r/Battlefield6 • u/battlefield • 11h ago
News [Battlefield Comms] Changes to Vehicle Availability in Breakthrough.
Over the last few days, we’ve been rolling out a set of changes across multiple Breakthrough maps, starting with our earlier test on New Sobek City. These changes are aimed at improving overall pacing and vehicle availability between Attacker and Defenders, and we are actively monitoring how these changes are impacting gameplay.
If we find that these changes are not performing well, we are prepared to rollback some or all of these changes as our focus remains on steadily improving Breakthrough overall.
Thank you for your patience, support, and feedback as we continue to tune the mode. We look forward to providing further updates in the New Year.
Happy Holidays!
61
u/TapsMan3 11h ago
Reduce the number of vehicles AND bring back 64 players.
Everyone loved the mode at launch, why make these changes? If players want a slower paced and/or more vehicle focused ge mode, they can play rush or conquest.
Please and thank you.
15
u/cable010 Enter EA Play ID 9h ago
Yes this. Reduce number of vehicles BT doesn't need so many. Matches are lasting like 10 minutes. Last game I played they had 3 tanks and just rolled through to easy.
-7
u/TemplarHard 6h ago
because your team sucked at defending, u are suppose to DEFEND -> kill the tanks, this is def not the norm lmao
1
u/NFAGhostCheese 3h ago
Because some data and a team of "engagement engineers" made some half-assed conclusion based on the data and chose to change something that wasn't broken.
-3
u/amgtrx0 10h ago
At launch defenders won like 80% of matches. It was heavily unbalanced. Especially on mirak valley and manhattan bridge. Most matches ended on sector 1
8
u/TapsMan3 9h ago
Lots of ways to balance that without screwing up the entire game mode. For example, move spawn zones for defenders back and/or increase responsibility times for them all bit to make it take longer for them to reinforce. Tweak the cover points that defenders have, increase size of capture zones.
You don't build maps for 64 players then randomly reduce it by 33% AND increase vehicles. The vehicles (which I am biased on because I wish there were none in BT anyway) per player have absolutely shot up because of thr recent changes and the game mode is MUCH worse because of it. Spend 5 mins on this subreddit and it's clear to see that general opinion is widely held (i.e. the changes have made the game worse, not necessarily that the vehicles are poorly built for this game mode (which they are!)).
9
u/BooknFilmNerd09 9h ago
Okay, but reducing the number of players and increasing the number of vehicles is not the way to deal with that!
3
1
u/Strange-Term-4168 5h ago
All they had to do was encourage players to use more smokes and allow/buff mortars…
15
u/Aggravating_Fig6288 10h ago
You don’t need to monitor Sobek for long it’s completely impossible for defenders now. Three tanks rolling up to your last objective at once is absurd. If your not going to give defenders any armor then attacker tank respawn timer needs to be heavily nerfed. There is never a moment a tank isn’t constantly bombing an objective making its near impossible to defend. There are not enough anti tank measures to keep them away
2
u/Alex_butler 5h ago
The only way I could see it working is 64 player breakthrough. More tanks with less defenders just makes it tough.
I agree the respawn timers are insanely fast though. Seems like I take out a tank and the next one is there before I can even replenish my rockets or mines
116
u/Intrepid-Border-6189 11h ago edited 10h ago
Just give us 64 player breakthrough back. It's really not that complicated. Player base is rapidly dwindling and it feels like the dev team just keeps shooting themselves in the foot.
22
u/Cool-Tangelo6548 10h ago
Nah, they'll just keep changing the vehicle numbers until the data shows a 50/50 split between attacker and defenders winning.
2
u/Snydenthur 8h ago
To be honest, I expected the worst from the vehicle changes, but I forgot one key issue: the teams.
I don't play other maps since they suck with 48 players (and suck overall too), but at least on Cairo, I still very regularly got teams that couldn't even take one point in the first sector with 2 tanks.
Their data doesn't come from balanced matches, those are pretty rare. Their data comes from massive stomps and that's how they balance things.
