I’m getting absolutely sick of joining halfway through a match, and losing because it’s either too late for me to make a difference, or I join and our team loses before I can pick a character. I want to play from the very beginning of a match and not have to deal with being forced to play an uphill battle. Just remove it. No one wants to join half-way through a match that they are bound to lose.
6 Likes
Backfilling a game in the last few seconds of the match is never fun, we can all agree on that.
But I can’t help thinking it’s almost funny how egocentric people can get when they come up with “solutions” for their own little grievances. Remove backfill? Take a breather for a second and actually imagine how that would work.
Right now, almost every game in Quick Play has a leaver. If you would completely remove backfill, no game in Quick Play would last until the end anymore. There’s no way people will stay in a 5v6 when some guy ragequit, and he isn’t replaced anymore. Games would end prematurely all the time, taking a lot of enjoyment away for both teams and reducing the quality of games overall. Games would be reduced to “first team that gets a leaver loses”, rather than last until the end.
5 Likes
It’s the ”overfill” or last 30 seconds backfill that’s frustrating and annoying. Not the actual backfilling in games that are not yet finished… atleast for me 
1 Like
id agree with the (Traveling to DEFEAT) part where you join and instantly lose, i dont want the 400 whatever xp there needs to be a system to prevent last minute joining
but other than that backfill shouldnt be completely removed imo.
3 Likes
Backfill is better then no backfill. But i agree, it usually means a loss.
Backfill should be a voluntary option, should be choise, not forced upon you.
And it should be rewarding.
3 Likes
But how many people would actually turn it on I’d that’s the case? No one would unless the “reward” is pretty damn big, but then people could probably farm for whatever so idk.
Yes, exactly, great rewards for voluntarily saving a game for 11 other participants.
Regardless of the outcome.
I have some personal rules of thumb when i play Overwatch.
One of them is that i do not play with Hanzo and Widow in my team.
In QP i just leave the lobby ASAP.
But when i am placed as backfill into a team with Hanzo and Widow i also leave immediately.
Resulting in penalties.
I would avoid those penalties if the reward for staying was sufficient enough.
I can wait a minute. I would not tryhard ofc.
I’d probably root for the opposition too.
But i’d voluntarily give them their victory, if my reward for making that possible was sufficient.
I think we should definitely have the option to opt out of backfill.
1 Like
Having a system like that is hard. Rainbow 6 Siege has a system like that but it’s flawed. (its first to 3 wins just in case you didn’t know) if you’re on a team and you’re losing 1-2, and someone leaves, the game prevents anyone filling that spot for your team, as someone could join last minute and lose 1-3 before they can do anything. Good idea on paper but it’s so annoying when it happens as you’re permanently down a player and you basically lose. TBH the entire backfill system is flawed imo but this isn’t a R6 forums so there’s no point me going into much detail.
1 Like
I’d rather have an option to opt out, its not fun at all to go into 3 backfilled games in a row on a loosing team, only to loose.
The amount of XP given is too low for the overall pissed off feeling you get if you are in an unlucky run of game losses.
I don’t think backfill should be removed from QP but the change I would propose is that if someone leaves during the last 60 seconds of the game, DO NOT add another player, it serves no purpose at all and only wastes people’s time who’re sitting and waiting for a new game.
Keep back fill, but not in the last minute of the match. If someone leaves <60 seconds, so be it, finish the game 6v5.
1 Like
Exactly this!!
I hate being put in as backfill when it’s less than a minute or on overtime, cause in arcade nobody sticks around for the next game so to say that “don’t worry you’ll get in a new game fast after” nope, it goes back to searching for a game then skirmish until it finds a game.
I would much rather have an entire match or at least half a match. Not the defeat screen immediately.
I also understand the frustration people feel when they leave at the end like that. I’ve had days when i’ve felt that my time is too precious to wait the last 20 seconds for defeat to pop up so i leave to search for a new game. The older you get the less patience you have with some things 
And to people who’s gonna call me a “dirty leaver” you clearly didn’t read what i wrote or understood it.
