All of which requires relics. I don’t see why you think the NS not requiring gear shouldn’t factor into this, other than just not wanting to admit you’re making false comparisons.
I suspect it’s because NS aren’t the same category of team as Jabba, marquee vs GL, and work without relics or stars. If Levi was still losing to Raddus, that’d probably be a more similar comparison. Maybe if it was losing to low star Raddus.
It absolutely surpasses Exec and Prof now. Exec can’t beat it reliably at all, and it’s got a single reliable counter (Prof) compared to the three reliable counters Prof has. It’s got the best hold rate in GAC by a good margin.
It was definitely underperforming when it was bugged, but now it’s the best ship by a decent margin. I get people wanted it to be more of an I win button, and have absolutely no counters, but it’s clearly the top of the food chain currently and is doing what CG said it would. You want to complain it’s not a big enough leap for its cost, that’s fine. But why would CG need an official comment on it?
I'm fine with CG investigating other instances of over/under performance, but please also Levi, and issue some sort of official statement
Are you serious? do you have the ship? have you read this thread? it's self evident. the ship does not surpass Exec and Profun
If NS beating Jabba is not desired, how is Prof beating Levi desired? It's the same concept, since you specifically don't want to call RI or use certain abilities.
BH aren't in the same category as LV, IT aren't in the same category as DR, Reva and Wampa aren't in the same category as SEE. No problems there, though. I should think even less problem with NS vs Jabba since it requires an omicron.
I'm not making false comparisons, I was merely countering your "same category" statement. While Prof and Levi are the same-ish category, purposefully using an undermanned team that is not designed to be used that way to beat a full relic team is exactly the same as using undergeared NS.
All of which requires relics. I don’t see why you think the NS not requiring gear shouldn’t factor into this, other than just not wanting to admit you’re making false comparisons.
I suspect it’s because NS aren’t the same category of team as Jabba, marquee vs GL, and work without relics or stars. If Levi was still losing to Raddus, that’d probably be a more similar comparison. Maybe if it was losing to low star Raddus.
It absolutely surpasses Exec and Prof now. Exec can’t beat it reliably at all, and it’s got a single reliable counter (Prof) compared to the three reliable counters Prof has. It’s got the best hold rate in GAC by a good margin.
It was definitely underperforming when it was bugged, but now it’s the best ship by a decent margin. I get people wanted it to be more of an I win button, and have absolutely no counters, but it’s clearly the top of the food chain currently and is doing what CG said it would. You want to complain it’s not a big enough leap for its cost, that’s fine. But why would CG need an official comment on it?
I'm fine with CG investigating other instances of over/under performance, but please also Levi, and issue some sort of official statement
Are you serious? do you have the ship? have you read this thread? it's self evident. the ship does not surpass Exec and Profun
If NS beating Jabba is not desired, how is Prof beating Levi desired? It's the same concept, since you specifically don't want to call RI or use certain abilities.
BH aren't in the same category as LV, IT aren't in the same category as DR, Reva and Wampa aren't in the same category as SEE. No problems there, though. I should think even less problem with NS vs Jabba since it requires an omicron.
I'm not making false comparisons, I was merely countering your "same category" statement. While Prof and Levi are the same-ish category, purposefully using an undermanned team that is not designed to be used that way to beat a full relic team is exactly the same as using undergeared NS.
I separated nothing. You made a statement, I made a rebuttal.
But sure, the other part of your point, low star Profundity works reliably against Levi too. Is that not a problem?
Starson, I know for a fact you’re smart enough to know how the word “and” works in a sentence. I think it’s a problem if a low gear marquee team beats a GL. If the counter needed relic NS to work, I’d wonder why CG is bothering.
If low star Raddus was beating Levi, I’d have have a problem with it. But that’s not the case. Max star Prof beats it reliably, low star Prof beats it, but much less reliably. This all strikes me as perfectly fine from a balance stand point, and I don’t think comparing the response to NS to the response to Levi demonstrates any sort of inconsistency here.
All of which requires relics. I don’t see why you think the NS not requiring gear shouldn’t factor into this, other than just not wanting to admit you’re making false comparisons.
