Rumor – New Battlefield 4 Game Modes Leaked? Combat Mission, Onslaught, and More [Updated]


A DICE developer who goes by the name “JBRipley” on Reddit has responded to the rumor, clarifying that these are, in fact, not upcoming Battlefield 4 game modes. Here’s what he had to say:

“Eh no, the code that was found is just a combined list of all the different game modes that Battlelog supports, which includes all the game modes from BF3 as well as MOHW.”

Thanks to MattTheMusketeerfor pointing this one out. Check out his video on the news here.

Original Story

A list of upcoming Battlefield 4 game modes have allegedly been discovered through the efforts of one particular user digging deep into the game’s code.

As with all info extracted from game code, it should be taken with a spoonful of salt, as there is no telling if the introduction of any of these game modes will actually come to pass. In spite of this, a few of the names do appear likely, especially re-appearing game modes like Tank Superiority, Gun Master, Squad Rush and Scavenger.

Check out the original forum post below from user Th3-Chronikk:

“While Doing some really in dept JavaScript digging trying to find DLC content i have found some game modes that have place holders in the server but are not currently active. All that were not firmware to me are below with my explanation on what i think they are.

1. “TANKSUPERIORITY” – Tanks only battle between everyone
2. “GUNMASTER” – Not quite sure about this one maybe kind of like COD’s gun game
3. “COMBATMISSION” – may be a game mode where you can do co-op missions for xp
4. “SQRUSH” – Squad Rush,Squad vs each other (not sure if already avalible.)
5. “SCAVENGER” – all possibly have to scavenge for weapons
6. “SPORT” – Haven’t figured this one out yet. (if you think you may know more info PM or quote me)
7. “FIRETEAM_SURVIVOR” – only one life (if you think you may know more info PM or quote me)
8. “ONSLAUGHT” – not sure. (if you think you may know more info PM or quote me)”

Game modes like Capture the Flag and Air Superiority have already made a return through two of Battlefield 4’s latest expansions, Second Assault and China Rising, and if these findings are to be believed, it looks like more are on the way, along with some new additions.

In last year’s shooter from EA, Medal of Honor: Warfighter, a game mode called Combat Mission tasked an attacking team with planting three bombs in randomly chosen locations on the map. It was one of the more popular team-oriented modes and would be a reasonable addition to Battlefield 4’s playlist. Onslaught was a cooperative game mode originally featured in 2010’s Battlefield: Bad Company 2. “Sport” appears to be a believable addition as well, if you recall DICE Producer Daniel Matros describing Battlefield 4’s push towards eSports.

What do you think? Would you like to see the return of any of the game modes listed above to Battlefield 4?

Source: Se7ensins, via Jacob.

  • Just saying

    I have a question for PS4 guys, is BF4 still crashing on it? I heard it’s kinda fixed and playable on PS4 now.

    • shoezzz

      Yeah, it’s fixed. Quite honestly, it was always playable. Yeah, you’d run into rubberbanding like T.I., you couldn’t play conquest 64 man, & there were crashes, but for the most part, it ran pretty well. It’s the gaming community once again making a huge fuss over issues that would inevitably be fixed.

      • Joel Santana

        Truthfully, I’ve only experienced issues with only playing Conquest, as it would always crash for the littlest things. Every other game mode worked perfectly fine for me.

    • Mike

      I been trying the campaign and even it crashes!

    • Katana67

      It certainly works, and unlike others have said I’ve never had a problem with crashes even on 64 player Conquest. Not one crash.

      However, there are glaring problems with BF4. The lag and/or hit detection is pretty appalling on PS4. Likewise, there are a ton of bugs/mistakes which are too numerous for me to list. It’s still not a complete game, although it certainly is working flawlessly in terms of stability for me.

      As an aside, is it so hard to include a timer in the server browser to show how long is left in a match before one joins? Tired of joining matches which are only a few tickets away from ending or matches which are in the after-match screen (with the pretense of joining for a certain favorite map).

    • dpg70

      Fixed? no. Playable? yes. Still way too many issues with the server browser, lag, rubberbanding, and random crashes to call it “fixed”.

  • MR_H0RNY

    Please tell me onslaught includes dinosaurs :3

    • Joel Santana

      Don’t think Dinosaurs would work for Onslaught, as it pits you against the AI and you have to capture points throughout the map.