1 Like
the problem is the game does not have any last 60 second s a match can in fact hypothetically last of an indefinit amount of time under the right situations.
Your not accounting for the fact that connection speeds may play into how fast you can load up a game from the match maker and other factor that may be involved…
Where no dealing with an exact measure of time but rather a range of opportunity.
Can they narrow that down a bit… maybe… but it may also just technically infeasible to do…
I’d rather they investigate and try to find a way to 100% identify actual leavers and then just ban hammer them into oblivion… but that may be just as infeasible.
In the end may be we should just exterminate the human race and start over because humans are trash.
1 Like
I’m all for starting over humanity 
people who lack empathy get the real life ban hammer
I have A.S.D… and part of my condition is i physically cant empathise with people… its an impossibility for me…
Should i be banned from life because of a condition i was born with and have no control over?
Yeah… thought so… think before you speak next time… not everyone thinks/behaves or is even capable of thinking/behaving according to your morality… k? thx…
depends on if you behave like an ass or if you can intellectually do the equivalent…
Frankly having a condition is never an excuse for being an evil SOB.
You can still act altruistically out of intelligent self interest and apply game theory principles to social interactions.
2 Likes
That wasnt the original specifications of the proposed arrangement i.e
In meaning regardless of how you act if you cannot empathise through being unable or unwilling you dont deserve to participate in life… which is exceedingly offensive
Now in retort to your bastardisation of the original position yes i can act like a decent human being and i can sympathise all though most of my thoughts and actions are based purely on logic and not emotion which makes most people think im an “ass” when im not really they just project their feelings way to much
The “real life ban” comment was posted without thinking, don’t take too much offence. In general, having empathy is always a good thing, and yes, for people with A.S.D. it just means it is a little harder to learn.
I work as a social educator, and one of the things I always learn the youngsters I work with, several of whom have conditions like ADHD and ASD, is that having a condition is never an excuse. It just means you have to work a little harder sometimes, and apply other principles to social behaviour. Everyone can learn empathy, even if they’re not born with it.
Yes understand it was said without thinking… and you misunderstand me i sm not personally offended i just highlighted the point that it is grossly offensive…
On the other point being a social educater you should know A.S.D is a blanket term not a singular diagnosis…
That being said i agree a condition is not an excuse but people often neglect to realize that their way of thinking is not the only way… and i detest being forced to think for them in correcting their misjudgments about behavior
As for working hard… i dont have to work hard at all… i understand a great deal about human psychology psyche and emotionality… and i find most of it repulsive
Emotions and empathy are a hinderance to societal progress and as such i have no interest in “learning” them even if i could
Which i cant… because believe it or not i spent the entirty of my formative years attempting to interact with people on an emotional level and never once succeeded in a way that was satisfying to both parties…
Some people may indeed be able to learn empathy… but i cannot… i understand it… i can falsly emulate it to appear “normal” but i can never “feel” it and i would posit that alot of the people you teach empathy aren’t really feeling it either… merely parroting it back to you to make it seem like they are
True. You were talking about physically not being able to empathise with people, though, which I was referring to.
That’s the thing, you don’t have to correct them or feel forced to. You can also just let it slide and realize not everyone thinks out of the box like that. Empathy is a common virtue, and emotions are automatic for most people, and necessary to survive. Not taking a certain condition in consideration is not offensive at all.
That’s simply not true. That’s your personal opinion about emotions. I can understand it, but I don’t agree.
That’s what I meant to say. You can’t learn feelings. You can learn how to behave in social interactions to the best of your abilities, by following certain guidelines and “rules”, and I’m glad you’re doing that.
You may not like it or disagree, but having emotions and expressing empathy is a keystone in social interaction - even if you have to “fake” it.
This discussion might go a little far right now… all I am trying to say is you should understand that not everyone is able to take every condition in consideration when they say stuff, and is just talking from the viewpoint they consider “normal”. What I’m saying is, you basically have to have experience with conditions like ASD to be able to think out of the box like that. Also, you shouldn’t take the “real life ban hammer” joke too literally, which is I assume (not sure, of course) also something that doesn’t come automatic to you.
1 Like