I suspect it’s because NS aren’t the same category of team as Jabba, marquee vs GL, and work without relics or stars. If Levi was still losing to Raddus, that’d probably be a more similar comparison. Maybe if it was losing to low star Raddus.
It absolutely surpasses Exec and Prof now. Exec can’t beat it reliably at all, and it’s got a single reliable counter (Prof) compared to the three reliable counters Prof has. It’s got the best hold rate in GAC by a good margin.
It was definitely underperforming when it was bugged, but now it’s the best ship by a decent margin. I get people wanted it to be more of an I win button, and have absolutely no counters, but it’s clearly the top of the food chain currently and is doing what CG said it would. You want to complain it’s not a big enough leap for its cost, that’s fine. But why would CG need an official comment on it?
I'm fine with CG investigating other instances of over/under performance, but please also Levi, and issue some sort of official statement
Are you serious? do you have the ship? have you read this thread? it's self evident. the ship does not surpass Exec and Profun
If NS beating Jabba is not desired, how is Prof beating Levi desired? It's the same concept, since you specifically don't want to call RI or use certain abilities.
BH aren't in the same category as LV, IT aren't in the same category as DR, Reva and Wampa aren't in the same category as SEE. No problems there, though. I should think even less problem with NS vs Jabba since it requires an omicron.
I'm not making false comparisons, I was merely countering your "same category" statement. While Prof and Levi are the same-ish category, purposefully using an undermanned team that is not designed to be used that way to beat a full relic team is exactly the same as using undergeared NS.
I separated nothing. You made a statement, I made a rebuttal.
But sure, the other part of your point, low star Profundity works reliably against Levi too. Is that not a problem?
Starson, I know for a fact you’re smart enough to know how the word “and” works in a sentence. I think it’s a problem if a low gear marquee team beats a GL. If the counter needed relic NS to work, I’d wonder why CG is bothering.
If low star Raddus was beating Levi, I’d have have a problem with it. But that’s not the case. Max star Prof beats it reliably, low star Prof beats it, but much less reliably. This all strikes me as perfectly fine from a balance stand point, and I don’t think comparing the response to NS to the response to Levi demonstrates any sort of inconsistency here.
All of which requires relics. I don’t see why you think the NS not requiring gear shouldn’t factor into this, other than just not wanting to admit you’re making false comparisons.
I suspect it’s because NS aren’t the same category of team as Jabba, marquee vs GL, and work without relics or stars. If Levi was still losing to Raddus, that’d probably be a more similar comparison. Maybe if it was losing to low star Raddus.
It absolutely surpasses Exec and Prof now. Exec can’t beat it reliably at all, and it’s got a single reliable counter (Prof) compared to the three reliable counters Prof has. It’s got the best hold rate in GAC by a good margin.
It was definitely underperforming when it was bugged, but now it’s the best ship by a decent margin. I get people wanted it to be more of an I win button, and have absolutely no counters, but it’s clearly the top of the food chain currently and is doing what CG said it would. You want to complain it’s not a big enough leap for its cost, that’s fine. But why would CG need an official comment on it?
I'm fine with CG investigating other instances of over/under performance, but please also Levi, and issue some sort of official statement
Are you serious? do you have the ship? have you read this thread? it's self evident. the ship does not surpass Exec and Profun
If NS beating Jabba is not desired, how is Prof beating Levi desired? It's the same concept, since you specifically don't want to call RI or use certain abilities.
BH aren't in the same category as LV, IT aren't in the same category as DR, Reva and Wampa aren't in the same category as SEE. No problems there, though. I should think even less problem with NS vs Jabba since it requires an omicron.
I'm not making false comparisons, I was merely countering your "same category" statement. While Prof and Levi are the same-ish category, purposefully using an undermanned team that is not designed to be used that way to beat a full relic team is exactly the same as using undergeared NS.
I separated nothing. You made a statement, I made a rebuttal.
But sure, the other part of your point, low star Profundity works reliably against Levi too. Is that not a problem?
There's an inconsistency because only one undergeared/undermanned team is being looked at. I don't think it would be a problem for Prof to beat Levi at full strength, but it's doing so at full banners with just three ships, and possibly even only two ships (I saw no video, just a couple claims).
Starson, I know for a fact you’re smart enough to know how the word “and” works in a sentence. I think it’s a problem if a low gear marquee team beats a GL. If the counter needed relic NS to work, I’d wonder why CG is bothering.
