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:

• 
  Straggler Liu | AI & Semis (@StragglerLiu) reported 43 seconds ago

  TSMC's AP7 facility tells you everything about the next AI bottleneck. P1 is an Apple WMCM line. P2 and P3 were supposed to be SoIC. They're now CoWoS. CoWoS demand killed SoIC capacity before SoIC even ramped. This is the physical reality of advanced packaging. Apple and NVIDIA aren't competitors in the traditional sense. They're competitors for the same cleanroom floors. The physical convergence, in three numbers. SoIC uses copper-to-copper hybrid bonding at 6-micron pitch. Interconnect density: 25,000 to 50,000 connections per square millimeter. Compare to standard microbumps at 600 to 1,000. SoIC is an order of magnitude denser. That's the vertical stacking solution. WMCM is horizontal: logic, LPDDR, and high-speed I/O side-by-side on the redistribution layer. RDL-first process. SoIC and WMCM are complementary, not substitutes. One does vertical. One does horizontal. Both require TSMC's most advanced packaging capacity. The capacity math that matters. CoWoS monthly capacity: 140,000 wafers by end-2026, 190,000-200,000 by end-2027. NVIDIA books over half. Mizuho: NVIDIA CoWoS allocation 630,000 wafers in 2026, 1,005,000 in 2027. WMCM: 60,000 wpm by end-2026, >120,000 wpm in 2027. Apple's line. SoIC: 10,000-15,000 wpm by end-2026. Morgan Stanley raised 2027 SoIC estimate to 45,000 wpm. Apple has booked 36,000 SoIC wafers for 2026, 60,000 for 2027 — almost entirely for Baltra AI server chip. NVIDIA's 2027 SoIC consumption: 120,000 wafers. That's 180,000 SoIC wafers of demand against 45,000 wpm of capacity. The math doesn't close. AP7 P2/P3 conversion tells you who wins today. TSMC converted P2 and P3 from SoIC to CoWoS because CoWoS demand exceeded expectations. CoWoS urgency is squeezing SoIC expansion. P1 remains Apple's WMCM line, but the SoIC capacity Apple needed for 2027 is now partially reallocated. The material signal confirms the convergence. Apple's M5 uses LMC liquid molding compound from Eternal Materials. This material was developed specifically for TSMC's CoWoS specifications. Apple is using CoWoS-grade materials to produce SoIC/WMCM chips. Same material. Same factories. Same equipment. Conflict is physical, not commercial. SoIC is the next battlefield — and it's capital-intensive. SoIC unit capex: $6.8-7.0 billion per 10,000 wafers of monthly capacity. Compare to CoWoS. The technical barrier is extreme. Equipment: Besi hybrid bonder, Applied Materials, Tokyo Electron. Taiwan wet process: 弘塑, 均华. NVIDIA's Rubin GPU: first chiplet design. Two compute chips + one I/O chip via SoIC vertical stacking, then eight HBM4 stacks via CoWoS. Apple's M5 Ultra already uses SoIC-mH. Both collide at SoIC in 2027. 2nm allocation already hints at the outcome. Apple has secured >50% of TSMC's initial 2nm capacity. NVIDIA's Rubin reportedly remains on 3nm. Apple dominates process. NVIDIA dominates packaging. Both are penetrating each other's territory. Apple needs NVIDIA-dominated CoWoS. NVIDIA needs Apple-dominated 2nm. This is mutual lock-in, not zero-sum. Four signals to track in the next 12 months. First, AP7 P2/P3 reallocation. Will TSMC convert P2/P3 back to SoIC as demand evolves? If not, SoIC capacity becomes the binding constraint earlier than expected. Second, SoIC yield. Hybrid bonding at 6-micron pitch is technically extreme. Unit capex of $6.8-7B per 10k wpm means any yield issue destroys economics. Yield curve is undisclosed. Third, WMCM ramp. 60,000 wpm by end-2026 and 120,000 wpm in 2027 are analyst estimates. AP7 P1 actual progress needs tracking. Any delay signals capacity constraints. Fourth, LMC supply. Eternal Materials is the sole CoWoS-spec LMC supplier. Both Apple and NVIDIA use the same material from the same supplier. Single point of failure. Conclusion. TSMC is expanding 2027 advanced packaging capacity from 1.3 million to 2.0 million wafers — a 53.85% increase. But demand is growing faster. CoWoS order visibility extends through 2027. AP7 P2/P3 conversion tells you which customer has more urgency today. The next 12 months aren't about who announces what chip. They're about four data points: AP7 P2/P3 reallocation, SoIC yield, WMCM ramp, and LMC supply. Those determine who gets the cleanroom floors.