        Mm, put it on a water-based map- Like Paracel Storm- and give some velociraptors a jet-ski or two. 😀

        • Joel Santana

          Might as well put Megalodons in the water too. lol

    • DerpSlayer

      Shut up with the dinosaurs already, are you five?

      • James K

        Just let DICE add in dinosaur mode to muffle the demand of it.

        • asgaro

          There are already dinosaurus games so why don’t people buy that?
          I posted here a link to Steam in response to MR_HORNY but it seems it has been removed by this website’s admins LOL.
          It’s called Primal Carnage btw, and its decent.

          • Mike

            nothing like blasting a raptor with a steyr aug… cmon, sounds great..

          • iSpiRiiT

            But cmon. Dinos with the frostbite engine?
            And i think Dice needs to add some kinda mode in Battlefield to escape from the serious battles. like cod zombies.
            Since i’ve heard of the idea of dino mode in bf.
            Everyday i hear the word ”bf” i imagine a soldier riding a t-rex as a tank and killing enemies !

      • TommyBoy

        You don’t like dinosaurs?

      • James Mulhall

        No.. but I have got an imagination.

  • Imaginative…

  • asgaro

    Ah yes, the return of more bullshit game modes.
    Seriously, why can’t DICE make some game modes that encourage teamplay with all the 64 players on a server?
    Take note of Planetside 2, DICE. There, taking over a region isn’t as simple as capping a little flag by your own. Taking over the base takes TEAM effort because several points within the base have to be captured first before the main core can be captured.

    I just feel DICE should be more inventive and stop making boring game modes that don’t fit with the team oriented gameplay Battlefield should be having. Most of these game modes above can be easily done in shooters like CoD.
    They should make game modes that are only possible with 64 players where all sorts of tasks have to be fulfilled.

    So far I haven’t felt the need to buy BF4. Because of bugs and shitty gameplay ideas like these.

    • Tom Miller

      If it is indeed Combat Mission from Medal of Honor, I really enjoyed that mode.

      • roland0811

        It was nice but the bad map design and lack of Hardcore mode across all game types killed Warfighter for me.

        Well, that and the numerous glitches from it being unfinished.

      • dpg70

        Wasn’t that just the MoH version of Rush? There were some differences, but ultimately it just played like Rush.

    • Just saying

      PS2 for me is way more fun tbh. What happens there is a real war considering the amount of players. Don’t get me wrong, I still love BF, but PS2 is different. Looking forward for its release on PS4.

    • Katana67

      I agree. In my opinion, Rush and CQ really are the only game modes which have a place in BF. Any other modes are just shoe-horned into the game for the sake of propriety and detract from the game in certain areas (such as map design).

      I wish they’d have a form of Conquest that would be based on overall control of large “zones” rather than flags which have no strategic value (and are often placed in areas which have no strategic value as well).

      I’ve enjoyed some of the gameplay I’ve had in BF4, and am doing fairly well. But I never feel like I am anymore, which is a problem. I’ll go 30-3 and feel like I went 20-20, simply because I’m dying when I shouldn’t be (mostly after having dumped a mag or two into someone). That’s just on the K/D side of things, the SPM and objective stuff seems alright to me.

      The bugs are somewhat debilitating at times, along with the still poor hit-detection on PS4. Some of the gameplay choices are baffling to me. The list is quite numerous, but a small sampling would be the still inordinate amount of rounds it takes to bring someone down in Hardcore, the presence of “random spread”, the marginalization of bipod use, the pervasive inclusion of “lock-on” and/or “seeking” projectiles for vehicles, in-air jet spawns, as well as VERY narrow map design (one spends far more time just turning around in jets than actually being on-target).

      • Gannon

        I’m also in agreement. That “zones” idea sounds like a hell of a game mode. Why have I never heard of this before. The zones would need to be quite large and very distinct, but the concept is there for sure.

        • Katana67

          I always envisioned the zone control as being calculated by overall player presence, asset control (vehicles for example), coupled with the more “real-time” stuff like kills, repairs, commander asset placement, etc.

          I’m still not sure one how I’d want it done, but I recall reading about a WWII MMOFPS having a moving “front line” which was dependent on player battle gains. Something like that, but on a BF scale. Regardless, I agree that the scale of BF’s maps would have to be expanded a bit from where they are now.