If low star Raddus was beating Levi, I’d have have a problem with it. But that’s not the case. Max star Prof beats it reliably, low star Prof beats it, but much less reliably. This all strikes me as perfectly fine from a balance stand point, and I don’t think comparing the response to NS to the response to Levi demonstrates any sort of inconsistency here.
All of which requires relics. I don’t see why you think the NS not requiring gear shouldn’t factor into this, other than just not wanting to admit you’re making false comparisons.
I suspect it’s because NS aren’t the same category of team as Jabba, marquee vs GL, and work without relics or stars. If Levi was still losing to Raddus, that’d probably be a more similar comparison. Maybe if it was losing to low star Raddus.
It absolutely surpasses Exec and Prof now. Exec can’t beat it reliably at all, and it’s got a single reliable counter (Prof) compared to the three reliable counters Prof has. It’s got the best hold rate in GAC by a good margin.
It was definitely underperforming when it was bugged, but now it’s the best ship by a decent margin. I get people wanted it to be more of an I win button, and have absolutely no counters, but it’s clearly the top of the food chain currently and is doing what CG said it would. You want to complain it’s not a big enough leap for its cost, that’s fine. But why would CG need an official comment on it?
I'm fine with CG investigating other instances of over/under performance, but please also Levi, and issue some sort of official statement
Are you serious? do you have the ship? have you read this thread? it's self evident. the ship does not surpass Exec and Profun
If NS beating Jabba is not desired, how is Prof beating Levi desired? It's the same concept, since you specifically don't want to call RI or use certain abilities.
BH aren't in the same category as LV, IT aren't in the same category as DR, Reva and Wampa aren't in the same category as SEE. No problems there, though. I should think even less problem with NS vs Jabba since it requires an omicron.
I'm not making false comparisons, I was merely countering your "same category" statement. While Prof and Levi are the same-ish category, purposefully using an undermanned team that is not designed to be used that way to beat a full relic team is exactly the same as using undergeared NS.
I separated nothing. You made a statement, I made a rebuttal.
But sure, the other part of your point, low star Profundity works reliably against Levi too. Is that not a problem?
There's an inconsistency because only one undergeared/undermanned team is being looked at. I don't think it would be a problem for Prof to beat Levi at full strength, but it's doing so at full banners with just three ships, and possibly even only two ships (I saw no video, just a couple claims).
Starson, I know for a fact you’re smart enough to know how the word “and” works in a sentence. I think it’s a problem if a low gear marquee team beats a GL. If the counter needed relic NS to work, I’d wonder why CG is bothering.
If low star Raddus was beating Levi, I’d have have a problem with it. But that’s not the case. Max star Prof beats it reliably, low star Prof beats it, but much less reliably. This all strikes me as perfectly fine from a balance stand point, and I don’t think comparing the response to NS to the response to Levi demonstrates any sort of inconsistency here.
All of which requires relics. I don’t see why you think the NS not requiring gear shouldn’t factor into this, other than just not wanting to admit you’re making false comparisons.
I suspect it’s because NS aren’t the same category of team as Jabba, marquee vs GL, and work without relics or stars. If Levi was still losing to Raddus, that’d probably be a more similar comparison. Maybe if it was losing to low star Raddus.
It absolutely surpasses Exec and Prof now. Exec can’t beat it reliably at all, and it’s got a single reliable counter (Prof) compared to the three reliable counters Prof has. It’s got the best hold rate in GAC by a good margin.
It was definitely underperforming when it was bugged, but now it’s the best ship by a decent margin. I get people wanted it to be more of an I win button, and have absolutely no counters, but it’s clearly the top of the food chain currently and is doing what CG said it would. You want to complain it’s not a big enough leap for its cost, that’s fine. But why would CG need an official comment on it?
I'm fine with CG investigating other instances of over/under performance, but please also Levi, and issue some sort of official statement
Are you serious? do you have the ship? have you read this thread? it's self evident. the ship does not surpass Exec and Profun
If NS beating Jabba is not desired, how is Prof beating Levi desired? It's the same concept, since you specifically don't want to call RI or use certain abilities.