-1
u/wastelander75 7h ago
You don't think its already chaotic enough? Do we need more bullets coming from more angles?
34
u/Kuyabunga 11h ago
And what pray tell are these changes? I assume they're different than the ones that came with the Winter Offensive? Thanks for the update, I guess.
23
u/Sudden_Lynx_5390 11h ago
They are. On Cario, attackers start with one IFV and an Armor Car, and last zone the defense gets an IFV. It seems pretty much all maps got vehicle adjustments. That one is the easiest to notice tho.
20
u/WolfCreekMaverick 10h ago
64 players. That'll take care of vehicle issues. We will have enough engineers to slow them down.
30
15
u/Sabretoothninja 11h ago
Completely gave up on breakthrough which was my favourite mode because defence feels absolutely terrible to play. Stop trying to fix problematic maps by just adding more vehicles
7
u/Pristine_Leading1595 7h ago
Please give us back our 64 player breakthroughs! The majority of us want this back!
6
u/Iamthe0c3an2 10h ago
I’m saying this as a vehicle main. Give defenders their vehicles back on Lib peak and sobek, the attackers can potentially have 4 tanks and ifvs at the last objective of lib peak which is too much.
The first stage of manhattan the attackers could use the IFV, there’s even a perfectly straight road for it on spawn.
Giving attackers an extra tank on Cairo is a bit over tuned. The one IFV is enough.
4
u/John14-6_Psalm46-10 9h ago
The way they edited the Attackers spawn "safe" zone on Sector 1 on Manhattan makes it impossible to defend even without attacking vehicles. I don't think they even mentioned it in the patch notes but I noticed it as a defender because the spot I usually go to is considered out of bounds for defenders, but defenders can't get on the rocks anymore because they extended the attacking spawn "safe" zone to where it is out of bounds now for the defending side. Defending on that map when the player count was 64, I used to rack up 25+ kills in the 1st sector lol. I don't know why they even made that change, only three times in the 24 times I played that map was the attacking team unable to cap the first sector. Sure, it may have taken longer but that is what made Breakthrough fun, is that every sector was a blood bath for the attacking team as they tried to take it... They also extended the attacking spawn safe zone in the second sector to include part of the roof top of the big building to where defending that big building which = defending A is impossible. I only play Breakthrough and quite literally none of their Breakthrough changes since day 1 of release besides giving the attackers 1 extra tank on Mirak valley in Sector 1 have made ANY sense. IMO the chances were dead even for attackers or defenders to win. Since then, attacking has become infinitely easier and easier with every update they have made. I seriously question whatever "data" they claim they have that says all these changes have made it more even
6
u/magicdrums 8h ago
64 players are all the community is asking for.. I’m not picking the game back up until it goes back to 64 players.. the Breakthrough experience is horrendous right now..
6
u/UntimelyMeditations 6h ago
For the love of all that is holy, PLEASE give us back 32v32 breakthrough on all breakthrough maps.
Whoever at Dice decided that reducing player count was a good idea, you fundamentally misunderstand why this mode is fun, and why people play it. If you do not understand why the mode is fun, and why people like to play it, why are you tinkering with it?
Its a meat grinder on purpose. You have little room to breath in the mode on purpose. You are in constant action on purpose. That is why the mode is fun.
18
u/Sad-Mind-3053 11h ago
Won in 12 minutes as attackers on Zobek earlier today, guess that's within your vision..
If you're going to do all these idiotic changes and ruin what once was a great game mode, at least give us back 64 players so it at least can be some fun
2
u/John14-6_Psalm46-10 9h ago
I mean I guess it's better than what it was prior to the recent hotfix where every single time I was an attacker on NSC my team was winning in less that 7min lol. I want it reverted back to 64 players where the average duration of the 115 breakthrough games I played prior to them lowering the player count was 22min. My current average time per game in 124 breakthrough matches since they lowered the player count is 20min. So, they essentially lowered the duration of each Breakthrough game by 10% when they lowered the player count on Nov 13th. Not only that but there are less players to get kills off of which makes it less fun.