          That and it could be done in tandem with a centralized and traditional “flag/point” system, whereby tickets are rewarded/deducted for overall zone control. Ticket bleed is exacerbated/impeded by control of individual points within those zones. This could be a new game mode or a modification to Conquest. I think it’d be a very good way of endorsing “team play”, in that even the traditionally vilified “snipers hanging back” play a role in zone control simply by virtue of being there. They’re still contributing to zone control even if they’re not taking a particular objective or even doing particularly well in terms of killing enemy players.

          • Gannon

            I think a very easy way to implement it would be to have it be essentially what Conquest is now, but simply expanding control points dramatically. Zone control should be very clear on who owns it as well as it’s boundaries. And although your asset control idea is pretty cool, it would force players who really PTFO to jump in a vehicle, even if they don’t want it. Overall though, it could, and should be done.
            I certainly don’t mind TDM every once in a while (although i think the area should be larger), especially since it would take so little of DICE’s resources that they could use elsewhere, but I do think there are far too many game modes that don’t take advantage of BF’s full potential with large scale maps and player counts.

            • Katana67

              For that, they’d have to abandon the arbitrary “radius” for capture in favor of zones. So yeah, I think that would be great.

              What I mean by asset control is more about allocation of assets rather than a particular benefit to the player. Asset control would only factor in to overall zone control in my mind and not any specific objective. So, for example, if there are two friendly IFV’s operating in a zone, the odds are in your favor that your team will have control of that zone (and not any particular objective within that zone).

              Think of it as a manual transmission. First gear is the zone control, it allows you to go relatively slowly (i.e. slow ticket bleed). Second gear is the workhorse, and is the flag/objective control, which allows you to go faster (i.e. faster ticket bleed). If you lose the flag, you’re downshifting back to first gear but still are whittling away at the enemy’s ticket count with a tool other than just kills/spawns. I think this type of hierarchical/tiered ticket continuum would require a marked increase in tickets to accommodate.

              I think the best way to do this would be to, as the OP said, just make objectives more dynamic. Having more than one objective in a game mode makes all the sense in the world to me, coupled with increasing the ways in which said objectives are advanced. For example, in a revamped Conquest mode you could have…

              – Four overall zones of the map, which would be controlled by player presence and calculated by X, Y, Z factors.

              – Several traditional conquest “flags” within those zones that serve as control points which could enhance ticket bleed if controlled. Likewise, it would add depth to the “zones” in that defending players would still be compelled to secure an enemy flag in their own territory.

              – Within those zones, or in conjunction with the traditional flags, you could have a tiered system whereby (as in the OP) you’d have to take a small outpost, a bunker, and a helipad to secure a base rather than just sitting in a general area and getting a “capture”.

              – Sabotage Objectives. Similar to the artillery pieces and radar stations from BF2, in that they could be destroyed to hamper a commander. Likewise, they should be tangible objects to be fought over. They’ve even half-way implemented this with the AC-130/Cruise Missile flag control and Bomber shed, they’d just have to make these types of resources worthy objectives. All you have to do is place these objectives on the same continuum as the flags and zones or make them affect ticket bleed.

              – Dynamic Objectives. These are already half-implemented, in that a Commander can tell a squad where to go. But there really isn’t any true incentive to follow a commander’s orders. That and the commander can’t really tell you what to do, or what classes he/she wants you to be, only where to go. You don’t really get any points for it, it doesn’t aid you in any way in taking flags, and it doesn’t result in a coordinated effort. I’m not entirely sure what to do with this, other than making the squad-commander interface more apparent. But I do like the idea of objectives being match-specific, so there might be some headroom there. Perhaps placing them on the same ticket bleed continuum would help give significance to the commander’s orders.

          • Andre R. Antunes

            similar to the system aplied in Heroes & Generals:

        • Andre R. Antunes

          The “zones” idea is not new. It was implemented by Frontlines:Fuel of War (
          Unfortunately the game didn’t had much success and died along with Kaos Studios (formed by members of Trauma Studios – the team behind the popular Desert Combat modification for BF1942).
          Something like a mix of Rush/Conquest would be nice. You would have to destroy/deactivate something and only then you could cap the flag… PlanetSide2 style

          • Katana67

            Good ideas > New ideas. There are zones in BF:PR, and it works beautifully.