BH aren't in the same category as LV, IT aren't in the same category as DR, Reva and Wampa aren't in the same category as SEE. No problems there, though. I should think even less problem with NS vs Jabba since it requires an omicron.
I'm not making false comparisons, I was merely countering your "same category" statement. While Prof and Levi are the same-ish category, purposefully using an undermanned team that is not designed to be used that way to beat a full relic team is exactly the same as using undergeared NS.
I separated nothing. You made a statement, I made a rebuttal.
But sure, the other part of your point, low star Profundity works reliably against Levi too. Is that not a problem?
There's an inconsistency because only one undergeared/undermanned team is being looked at. I don't think it would be a problem for Prof to beat Levi at full strength, but it's doing so at full banners with just three ships, and possibly even only two ships (I saw no video, just a couple claims).
Because they're the same? In both cases you are taking a purposefully underpowered team in order to win.
What a weird comparison. Even ignoring that the crux of my argument is that NS is a weaker power level squad AND under geared, calling relic level and not calling RIs the same thing is weird leap in logic. We’ll just have to agree to disagree here I guess, I can’t imagine CG considers the amount of investment you’ve made for your characters and the tactical decisions you make to win a battle the same thing.
Starson, I know for a fact you’re smart enough to know how the word “and” works in a sentence. I think it’s a problem if a low gear marquee team beats a GL. If the counter needed relic NS to work, I’d wonder why CG is bothering.
If low star Raddus was beating Levi, I’d have have a problem with it. But that’s not the case. Max star Prof beats it reliably, low star Prof beats it, but much less reliably. This all strikes me as perfectly fine from a balance stand point, and I don’t think comparing the response to NS to the response to Levi demonstrates any sort of inconsistency here.
All of which requires relics. I don’t see why you think the NS not requiring gear shouldn’t factor into this, other than just not wanting to admit you’re making false comparisons.
I suspect it’s because NS aren’t the same category of team as Jabba, marquee vs GL, and work without relics or stars. If Levi was still losing to Raddus, that’d probably be a more similar comparison. Maybe if it was losing to low star Raddus.
It absolutely surpasses Exec and Prof now. Exec can’t beat it reliably at all, and it’s got a single reliable counter (Prof) compared to the three reliable counters Prof has. It’s got the best hold rate in GAC by a good margin.
It was definitely underperforming when it was bugged, but now it’s the best ship by a decent margin. I get people wanted it to be more of an I win button, and have absolutely no counters, but it’s clearly the top of the food chain currently and is doing what CG said it would. You want to complain it’s not a big enough leap for its cost, that’s fine. But why would CG need an official comment on it?
I'm fine with CG investigating other instances of over/under performance, but please also Levi, and issue some sort of official statement
Are you serious? do you have the ship? have you read this thread? it's self evident. the ship does not surpass Exec and Profun
If NS beating Jabba is not desired, how is Prof beating Levi desired? It's the same concept, since you specifically don't want to call RI or use certain abilities.
BH aren't in the same category as LV, IT aren't in the same category as DR, Reva and Wampa aren't in the same category as SEE. No problems there, though. I should think even less problem with NS vs Jabba since it requires an omicron.
I'm not making false comparisons, I was merely countering your "same category" statement. While Prof and Levi are the same-ish category, purposefully using an undermanned team that is not designed to be used that way to beat a full relic team is exactly the same as using undergeared NS.
I separated nothing. You made a statement, I made a rebuttal.
But sure, the other part of your point, low star Profundity works reliably against Levi too. Is that not a problem?
There's an inconsistency because only one undergeared/undermanned team is being looked at. I don't think it would be a problem for Prof to beat Levi at full strength, but it's doing so at full banners with just three ships, and possibly even only two ships (I saw no video, just a couple claims).
Because they're the same? In both cases you are taking a purposefully underpowered team in order to win.
Is this the final state of leviathan or do people know this hot mess is getting further much needed work/entire rework
We don't know yet, as there has been no official response from CG, other than that a few bugs have been fixed and they are investigating. It is not known if all bugs have been fixed, or if the ship is performing as CG intended
So Levi has changed the gac meta but I think those arguing that Levi has clearly passed ex and profundity are wrong. I suspect the numbers for Levi holds to drop significantly this next gac season as fewer players try anything but the profundity counter.
