Battlefield 6’s Beta Misses the Mark on My All-Time Favorite Mode, But I’m Not Worried

Battlefield 6’s beta is undeniably a success, as its player counts have been staggering and BF6’s pre-orders have seen a major spike since its release. Many gamers are clearly loving the game, though there are some Battlefield veterans that have been quite critical of the upcoming title on platforms like Reddit. Overall, I’ve disagreed with the vast majority of these critiques. As an infantry player, Battlefield 6’s smaller maps have been right up my alley, while nitpicks like main menu design have never been something I’ve lost sleep over. I’m indifferent to open and closed weapons, as I think BF6’s classes feel great in both playlists, and I don’t crave a return to player-run servers where a mod will kick someone for daring to steal their helicopter. However, I do agree with the notion that Rush doesn’t quite feel right.

As previously mentioned, Battlefield 6 maps like Empire State have been just fine in my eyes (outside of Rush), as some of my favorite maps are Operation Metro, Siene Crossing, and Grand Bazaar – all of which happened to highlight how great Rush was in Battlefield 3. BF3, much like its predecessor, Bad Company 2, felt as if it was built around Rush, as maps flowed brilliantly and the fights around the MCOM stations always felt balanced. It’s for this reason that I’ve always been a Rush guy, and Conquest has never been my go-to mode. While I appreciate its large-scale battles and vehicular warfare, I personally find it far more fun to fight on foot without having to run between points for ages, which BF6 excels at. Sadly, despite nailing infantry combat, the beta misses the mark on Rush. This is a genuine shame, as some of my fondest gaming memories are sniping attackers in the first sector of Operation Metro and holding off waves of players parachuting from above on Damavand Peak.

Thus far, the community’s complaints about Rush are two-fold, and they’re both things that I agree with. First is the argument that 12v12 is simply too few players for the mode, and depending on the map, this issue feels more or less obvious. While something like Iberian Offensive remains action-packed, Liberation Peak feels lifeless compared to how it plays in Conquest and Breakthrough. I was eager to show my fiancée what my favorite Battlefield game mode was like, as she had finally gotten into the series thanks to BF6’s satisfying revives. Unfortunately, we ended up on Liberation Peak, and she felt bored and frustrated because there was “nothing for her to contribute” and so few people to revive in Rush. This, when coupled with the other issue of how unbalanced certain points feel (looking at you, Iberian Offensive, as the final point is basically in the defenders’ spawn), has me feeling disappointed in Rush. Despite this, I’m still hopeful for BF6 and the future of this classic mode.

Battlefield Studios Has Time to Address Rush Feedback

I’m hardly the only person to criticize the latest iteration of Rush, and while some players have failed to deliver their feedback in a courteous way, hopefully there have been enough gamers that have taken the time to be respectful when sharing their issues with the mode. If there has been (and if players continue to speak up), then Battlefield Studios will hopefully use the two months between now and launch to make some adjustments to Rush. The bones of an enjoyable experience are there, as the intense first few sectors of Iberian Offensive showed me, but the mode needs some significant tweaks. These include:

• Better balancing for certain MCOM Sectors, with the final two MCOMs on Iberian Offensive coming to mind as well as Empire State’s MCOMs.
• 24v24 on all maps, or at the very least, varying player counts depending on the map.
• More vehicles, as currently, Rush feels like a 12v12 deathmatch variant with optional bomb sites.

I’m optimistic that Battlefield Studios will make these changes, but if it does not, I may have to make Breakthrough my main mode. While Rush hasn’t been something I’ve properly enjoyed since Battlefield 4, as Operations stole the show in games like BF1, I was really hoping that BF6 would be a return to form for the mode. It’s a shame that it isn’t, at least in its current form, as a top-notch infantry experience really should be highlighting Rush’s strengths. Fortunately, even if Rush isn’t directly touched up by Battlefield Studios, creative fans could be a saving grace for the mode.

Battlefield Portal Could Save Rush Even if Battlefield Studios’ Focus is Elsewhere

Assuming Battlefield Studios has its hands full designing more large maps that cater to that portion of the player base, Rush fanatics may have to come together to polish up the mode through Battlefield Portal. With the new version of Portal utilizing Godot, Battlefield Studios is giving players the option to move and alter certain assets on each map – something that could be game-changing for hardcore fans. If players have issues with certain points offering too much or too little cover for defenders, they could adjust them. Perhaps they will even be able to move MCOMs and increase player counts as well, letting gamers make the ideal version of Rush through Battlefield Portal’s server browser. With this in mind, I’ve got no concerns that my favorite Battlefield mode will eventually reach its full potential. Until it does, I’ll just have to keep on having a blast playing Breakthrough, which remains a fine alternative.

Battlefield 6

Released

October 10, 2025

Developer(s)

Battlefield Studios

Engine

Frostbite

Multiplayer

Online Multiplayer, Online Co-Op

Number of Players

Single-player

Steam Deck Compatibility

Unknown