• 
  Bootstrap Bill (@WillDaBeast_69) reported 2 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldComm Fix the ******* black screen bug. Fix the ******* grenades. Fix the ******* new sniper being a total meme gun. Thx

• 
  JTCrawford (@JtCrawford) reported 3 minutes ago

  FBI seized Chinese botnet tools used against NASA, DOE, and Senate networks. When adversaries penetrate critical infrastructure with impunity, it's not just an IT problem—it's proof we're not treating cyberspace like the battlefield it is. #Cybersecurity #CriticalInfrastructure

• 
  China pulse 🇨🇳 (@Eng_china5) reported 6 minutes ago

  China is watching every move. Taiwan tried to make its air defenses harder to find by moving Tien Kung-3 and Patriot systems to temporary positions during Han Kuang-42. The problem? Every new position becomes another target to map. Chinese satellites, drones and electronic intelligence are turning Taiwan’s mobile air-defense network into a constantly updated battlefield map—tracking launchers, radars, command posts and support nodes. You can move the missiles. You can’t hide them from an intelligence network watching from above.

• 
  Bill Bruin (@Hockey14144) reported 6 minutes ago

  @BattlefieldComm Fire Anyone who was working On Call of duty at any time. . Remove Battlepass. Fix the TTK Let us turn off the Top Gun Music. Make Better Maps stop ruining old ones. Let PC players turn off crossplay. Future BF Remove Crossplay.

• 
  Naoufal Houjami 🇺🇸 (@ForTexasHoujami) reported 10 minutes ago

  @RepJeffries You never served in a real battlefield and you're trying to look though by fighting the mosquitos and flying bugs. They keep installing unfit people in high positions with big mouth to distract people from their real problems.

• 
  Jerry Razor Travone™️ (@JerryTravone) reported 12 minutes ago

  @hrplays7 Battlefield has major audio problems. A tank should make a ton of noise and the screen should shake not fly down the road at 50 mph and pull up behind you with no audio . That right there is why I quit battlefield.

• 
  CAMIKAZE78 (@CAMIKAZE78) reported 13 minutes ago

  The Battlefield 6 ragebait experience is just in overdrive right now. Audio? Cooked. Grenade indicators? Still broken. Black screen bug? Persistent. Missiles still going through flares? You betcha. MAN, wanting to love Battlefield 6 is tiresome because under the hood, it's got the potential to one of the greatest in the series. But we are just taking too long to fix critical, at times, seemingly simple issues that continue to plague the experience.

• 
  No Man's Smile (@NoMansSmile) reported 14 minutes ago

  @Battlefield @BattlefieldComm So sad that these guys work hard to add good features/modes to the game just to take it away from their player base weeks later because of greed and a broken anti-consumer live service system. Every developer should take a page out of HelloGames. Make games as passion not greed.

• 
  Reluctantly Present (@ReluctantlyPre1) reported 17 minutes ago

  @Battlefield Can we fix the camping on carriers? I refuse to play that mode.

• 
  Ben Swann (@BenSwann_) reported 18 minutes ago

  THE SURVEILLANCE STATE IS HERE, AND IT’S BEING SOLD AS “SAFETY” The surveillance state is no longer a distant dystopia. It is here, marketed as public safety. The argument is always the same: “If you have nothing to hide, why worry?” But privacy is not reserved for people hiding something. It is a fundamental right in a free society, protected precisely because unchecked government surveillance is dangerous. Will Freeman, founder of DeFlock, is challenging Flock Safety’s expanding camera network. The fight surrounding Freeman, Flock CEO Garrett Langley, and the lawsuit known as Langley v. Freeman exposes the deeper issue: once surveillance infrastructure is built, who decides how it will be used, and where does it stop? Flock cameras are only one piece. Palantir’s technology can fuse satellite imagery, radar, cameras, sensors, and other data into a real-time operational picture. On a battlefield, that means tracking targets and building strike packages. But what happens when that same logic- identify, track, fuse, predict, act is turned on the public? Flock cameras. Facial recognition. License plate readers. Satellites. Data fusion. When those systems connect, they do not simply monitor cars. They create a map of human movement, and the architecture of a surveillance prison. Maria Zeee (@zeeemedia) joins me to break down the dystopian world these technologies are attempting to build.