I’m also assuming fewer players will place Levi on defense as more players realize how weak Levi is to profundity. You then get into the trickledown effect of fewer profundities on defense because it’s the hard counter to Levi. Once more players start keeping profundity and Levi for offense, which are both hard counters to ex, players will begin questioning whether it makes sense at all to place ex on defense.
So you’ll end up with the player base probably mostly in one of two camps. All 3 on defense hoping a solo ex on defense by the opponent or all on offense to nullify ships in its entirety. My guess is the latter.
Except that what consists of the player base won't have a 7* Levi for many many months yet
Obviously this is for the 7* v 7* Levi matchup. But even if you don’t have Levi having profundity probably means you’ll see it less frequently on defense or if you do you’ll see all three.
My point stands though that it’s weakness towards profundity will likely mean both profundity and Levi end up as offense only units and ships become less important in gac as it’ll be cleared with high banners by a significant amount of players consistently.
The fact that its weak on defense to ProFun and loses ships in battles offensively vs. ProFun (so not max banners in GAC when on Offense, and opportunity for opponent to get max banners attacking it if you place on Defense), only further supports the argument that it is not surpassing ProFun and the current META like it was heralded to. Another reason for CG to come out and say something about this
The fact that its weak on defense to ProFun and loses ships in battles offensively vs. ProFun (so not max banners in GAC when on Offense, and opportunity for opponent to get max banners attacking it if you place on Defense), only further supports the argument that it is not surpassing ProFun and the current META like it was heralded to. Another reason for CG to come out and say something about this
I think Leviathan has sort of pushed the meta in that's it's knocked down Executor somewhat. Profundity now has a counter in Executor and Leviathan (outside of Prof v Prof). Executor is countered by Leviathan and Profundity (again mirrors aside) and Leviathan has a reliable counter on defence in Profundity (mirror aside).
Given that Profundity came out just under a year ago, also has very high reqs, it's not unreasonable that it, for now, it can counter the new ship - on offence anyway.
The fact that its weak on defense to ProFun and loses ships in battles offensively vs. ProFun (so not max banners in GAC when on Offense, and opportunity for opponent to get max banners attacking it if you place on Defense), only further supports the argument that it is not surpassing ProFun and the current META like it was heralded to. Another reason for CG to come out and say something about this
They just did. Team is investigating.
I just saw the post, hooray!! Honestly, that's what I was waiting for, just some official response that they are looking into it. Thank you CG!
I’m basing it off swgoh.gg data, because that’s the data CG provides, and thus the data I’d assume they’d use if they were to investigate the issue.
Prof and Exec both hold about 25% of the time, Levi holds about 35% of the time. Prof has two hard counters (80% or more win rate) and one soft counter (60% or more). Levi has one hard counter and one soft counter.
Do you have broad statistic against which fleets Levi holds up against? If during next GA all ppl will use ugnots against jawas - we may have statistic of meta-difining pack of jawas which holds better than GL. Thats why old granny Traya has the highest winrate in attack.
Than again, will it be ok if Jabba + Krrsanta could solo any GL in the game in any relic, including next Leia, and each with whole team, but Leia with whole team could still defeat Jabba. Though, for less banners.
P.S. yep, I know devs are looking into Levi's underperforming case
The Gerbil posted his videos about no-reinforcement Profundity over 10 months ago so it's funny to see content creators still derping around with the U-wings and Phoenix ships in this season's GAC streams. It's less excusable for CG not to be aware of the meta but it was pretty obvious they were clueless as soon as Leviathan's kit reveal dropped with that anti-Phantom II tech.
The "issue" is that gaining 10% download and giving Outrider a bonus turn is better than any reinforcement Rebels have available. You could probably fix it by just removing the download but it's inane to nerf a tactic that's not a bug, has been in the open for almost a year now, and is mostly an indictment about how poorly most of the Rebel ships work with Profundity thanks to its ban on TM manipulation. Players should be able to consider Profundity as WAI by now.
Sorry to sidetrack the GAC and Arena underperformance of Levi on defense discussion…anyone else surprised CG released such a resource heavy ship to see it absolutely destroyed in ROTE Geonosis?