            • Andre R. Antunes

              yep… and it sucks that EA / DICE doesn’t care about user created content. THAT would be the real listening to the community

        • dpg70

          Not sure where it originated, but Zones was a great mode in Warhawk. Basically CQ, but the bleed was sped up when you connected capture zones. That kept alot of the fight in the middle because that flag was the key to connecting the rest.

          • Gannon

            Sounds really cool. This is what BF needs in my opinion.

      • iSpiRiiT

        oh man you scared me for a sec. By CQ i thought you meant ”Close Quarters” lol

  • Tom Miller

    Okay I’m kind of not believing this story for one reason: if he’s such a Battlefield fan that he’s digging up this code, seems like he would have already known what a few of these gametypes would be. I redid his list, but entered the true game mode description and left the one’s I don’t know.

    1. ”TANKSUPERIORITY” – Same as Air Superiority but with Tanks

    2. ”GUNMASTER” – This would be the return of Gun Master from the Close Combat DLC introduced in Battlefield 3

    3. ”COMBATMISSION” – This would probably be the return of the same game mode from Medal of Honor (2010). A “Rush” type game mode with objectives instead of MCOMs.

    4. ”SQRUSH” – The same game mode from Bad Company 2 and Battlefield 3.

    5. ”SCAVENGER” – The same Game Mode introduced with the Aftermath DLC for Battlefield 3

    6. ”SPORT” –


    8. ”ONSLAUGHT” – The Co-op game mode DLC from Bad Company 2. (Wish there was a “Dino” here lol)

    • Wiking


      Wave after wave of dinos instead of AI soldiers.
      Sort of CoD Zombies, but with dinos in BF4!
      FUCK YEAH!!!

      • Who would care? The AI in this game is so abysmal these missions would be a cakewalk.

        • ThatSpeakerOfTruth

          Although random bursts of bullets, enemy hordes, and one-shot RPGs ending your life instantly à la Battlefield 3’s hard AI soldiers could still pose a problem. Brute difficulty, but I suppose difficulty nonetheless, to have dinosaurs with 1,000,000,000 health.and a Godzilla nuclear pulse attack.

    • Th3 Chronikk

      Never said i was a big BF4 fan.

      • Tom Miller

        Gotchya, re-reading my post I did kind of sound like a dick in the opening sentence, my apologies for that.

        • Th3 Chronikk

          Oh no it’s fine, I’m not a big BF fan i have played them before to try them out but haven’t really became a fan until BF4. So i don’t know as much about the game as others. Just sharing what i found.

  • Liam Urry

    Smells like the code from BF3….

    • swipe_06

      Its actually from the battlelog source, and not from any game. there’s some game refered as “warshaw” too, but I think its enough rumours for today.

  • Kyle Jackson

    Like I’ve said before, a mode where everyone has the exact same 1 gun, then lets see who has the skills.

    • Gannon

      Only if the rounds were relatively short and the gun was constantly randomized. Otherwise it would be extremely boring.

      • thatoneguy

        Like a Sharpshooter type of game mode from the Call of Duty series. Free for all, with everyone having the same gun, every 45 seconds the gun would change to a randomly selected weapon. I think games lasted for 7 minutes.

      • Kyle Jackson

        Changed at the end of every round yes.

  • blondbassist

    Yay more ways to experience broken netcode..

    • DerpSlayer

      Game works fine here. Check your system.

      • Taylor Cogdill

        My computer runs Crysis 3 fine. My computer runs Farcry 3 fine. My computer runs BF3 fine. My computer runs ARMA 3 fine. I have the recommended Radeon 7870 and an AMD CPU. I have 10G of RAM. BF4 is the ONLY game that I’ve played for the past year that crashes more than once every game session. It’s not our systems, it’s the broken game.

        • I had a Radeon 7950 and a Intel i5 3570K and it ran the game fine. I even ran it without a graphics card since I sold it and it still runs at the lowest settings. The game hasn’t crashed for me since the second or third patch.

          • Warlon

            I have the same setup and totally agree. The hate is strong against BF4. It’s the cool thing to hate on it.

        • Warlon

          The game runs runs perfectly fine. It’s not Dice’s fault you are too inept to run their game.