• 
  Maris (@Nazumejud) reported 19 minutes ago

  The blizzard had buried the driveway beneath thick drifts, yet it could not hide the sight of Emma lying beside the porch steps, clutching Noah beneath her coat to keep him alive. One look at her frostbitten hands and exhausted eyes hurt more than every battlefield I had survived during the past eighteen months. For one horrifying moment, I feared I was already too late. I dropped my duffel bag and sprinted through the snow. “Emma!” Her eyes opened weakly. “Ethan?” She said my name as though she believed I was a dream. Noah’s faint cries barely rose above the howling wind. Emma had wrapped him in layers of her clothing, leaving her own arms and feet exposed to the cold. I tore off my military coat, wrapped it around them both, and lifted them into my arms. “How long have you been out here?” Emma tried to answer, but her teeth were chattering too violently. I reached the front door and twisted the handle. Locked. I pounded once. No one answered. Through the living-room window, I saw the glow of the fireplace. Shadows moved inside. Someone laughed. My family was warm while my wife and infant son were freezing to death outside. I stepped back and kicked the door beside the lock. The frame cracked. A second kick sent the door flying inward. Warmth spilled over us. So did the smell of roasted meat, expensive bourbon, and burning cedar. My father, Richard Cole, sat beside the fireplace holding a glass from the bottle I had saved for my homecoming. My mother, Diane, wore Emma’s favorite cream cashmere robe as though it belonged to her. My younger brother, Kyle, stretched across my couch with muddy boots resting on the coffee table Emma and I had chosen together. All three stared at me. My mother’s face lost its color. “Ethan?” she blurted. “We weren’t expecting you until Friday.” My return date had changed after a transport aircraft opened an earlier seat. I had kept it secret because I wanted to surprise Emma. Instead, I had surprised the people destroying her life. I carried my wife and child across the room. My father rose from his chair. “Put her back outside.” I stopped. “What did you say?” “She attacked your mother,” he replied. “She became hysterical when we explained the situation.” Emma buried her face against my shoulder. “They changed every lock,” she whispered. “They took my phone, my wallet, everything. They said the house belonged to them.” Kyle gave a careless shrug. “Legally, it does.” He nodded toward the wall above the fireplace. A framed property deed hung where Emma and I had once displayed our wedding portrait. My father’s name appeared beneath the description of my property. On the dining table sat mortgage documents, bank statements, legal notices, and a thick folder marked CUSTODY PETITION. My mother crossed her arms. “Emma became unstable while you were deployed. We had to protect your assets and your son.” “You left them outside in a blizzard.” “She refused to cooperate,” my father said. No anger showed in his face. That frightened me more than shouting would have. I had seen men justify terrible actions with the same calm expression. They did not think of themselves as cruel. They believed they had the right to decide who deserved safety. I carried Emma upstairs. My mother followed. “You cannot take the baby,” she said. “Our attorney advised us to keep Noah away from her.” I turned so quickly that she stepped backward. “Come near my son again, and the police will be the least of your problems.”….

• 
  Chris Daulton (@blackvaultchris) reported 21 minutes ago

  @bennyjohnson There are no men in the WNBA. Nobody is advocating that there be one. You weirdos have created a battlefield for a hypothetical problem that doesn't exist.

• 
  CSIX-// (@clarityysix) reported 26 minutes ago

  Live service shooter is disgusting generalisation GTA6 will get updates post launch & has guns, is that another live service shooter? You trynna tell me that E-Day, HellDivers, Warhammer, Halo, Fortnite, Battlefield, Borderlands, GTA & Valorant are all the same game?