I think Leviathan has sort of pushed the meta in that's it's knocked down Executor somewhat. Profundity now has a counter in Executor and Leviathan (outside of Prof v Prof). Executor is countered by Leviathan and Profundity (again mirrors aside) and Leviathan has a reliable counter on defence in Profundity (mirror aside).
Given that Profundity came out just under a year ago, also has very high reqs, it's not unreasonable that it, for now, it can counter the new ship - on offence anyway.
Well said, I agree.
If they can figure out how to still make Prof a largely reliable counter but for good, bad or terrible banners (RNG dependent) this ship would be everything they said it would be.
Sorry to sidetrack the GAC and Arena underperformance of Levi on defense discussion…anyone else surprised CG released such a resource heavy ship to see it absolutely destroyed in ROTE Geonosis?
For sure. I think "absolutely destroyed" is a little much since it does fine in Middle (although Exec does just as well or better) but Geonosis is definitely a disappointment. Since no one's beaten it in the eight months since launch, most TB-focused people have been assuming that the mission was intentionally built to require this year's capital ship. For it to just completely flop there is a huge letdown. What's even worse is that it looks like the mission might just be bugged so that enemy ships mass assist when they shouldn't (no buzz droids or the assisting ships aren't Vulture Droids, for example). It would be really nice if CG would just come out and say whether the mission is working as intended or not.
Since no one's beaten it in the eight months since launch, most TB-focused people have been assuming that the mission was intentionally built to require this year's capital ship. For it to just completely flop there is a huge letdown.
I know that I rushed Levi SPECIFICALLY for the RotE benefits. I know I'm not the average player in that sense and that more people are concerned with Fleet Arena and GAC, but I figured there would be counters and I don't play GAC seriously anyway, so I'm not worried about getting beaten by other players in FA so long as I can climb back, and I just don't care about getting beaten in GAC.
That leaves RotE as the primary driving need for a new cap ship -- particularly a new DS cap ship. For CG to create a new meta DS ship and leave the difficulty of the first few DS Fleet missions unchanged by its arrival was an incredibly poor choice in my view. If they follow the pattern, we'll get a new LS cap ship next year, and it will be 2 years before we have a new DS cap ship.
2.5 to 3 years of waiting to be able to beat p1 and p2 Fleet missions in DS is just unacceptable. I honestly have no idea what they were thinking but in my mind this is the much greater tragedy of Leviathan. Players will always beat other players (in mirror matches if nothing else), but this is CG specifically barring us from any competitive play in DS TB fleets.
We know it's WAI. Now I want to know why I have to wait three years to play DS fleets in TB. Seriously, it's not even like we can't 3* those zones. If you're not preventing 3*, then why bother denying us the fun of playing those missions competitively? Even a 50-70% win rate would have been such a huge improvement and we could enjoy the attempt.
So why not investigate how Levi is broken vs. DS TB fleet missions, CG? We have no notice that such an investigation is ongoing, so obviously this is WAI. And if it's WAI, then this is intentional hatred for the players that enjoy TB.
The fact that its weak on defense to ProFun and loses ships in battles
offensively vs. ProFun (so not max banners in GAC when on Offense, and opportunity for opponent to get max banners attacking it if you place on Defense)
There are many threads showing Levi can get OVER max banners on offense if you get the Take Over The Ship bug,
anyone else surprised CG released such a resource heavy ship to see it absolutely destroyed in ROTE ?
This is really frustrating. Both, Profy and exe are requirements for special TB missions, but Levi can't even handle lower zones.
I'm not sure its meta-defining at this point. Meta means dominating in different parts of the game, TB included(actually it was nobrainer to make Levi walk through TB like knife through butter), but not handling TB, even lover zones.... its huge
anyone else surprised CG released such a resource heavy ship to see it absolutely destroyed in ROTE ?
This is really frustrating. Both, Profy and exe are requirements for special TB missions, but Levi can't even handle lower zones.
I'm not sure its meta-defining at this point. Meta means dominating in different parts of the game, TB included(actually it was nobrainer to make Levi walk through TB like knife through butter), but not handling TB, even lover zones.... its huge
Yeah, Levi not cutting it in RoTE ireally s sub-par. Look at how Profundity performs by comparison.
anyone else surprised CG released such a resource heavy ship to see it absolutely destroyed in ROTE ?
