, nobody was watching their 6 o’clock. There was no overwatch either. Now I understand how the bandits and Boko Haram get their information from, because how do you leave a teammate on the battlefield without cover?

• 
  chris (@ChrisSlaske) reported 12 minutes ago

  @Battlefield why is drag revive so bad? You take one step forward and 7 steps back each update. Every day brings new attention to problems that have been plaguing multiplayer for months

• 
  ElJawnJefe (@ElJawnJefe) reported 12 minutes ago

  @Battlefield Fix Your ****** As ******* Servers, No Reason Anyone Should Have To Wait 34 Mins To Gather 80 ******* People For A Game Do ******* Better

• 
  Pope Puke (@ReligionKills66) reported 12 minutes ago

  @MAGAVoice Look at the staggering difference between a true military hero and a total disgrace. Our brave service members look danger in the eye. They are willing to lay down their lives, knowing the rest of our military will die for our country to protect our freedom. They sacrifice everything—their youth, their safety, and their lives—so that we can stand here today. And what do we get on the other side? A cowardly, draft-dodging piece of trash who ran away when his country called. While real heroes were bleeding on the battlefield, he was hiding behind fake excuses and privilege. It is a pathetic, shameful display. It should give you an embarrassment so deep, it leaves a literal tingle in your pants just watching someone act with such total cowardice. We must never confuse the ultimate sacrifice of our military with the absolute disgrace of a coward.. Disgraceful **** Face

• 
  mohammad solymani (@msolymani13) reported 14 minutes ago

  @joekent16jan19 The problem is that you are not dealing with someone who thinks rationally or acts on the basis of reason. As an old Iranian proverb says, "You are reciting the Qur'an into a donkey's ear." If reason had any place in the equation, the logic of your argument would be obvious. But when reason disappears, desperation takes control. For Iran, this is an existential conflict. Any nation that believes its survival is at stake will inevitably escalate its response in order to remove the threat it faces. Whether others approve or not does not change that strategic reality. If this path continues, the consequences will not remain confined to the battlefield. The world may soon face a devastating economic crisis whose effects will extend far beyond the region!

• 
  Don Elliott (@RealDonElliott) reported 15 minutes ago

  I die almost every match by heli sniper. The chopper fires one shot, a headshot. @Battlefield you need to fix that crap

• 
  Thund3r 4 (@4Thund3r) reported 23 minutes ago

  @Battlefield all youve done with these changes is uncovered the horrendously fast ttk problem the game has. Mix that with dogwater netcode and the games just not fun. Fix it or find out why it dies off

• 
  Linton Phillips (@LintonPhillips) reported 24 minutes ago

  @krassenstein You’re rooting for a different country… in the World Cup and on the battlefield in a war. Whose brain is broken?

• 
  BiffBifford™ 🇺🇸 (@TBifford) reported 28 minutes ago

  @AlexKau74366366 Patton was built to fight. It's a shame a car accident took him out instead of the glory of dying on the battlefield. Patton did not die in combat. On December 9, 1945 (months after the war ended), he was involved in a low-speed car accident in Germany while on a pheasant hunting trip. His Cadillac collided with a U.S. Army truck. He suffered a broken neck and was paralyzed from the neck down. He died 12 days later from a pulmonary embolism (blood clot) in a hospital in Heidelberg.

• 
  asmarino ደጀና💪🇪🇷 (@azmarinoss) reported 28 minutes ago

  @mjoe0989 No question 100%. If this the problem for them why they are silent when they see the pp massive preparation for war? Why d9 you silent for ongoing war in amhara, Oromo, and other Ethiopian? Even do you think not preparation for war save Tigrayans if pp create war with Eritrea? Wehere do you think the Battle ground if pp strat war for annex Assab? And what choice you see the Tigrayans ppl at all? question—100%. If this is really their concern, why were they silent while PP was openly preparing for war? Why stay silent about the ongoing wars in Amhara, Oromia, and other parts of Ethiopia? Do they honestly think ignoring military preparations would protect Tigrayans if PP started a war with Eritrea? Where do they think the battlefield would be if PP tried to annex Assab? What realistic choice would ordinary Tigrayans have in that situation?