• 
  Psycho Fella (@Psycho_Fella) reported 28 minutes ago

  THE TANK ERA IN UKRAINE IS OVER. JUST NOT THE WAY COUCH EXPERTS, ADVISORS, AND CONSULTANTS UNDERSTAND IT By Rimas Armaitis, Armed Forces of Ukraine (ZSU) veteran—Lithuanian, sapper, instructor The New York Times reports that about half of the tank battalion soldiers from Ukraine’s 33rd Mechanized Brigade have already retrained as drone operators. Some recruits are no longer being trained to operate tanks at all. Leopard 2A4s are still maintained, repaired, and used for training, but they are rarely sent on combat missions—mostly during bad weather when drone activity decreases. This does not mean that all tanks will be scrapped tomorrow. It means something much more unpleasant for tank enthusiasts: the tank has lost its status as the primary strike platform. The platform remains, but its role, frequency of use, and cost-to-risk ratio have fundamentally changed. A tank costing millions cannot operate freely on the battlefield because it is under constant surveillance by reconnaissance drones. Once detected, a tank doesn’t even need to be destroyed in a single strike. The first FPV drone might damage a track or optics, the second hits the engine, and the third attacks the crew or the evacuation vehicle. Later, the job is finished off by a heavy bomber drone, artillery, or aerial mining. Even if the tank remains repairable, the combat mission is already ruined, the crew’s lives are at risk, and another expensive machine must be sent to evacuate the vehicle. This is where the economics of war begin—something our couch generals for some reason stubbornly refuse to understand. The key issue isn't whether a tank can theoretically be protected. What matters is how much its protection, logistics, repairs, and trained crew cost compared to how little it costs the enemy to detect, disable, and finish it off. When a chain of drones costing a few hundred or a few thousand euros disables a platform worth millions, we are not facing an emotional debate of "tanks vs. drones," but a catastrophically unfavorable cost-to-result ratio. Of course, some advisor-consultant will now pop up and solemnly declare: "But a drone doesn't hold ground!" Thank you for the breakthrough. An artillery shell doesn't hold ground either. A landmine doesn't control an intersection, and a fighter jet doesn't sit in a trench. Different tools perform different functions. The logic of modern assault is as follows: reconnaissance drones spot positions and movement; FPVs and bomber drones destroy or suppress targets; ground-based robotic systems transport explosives, lay mines, scout, provoke the enemy into revealing firing points, and provide fire support. Only then do the infantry clear, capture, and consolidate the territory—performing what is called "zakrep" on the front lines. Unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) are already being deployed with machine-gun modules, grenade launchers, shaped charges, and fragmentation charges. They handle logistics, evacuation, engineering, and specific assault tasks. They haven't replaced all light armored vehicles yet, but they are already taking over functions where it is better to lose a machine than to lose a machine along with its driver, crew, and squad. Infantry aren't going anywhere. However, a pure infantry assault without aerial reconnaissance, electronic warfare, drones, combat engineering preparation, and fire support is nowadays more simply referred to as a "meat assault." The neat phrase "an infantryman will still have to clear the trench" does not justify the idiotically wasteful decision to send him into that trench first. The role of artillery is also evolving. It remains essential for mass firepower, suppression, area targets, and operating under conditions where drones are restricted. However, single targets have long been handled by FPVs, heavy bomber drones, and mid-strike drones. Deep-strike systems and cheaper cruise missile analogs operate further behind enemy lines. So, drones haven't "replaced everything." They have taken over a huge share of reconnaissance, spotter adjustment, precision destruction, mining, logistics, and even assault roles. As a result, tanks, armored vehicles, artillery, and aviation are used less frequently, more cautiously, and only when their impact justifies the cost and risk. Another argument from the couch experts: "Just turn on electronic warfare and the drones won't fly." Right, of course. Strange that the Ukrainians themselves haven't thought of pressing the magic "turn off drones" button over more than four years of war. Electronic warfare (EW) is essential, but it is not an invisible dome. We now have frequency hopping, relays, elements of autonomous control, machine vision systems, and fiber-optic-guided FPVs. Every line of defense triggers a countermeasure, and technological cycles at the front line sometimes change within weeks. While our consultant spends six months coordinating the final version of a PowerPoint presentation, his "latest" conclusion is already outdated twice over. We are not anti-tank. We are against using tanks according to the doctrine of yesterday's war. For a tank to make a proper comeback to the battlefield, it needs more than just a metal cage welded onto the roof. It requires a complete protection ecosystem: drone detection, electronic warfare, active and passive defense, interceptor drones, dedicated reconnaissance drones, reduced physical and electromagnetic visibility, and integration into a unified intelligence and fire-control network. The tank of the future will likely be unmanned or optionally manned. Because the issue isn't just armor thickness. The issue is sending human beings, along with the tank, into a zone under constant surveillance and targeted fire. This is what we have been talking about for years now. Except our conclusions weren't drawn from watching YouTube or dragging blue and red rectangles across a screen. They emerged from the trenches of the current war. We have seen how the kill zone is shifting, how drones evolved from an auxiliary tool into a primary means of destruction, and how outdated procedures began costing human lives. Yet in Lithuania, a strange qualification system still prevails: if you were at the front yourself, you are "too emotional." If you fought on Facebook for four years, you qualify as a military expert. If you saw the doctrine fail, you are a radical. If you rewrote it three times in PowerPoint, you are an advisor or consultant. So let me repeat this as simply as possible: Tanks haven't disappeared. What has disappeared is the ability to use them the way it was planned ten or twenty years ago. Aerial and ground robotic systems have already taken over a portion of the roles previously held by light armor, artillery, aviation, and infantry. Anyone who fails to grasp this isn't "defending classic warfare"—they are simply preparing for yesterday's war using tomorrow's budget. And if, after all these arguments, someone still only hears "veterans want to get rid of tanks," it's not an additional explanation they need. They lack the ability to read a text longer than the headline of a tank procurement contract.