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:

• 
  Sayber_31 (@Sayber_31) reported 3 minutes ago

  @the_patcher77 @BattlefieldComm The problem is unless the feedback comes from some with ttv or yt at the end of their username they’re not listening.

• 
  NupeKeem 🫡 (@NupeKeem) reported 4 minutes ago

  @Battlefield @BattlefieldComm you cant fix the notecode yet? I love getting shot behind a wall. Literally the best feeling there is. Imagine being on a streak and you dying behind a wall

• 
  Lord Dundee (@DundeeLord) reported 5 minutes ago

  @NoGGiNTheNoG8 @deadlyweapns Not necessarily, but all it takes is a little bit of dirt on the wrong hydraulic piston and this whole thing goes out of service. Btw, the entire battlefield is covered in dirt. Drones don’t even need to touch it to break this thing.

• 
  BillsmafiaMFKA He/Bro/Daddy (@Emanuel56353090) reported 6 minutes ago

  @Battlefield hey douchebags fix strike point. you ruined it and took it away. it was the perfect game mode

• 
  Ducky (@Duckey141) reported 8 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldComm Most out of touch clueless devs currently out there, genuine monkeys, just adding things and fixing **** all while we still have beta bugs rampaging in season 3 with no fix in sight

• 
  gavin newsom fanclub (@ForsakenCrown) reported 12 minutes ago

  @Ryangofett_2490 @HopeOfTheRealm Portals biggest problem imo is it's trying to both be a traditional Battlefield server browser and also trying to be a custom game browser when those two things just don't work together. Hopefully the release of matchmaking supported server browser will fix this

• 
  Kelly Detonated (@KellyDetonated) reported 13 minutes ago

  We can blame eachother for this but truth be told the whole Doha Deal was a disaster, and is still problematic today. Now, it can be something accept for what it is, learn and get better now, or we can pretend it isn’t there. I’ve accepted it, and hope we address that money is still going to the Taliban. Qatar is exceptionally clever when it comes to laundering money, while slapping on a bow and smiling saying it’s something else. We don’t operate this way, but they do, no matter how many shiny gifts and “peace” deals it brokers. It seems Soviet inspired, so maybe they learned from the best. Idk. It would be wise to have a completely neutral mediators, moving forward, that nobody involved has any conflicts of interest and a proven track record of success. We must use the icky stuff as a point of reference no matter how bad it stings to do so. My thoughts are that this is a clear case for strategic, long-game warfare that isn’t necessarily fought on a battlefield. We also need to admit that our reward system is very different than the middle eastern countries. We want everything done now. They are ideology driven. We’re built different. So this would require any agreements to include some language requiring enforceability that can’t be broken until it’s complete.

• 
  Swipy (@Sleepy4PF) reported 15 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldComm @Battlefield Just fix that damn netcode im tired of ghost bullets and inconsistent shots

• 
  ฏ๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎ ฏ๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎ ฏ๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎ ฏ๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎๎ ฏ (@voidsrus4) reported 19 minutes ago

  the problem with battlefield 6 being a live service game is all the cosmetics are designed for children. there are cosmetics i would probably buy, they won't sell them. and the game despite their best efforts is still too hard for children