          • Taylor Cogdill

            I have all of the recommended specs, even the very specific graphics card. It’s not me, it’s their game. There are people with gaming rigs that cost $2k+ that keep crashing. People have recorded battlefield 4 in task manager going from taking 8Gb of ram to taking all available ram in just a second. I’m a computer scientist, so I can tell you that is indicative of a memory leak, something that first year programmers learn how to control. DICE broke their game with bad code. It doesn’t matter how good your computer is: memory leaks will crash anything, even supercomputers.

  • Sheldon

    Scavenger and Gun Master!

  • I might be very wrong, but Fireteam_Survivor might be another co op mode. When I think of it, I think of the Fireteam game mode from a PC F2P shooter called Combat Arms. Its you and 6 others in a semi linear walk through each mission where you do random things, hold an objective, destroy a satellite uplink, retrieve a laptop that looks like a Macbook (lol) and you only had one life until the objective was done.

  • MegaMan3k

    My speculation:

    Combat Mission was a working name for Obliteration. Sport was a working name for Defuse.

  • Th3 Chronikk

    Wow, i feel so honored that this got posted from what i did. Should have setup an interview or something with me, i have different views on some of this.

    • SamRock

      Dude lots of articles get written based on thread/posts created by users! You cant expect the editors/writers to contact OPs for their thoughts probably because its already in the OP 😉

  • Matthew Robertson

    This is where all the Battlefield fans try and kill me through the internet, i think they’re copying a bit of CoD here. #JustSayin’

  • Pingback: Battlefield 4: modalità non attive nascoste nel codice -

  • Soldier

    Sport – possibly for esports? Just throwing it out there.

  • Ben August

    Speculating on Fireteam here:

    A modern USMC “Fireteam” consists of 3 Marines; it is the 2nd smallest infantry on the field, but also makes up the core of all infantry sub-groups. The ranking Marine (a non-commissioned) often carries a M249 Saw, while the other two members carry alternative tactical weapons (probably M4’a, or an M4 configured for 700 yard combat).

    Could be a new name for Squad based combat. Last Fireteam (small squad) alive, wins.

  • Marcus Roue

    EA why don’t you fix bigger issues?

    Like PS3 users who have the Limited Edition version of BF4. They get the China Rising DLC free but when they upgrade to the PS4 digtal version, the DLC isn’t included.

    What’s up with that???

    • Mitch

      When did they say that separate DLCs would carry over? Link?

      • Marcus Roue

        It’s pretty much common sense. Why bother offering an upgrade to PS3 owners if the digital PS4 version won’t carry over the bonus items from the Limited Edition?

        CoD: Ghosts has a free DLC map called Free Fall. That in itself will carry over to the PS4 digital upgrade offer.

        Last time I checked, EA was competing with Activision right?
        Dumb decision on EA’s part.

        • Mitch

          It’s commen sense, too bad EA completely lacks common sense.

  • Oblivion_Lost667

    In all honesty, I don’t see all of these making it in, it looks more like a list of game modes they had code for and threw in to see how it’d work, or were there before and they decided to scrap them. SQRush got scrapped, and probably for good reason, I love the game mode, but it was dead. Sport may just be another name for the e-Sports game mode.

    The ones I see them taking are Gun Master, and Scavenger simply because they were fairly popular gamemodes in BF3, and they’ll be good to sell DLCs. Tank Superiority will probably make it in too. Onslaught MAY make it in, and I’d love if it did, it was a fun way to unlock weapons and have some fun with your friends, but as for Fireteam Survivor and Combat Mission, I’m not sure, I don’t know what the first one will be, and the second one could’ve just been code the MOH:WF devs carried over with them to see if it’d work in BF4, I’m sure they’d love to get a gamemode they worked hard on making into another game, since MOH:WF died without much of a chance for them to patch it, and then EA disbanded them.

  • dpg70

    There needs to be a FIX THE GAME post here, so…


  • John Kimble

    These modes are a waste of time and resources. Most people including myself might play these modes 1 or 2 times then go back to Conquest. Anybody up for some Air superiority. lol

  • Delta8A

    with broken staff shell mechanics, tank vs tank gameplay is a nightmare. dice douchebags.

  • Pingback: CLAN [COBRA] OFICIAL | Battlefield 4 pode receber novos modos de jogo()