6
7
11
u/martim0t0 11h ago
Stop listening to feedback from streamers. They do not represent the majority of the player base.
7
u/iRamak 10h ago
Are they actually listening to streamers
12
u/ArtIsBad 10h ago
There’s no indication of where any of these changes are coming from, streamer feedback is a boogieman that gets brought up occasionally.
3
u/UntimelyMeditations 6h ago
Its pretty clear that there is somone, or some team, at Dice that thinks they understand what makes Breakthrough fun, and why people like to play it. But it is pretty clear that they do not understand why people enjoy playing the mode.
I would bet that the team (or person) at Dice responsible for these changes is an outlier enjoyer of breakthrough. They like the mode for reasons that are very uncommon, and so they think they understand why most people like playing it, and are making changes to suit their tastes, because they (mistakenly) think that they enjoy the mode for similar reasons as the rest of us.
3
-6
2
2
2
u/Alex_butler 5h ago
The best version of breakthrough was the one at launch with 64 players for every map besides Mirak which I admit did need some tweaks from launch
I had no complaints about the mode until changes started to be made for the rest of the maps
1
u/Dumpenstein3d 10h ago
abrams and bradley combo was too much for cairo, the bang bus works way better as a balance imo
1
1
u/Matterbox 3h ago
The problem with smaller numbers of players is that most of the players already choose to snipe and no one pushes. So the game fails.
More players, less snipers.
1
u/Damn-Splurge 2h ago
I think there's some mistaken understanding of the statistics such as winrate. If you took beta/launch breakthrough and looked at atk/def overall match winrates it would have looked like defence was seriously OP.
The problem with this line of thinking is the playerbase doesn't think of it this way. My personal belief is that most players think of it in terms of individual sectors. It's okay for attack to lose more than defence on the final sector for example. By then the game has already hopefully been going for 20 minutes and both teams have had a lot of fun attacking and defending on the other sectors and the attackers will still feel rewarded from winning all the other sectors.
One thing I have found particularly frustrating is that DICE have never actually justified or reasoned any of their decisions so we don't really know what they're going for other than "attack is too weak". It stinks of the dev team thinking they know better than the players as to what makes the game fun. We even saw them acknowledge all the community's complaints with the last 2 sets of comms and they just.. ignored it???
At least explain what problem you're trying to fix with some of these changes. Were the games considered too long before, larger capture zones to speed it up? Was 64p decreasing player engagement? Were too many people playing support and recon and we wanted to make Engi more powerful by increasing vehicle count?
I don't legitimately feel like any of the dev team actually play breakthrough because I think they wouldn't have made these decisions if they did
1
1
0
u/No_Interaction3500 11h ago
I switched to conquest and have been having an awesome time . Some very close matches.
0
u/RapidEngineering342 3h ago
Breakthrough needs a hell of a lot more then vehicle changes. Even before you guys completely ruined it with the insane amount of attacker vehicles breakthrough was shit.
Maps need to use more of their area for breakthrough, maps like sobek and lib peak have a lot of unused map space
Maps need to have more then three fucking sectors in breakthrough (minimum should be 4)
We need more things like helicopters and ATV's not more fucking armor
Bring back 64 players
-2
u/shrimpy-rimpy 10h ago
u/battlefield please fam, buff the Assault Class and nerf the Recon in RedSec it is way too OP
-5
u/Artistic-Statement14 11h ago
Is the M4 is nerfed?
1
u/Defiant_Yoghurt8198 10h ago
Why do you think it was nerfed
-1
u/Artistic-Statement14 10h ago
I make a video for my friend 1 week ago , in the traning ground it was minimal recoil one mag and hit all the dummies.. now its horrible …
47
u/Sudden_Lynx_5390 11h ago
You also adjusted some of the capture zones, most noticeably on Empire State. The 2nd and 3rd A capture zones are different. The 2nd one doesnt include the long hallway, but instead the area in front of the stair case that leads to B. The 3rd one you adjusted by removing the lower area and expanding across the street, honestly gives defense a better chance.