• 
  REVENGE (@revsprotwit) reported 31 minutes ago

  @ThelVanDamne Removing health packs, dual wielding, vehicle boarding, equipment did alter halo. Also, the BR doesn't have hit scan. It's just really fast projectile. In fact, the projectiles of the BR are actually slower in halo 3. Further proving you don't know jack **** about what you're trying to seem like an expert on. All of the things you listed were carefully considered and tested before being greenlit to be added to the game. most of the things you mentioned don't really alter the player that much other than improve gameplay flow, which halo 5 abilities do not as we'll get to in a bit. Vehicle boarding is a natural evolution of the combined arms combat halo is known for. it gives people not on vehicles another tool to defend themselves against vehicles, especially when paired with the emp of the plasma pistol, or EMP ball. Removing Health packs (while I don't agree with it) was necessary for multiplayer. Regenning health ensured that once you finished a fight and had time to recover, you entered new engagements on equal footing with other players. Allowing you to be more aggressive. Removing fall damage allowed for greater organic verticality, and improves gameplay flow. Fall damage was a hinderance to map design, and player movement that halted the game. Halo is a game that relies on good consistent flow, and 30 seconds of fun philosophy. If fall damage stayed it would objectively hurt gameplay flow and map design. Equipment affects the battlefield directly. It creates area denial, support for team mates, and cover from enemy fire. It emphasizes the team work aspect of halo's multiplayer. at the same time though, the equipment was never one sided. A skilled player could turn equipment you brought into the field against you, and even use it to their benefit. Dual wielding is an extension of the weapon sandbox. It gives weaker single handed weapons additional utility. While I think the implementation and execution was not the best, it provided another layer to combat that gave you pause to consider using single handed weapons over two handed weapons. All of these changes organically evolved halo's combat loop. Which I even said I wasn't against. Spartan abilities on the other hand: >Sprint even though it makes you run faster, is still disruptive to the gameplay loop, because it forces you to put your gun into low ready while sprinting. Then have to bring it back up when exiting sprint, disrupting halo's gameplay flow. Along with the other aforementioned gameplay implications. >Ground pound locks you into an animation that you have zero control over, and on impact you have to wait for an animation to play before you can regain control of your character. Same for spartan charge. Again, disruptive to gameplay flow. The only "spartan ability" I have no problem with is clamber, because that's less of an "ability", and more of a quality of life improvement that still punishes you for bad jumps.

• 
  tavareziam (@tavareziam) reported 41 minutes ago

  For the person lost in delusion, it is not a belief. It is the final load bearing wall of their identity. When you bring facts, you are not correcting an error, you are asking them to stand in the open air while you remove the only thing still holding their sense of self upright. Their resistance is not stubbornness. It is the nervous system screaming: “If this beam goes, I die.” You are arguing in the language of truth. They are fighting for psychological survival. These are not the same battlefield. You cannot logic someone out of a structure that is keeping them alive. Every “gotcha,” every patient explanation, every demand that they “just face reality” is experienced as an existential assassination attempt. That is why airtight logic fails, it threatens the very coherence that lets them wake up in the morning without falling apart. Walking away is not defeat, apathy, or lack of compassion. It is the rare recognition that their delusion is their sacred (and broken) architecture, and your job is never to become the wrecking crew for another person’s psyche. The moment you accept this, something shifts in you. You stop needing them to change so you can feel sane. You stop pouring your life force into a demolition that would only leave rubble and resentment. You simply let their structure stand or fall on its own timeline. And in that letting go, you discover the quiet, almost unbearable freedom of no longer making someone else’s survival your responsibility. Your peace was never in winning the argument. It was in finally understanding why the argument was never winnable, and choosing, with eyes wide open, to walk out of the collapsing building while it is still possible to do so intact.