• 
  Mαr Mounier 🌐 (@elhigadodmarita) reported 19 minutes ago

  @mhfmvc Dear brother, I deeply appreciate the candor of your analysis. You present a position of impeccable logical rigor within a closed system, yet you commit the very error of those you criticize: you reduce the Mystical Body of Christ to an administrative problem to be solved at a desk. You employ the sedevacantist thesis to denounce the ‘inconsistency’ of others, but to what does your position lead in practice? To a total atomization where every believer becomes their own Pope, awaiting a restoration that, by your own premise, is humanly impossible. Absolute sedevacantism ultimately manifests as a form of quietism: since you posit that there is no authority, there is no mission, and therefore nothing to do but await the apocalypse from the comfort of one’s home. And that is the very triumph of the ‘sect’ you so adamantly oppose! They need not persecute you if you have already excluded yourself from the combat. Furthermore, you accuse me of caring only for ‘externals’ rather than doctrine. On the contrary: precisely because I am concerned for doctrine, I understand that the Church is NOT a corporation whose legal validity is automatically annulled by the errors of its managers. Remember that the history of the Church is a record ad infinitum of Popes who have been weak, erratic, or deeply questionable, without that signifying that the Holy Spirit has abandoned the sacraments or the apostolic succession. The fact that you require the entire ‘protocol’ of history to be flawless to believe in the validity of the hierarchy reveals that your faith depends on bureaucratic perfection, not on divine Providence. Then, you criticize the SSPX for its ‘inconsistency,’ yet in practice, they are the rearguard trench of a war you have already declared lost. Is the SSPX position perfect? No. But the ‘purity of doctrine’ you demand is, at this historical juncture, a LUXURY that does not permit the building of a single chapel, the formation of a single priest, the protection of the Tridentine Mass, or the salvation of a single soul from destruction. The SSPX, conversely, for all its limitations, is fighting the war, taking bullets, missiles, and bombs. They remain in the field because they know that the General on the line is CHRIST and the fortress to be defended is HOLY. Finally, you argue that it is ‘utterly inconsistent’ to recognize the Pope while rejecting the Council. Brother, it is entirely Catholic to acknowledge the historical facts-that Rome is occupied by an anti-theology-and, simultaneously, to maintain that Christ has not abandoned His Sacred Spouse, but has allowed a trial of purification where Tradition remains the only guiding thread. Do you prefer the theoretical purity of self-destruction? So be it. I prefer the resistance in the trenches, with all its wounds, abuse, suffering, and contradictions, for as long as the occupation lasts. But we must not leave the enemies of the Church an easy path. Remember: being Catholic is NOT for the cowardly. To be a militant Catholic, one MUST BE BRAVE. I understand your position perfectly, but we have been pushed into a FRONTAL war, and doctrinal purity is useless if it merely becomes a shroud to bury the cause of Christ. The ‘inconsistency’ of which you accuse me is not a weakness; it is my refusal to let the enemy dictate the rules of my own surrender. No. If the Church is to be defended, we must step directly onto the battlefield. And we do not care about appearing with pressed and perfumed uniforms. All we care is: we are under fire, and we MUST save lives—and souls. Even if there are only twelve of us.

• 
  Whiskas (@WhiskasOfficial) reported 21 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldComm Over a week to fix Strike point?!!!! You guys suck.

• 
  JRB (@JRB___2) reported 21 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldComm FIX THE BOTS

• 
  3 KingsInPersia (@Smokemifyo14691) reported 24 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldComm @Battlefield I’m tired of getting killed behind walls and solid objects, I’m tired of poor hit registration, I’m sick of getting killed with 1 bullet. I’m just tired fix it. NOW!! No more lightning fast kills no more

• 
  chris (@ChrisSlaske) reported 24 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldComm Remove ranked. Give every squad size for red sec. Casual better be whatever squad size we want. You removed working initiation for graphic lighting glitchfest in redsec you cant even patch a fix. Great job giving recon even more bullshit for redsec. Infantry conquest, not oblit

• 
  Fred Velez (@Fredvelezcrypto) reported 25 minutes ago

  Morning BTC read: The chart is still not pretty. BTC rejected the $65.5K–$66.5K range high and is now sitting closer to the lower half of the current battlefield. Right now, I see the active range like this: Range high: $65.5K–$66.5K Mid-zone: $62K–$64K Range low: $60K–$61K Major line: $58.1K The liquidation heatmap also shows liquidity stacked below, especially around the $61K–$62K area, with deeper danger still near $60K. So yes, BTC can still sweep lower. But here is the key: this is not confirmed collapse yet. It is a market trapped in a violent range. The problem for bulls is ETF flows are not helping. Another red BTC ETF day. Roughly -$90.7M yesterday. That comes after -$82.2M the day before. So the market has: weak ETF demand negative structure liquidity below DXY still elevated and BTC below the reclaim zone That is not the setup for blind optimism. For bulls, the first job is simple: reclaim $64K–$64.5K. Then $65.5K–$66.5K. Until then, every bounce is just a bounce inside a damaged range. If BTC loses $62K cleanly, I think the market starts hunting $60K–$61K again. If BTC holds this zone and reclaims $64K+, then we can talk about stabilization. No need to overcomplicate it. BTC is not dead. But buyers have not taken control. This is still a trigger market. No confirmation, no conviction.