What if you made a rule that said if(remaining_match_time>120s) print ‘backfill_false”
How about that ? Amazing i know, almost like no one thought about and complained about it.
But seriously, if match time is under 2 mins, i dont wanna join that, and im sure a ton of people feel the same, please ffs, make it happen.
Note: no im not a programmer
Do you mean time remaining is less than 2 minutes or time ingame is more than two minutes?
Is not the same as
If the latter, are you taking into account time extensions? ie losing a point and having time going above 2 minutes? Either way I don’t think this is a good idea. You might as well just end the game early, because 5v6 has an absurdly small chance of producing anything balanced or fun. Two minutes is plenty of time to turn a QP game around in a fair 6v6, but if the game is 5v6 it might as well be already over.
You don’t want backfill if the match time is GREATER THAN 120 seconds? 
I would argue that is their intention.
Usually after backfilling into a game that’s longer than 2 mins in, there will be some very obvious problems on my team showing up in 30s or so.
The language is bad, and it would have to be a case-statement, though my programming expertise at this point is 20+ years old, so maybe, case-statements aren’t in vogue anymore.
As note, 2 minutes into a game is not even half a game, so I wouldn’t block backfills into a game two minutes in.
Something like, if the game only has 90 seconds or less left in to the match, then, probably would block it.
Ok ftfy, i think thats how it should’ve been.
Also im not a programmer
I’m legitimately confused.
It feels like you have to mean you don’t want to join games that are almost over, but you worded it twice in a way that strictly interpreted means you don’t want to join anything but those games.
And there’s no good way to do this nor should it be done. Not having a backfill on games that are almost over I can guarantee you would be more frustrating to the team that has to fight while being down players than it is to the person who has to backfill. Your solution would just make things worse overall. I think you’re just being shortsighted.
What if we made leavers actually suffer more than the players that stayed ?
1-backfill disabled when remaining time is less than 1:30.
2-harder punishments for leavers.
3-remove paris and hlc.
the only thing I agree with.
120 seconds is PLENTY of time to salvage a game. I would rather not have games doomed to 5v6 for however long the 5 people manage to make a stand.
You make the problem sound simple but fail to consider how 120 seconds on the clock is not 120 seconds of gameplay left and there is no way the system knows exactly how much time is left.
There’s no way to determine when ~1:30 is left for many games though. You can never take the first point on a map like Blizzard World and the whole game can be over in a couple of minutes or it can go on for about ten.
I guess it depends on what you mean by harsher punishments. I’m not generally for punishing people much for leaving the casual gamemode. I’m completely in agreement that at the very least Paris and Horizon should be removed. Personally, I’d be okay with all of 2CP being removed.
Well, with harder punishments, people should leave less, therefore you backfill less, or you should be able to opt out of backfill, the current situation is ridiculous, and blizzard are oblivious on how to act, its like they have the first game with backfill.
If people had a choice, next to nobody would backfill.
Considering they’ve tried a few things (priority queue after backfilling being one) I still don’t think you are as cognizant as you could be about how complex the problem is. It’s not just a matter of “we don’t like it so we shouldn’t have to do it” or “just end the game if there’s too little time”.
So while backfill is mostly not fun and I’m not going to say we should line up for it and smile… it’s currently necessary and the other option being leavers get harsh penalties… which seems to be something they’re also unwilling to do since there are extraneous issues such as life happening and not prioritizing a video game because you’d not be able to play.
… TLDR: You have point, but your chosen comment seems uninformed and overly simplistic.
It’s a shame they don’t include little optional surveys in game to gauge people’s interest in this and many other things 
personally I don’t really mind backfilling into games. I end up in a defeat screen so rarely it doesn’t really bother me and I can just spend my priority thing on Damage (though deathmatch feels like my most played mode with all the smurf/alt-tastic games I’m dodging 
).
That’s the thing, comp is where it’s at if you want full 6v6 where people get perma banned if they leave too frequently. QP should stay as a casual mode. Not to say that people shouldn’t be trying at least a tiny bit to win, but if people don’t want to play anymore for whatever reason I’d rather them leave and get someone who does.
I’ve seen a lot of potential solutions for backfilling into defeat screens but there’s just too much wiggle room in the way the game can suddenly end or stall at the end for the entire game that are never really taken into account. As such make backfill optional, give them a front of the queue pass for completing a back filled game, keep the heavy handed punishments for the competitive mode.
Teaching Blizzard programming - lmfao. Good luck. Might as well try teaching a starfish how to read.
Neither do I, but I’m not going to pretend that I haven’t noticed a great deal of others do not like it.
As such backfilling is necessary. Alright I’m with you here.
And this would be why we cannot have a hard 120s limit.
I’d be game… but honestly I wonder how sparse that queue would be.
meh, id take 400 extra xp for playing for a minute
Yeh it shows
It would be < not >
That said I think 2m is still good enough, 1m is impossible so they should make it 60s
Oh I’m not pretending that there aren’t people that don’t like it. I’m just iffy when I see people saying the word most or next to nobody 
Even if I don’t care I don’t see why it couldn’t be catered for/trialled unless you are correct in that next to nobody would be backfilling. Especially for somethin like Tank but I think that’s it’s own problem that blizzard needs to deal with =\
Yeh as a general rule hard limits just annoy people. If I’m that determined to leave a game and it’s blanked out I’ll just kill the game. If I’m heavily penalised when I log back in, I’ll just play some other game then maybe jump on again later (whereby they run risk of me realising I’m having way more fun on something else 
).
Could be an absolute distaster! I think it’d be an interesting experiment for them to trial (not in the experimental mode, too few players) but just make it well known that this is a temp feature theyre trialing with no promises that it’ll stay.
I get conservative/small changes to gameplay like heroe stats (even if they don’t do them as frequently as they should) but for qol things they really could be more aggressive =\
This is another thing. The incentive are absolute garbage. I have essentially all cosmetics and 50,000 “blizz bucks”. A loot box or 25 FLIPPING CURRENCY IS LITERALLY WORTHLESS. I’m more annoyed by the clutter of such worthless icons wrecking the aesthetics. Make the incentives decent and incentivising for people like me.
I’ll help you:
If (matchTime => fillTime) then
{
fill = false;
}
else
{
fill = true;
}
I would make fill and time variables. All print will do is just print to the console, so we do not want that. Also I would turn off filling altogether instead of looking for backfilling specifically. Making a time a variable would make things easier too.
Well then there would be an output of ‘backfill_false’ somewhere on the CLI or whatever the current standard output is on the server, as long as the game end is longer then 120s away.
Well this certainly would not happen. First of all your condition would be true when the rest of the game runs longer then 2mins and not under 2 mins. And second printing out some arbitrary string would not do anything meaningful.