This is really frustrating. Both, Profy and exe are requirements for special TB missions, but Levi can't even handle lower zones.
I'm not sure its meta-defining at this point. Meta means dominating in different parts of the game, TB included(actually it was nobrainer to make Levi walk through TB like knife through butter), but not handling TB, even lover zones.... its huge
not to worry - misery loves company it maybe won't comfort you much, but know that this huge incompetence, fiascos, untested releases, "investigations" and fixes taking a huge amount of time, toying with the people that pay the bills etc. is noticed and.. lost opportunities won't be valid for the community only (and we're talking about huge numbers as what a "little bird" i was making a report for told me)
Invincible characters or ships are bad for the game. Eliminate any theory crafting and ensconce pay-to-win. I'm hoping CG keeps Prof as a counter to seven-star Lev. Otherwise, we're going to be in that position all over again where people who have it can win and people who don't can't.
(And part of the reason people are using Prof to counter Lev, rather than mirrors, is because CG put much of Lev's functionality behind a seven-star gate.)
Invincible characters or ships are bad for the game. Eliminate any theory crafting and ensconce pay-to-win. I'm hoping CG keeps Prof as a counter to seven-star Lev. Otherwise, we're going to be in that position all over again where people who have it can win and people who don't can't.
(And part of the reason people are using Prof to counter Lev, rather than mirrors, is because CG put much of Lev's functionality behind a seven-star gate.)
I don't think it should be invincible. But as the new shiny, it should only have soft counters for low banners at best.
Replies
I separated nothing. You made a statement, I made a rebuttal.
But sure, the other part of your point, low star Profundity works reliably against Levi too. Is that not a problem?
If low star Raddus was beating Levi, I’d have have a problem with it. But that’s not the case. Max star Prof beats it reliably, low star Prof beats it, but much less reliably. This all strikes me as perfectly fine from a balance stand point, and I don’t think comparing the response to NS to the response to Levi demonstrates any sort of inconsistency here.
There's an inconsistency because only one undergeared/undermanned team is being looked at. I don't think it would be a problem for Prof to beat Levi at full strength, but it's doing so at full banners with just three ships, and possibly even only two ships (I saw no video, just a couple claims).
Because they're the same? In both cases you are taking a purposefully underpowered team in order to win.
We don't know yet, as there has been no official response from CG, other than that a few bugs have been fixed and they are investigating. It is not known if all bugs have been fixed, or if the ship is performing as CG intended
I’m also assuming fewer players will place Levi on defense as more players realize how weak Levi is to profundity. You then get into the trickledown effect of fewer profundities on defense because it’s the hard counter to Levi. Once more players start keeping profundity and Levi for offense, which are both hard counters to ex, players will begin questioning whether it makes sense at all to place ex on defense.
So you’ll end up with the player base probably mostly in one of two camps. All 3 on defense hoping a solo ex on defense by the opponent or all on offense to nullify ships in its entirety. My guess is the latter.
Obviously this is for the 7* v 7* Levi matchup. But even if you don’t have Levi having profundity probably means you’ll see it less frequently on defense or if you do you’ll see all three.
My point stands though that it’s weakness towards profundity will likely mean both profundity and Levi end up as offense only units and ships become less important in gac as it’ll be cleared with high banners by a significant amount of players consistently.
They just did. Team is investigating.
Given that Profundity came out just under a year ago, also has very high reqs, it's not unreasonable that it, for now, it can counter the new ship - on offence anyway.
https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/265205/investigation-leviathan-matchups#latest
I just saw the post, hooray!! Honestly, that's what I was waiting for, just some official response that they are looking into it. Thank you CG!
Than again, will it be ok if Jabba + Krrsanta could solo any GL in the game in any relic, including next Leia, and each with whole team, but Leia with whole team could still defeat Jabba. Though, for less banners.
P.S. yep, I know devs are looking into Levi's underperforming case
The "issue" is that gaining 10% download and giving Outrider a bonus turn is better than any reinforcement Rebels have available. You could probably fix it by just removing the download but it's inane to nerf a tactic that's not a bug, has been in the open for almost a year now, and is mostly an indictment about how poorly most of the Rebel ships work with Profundity thanks to its ban on TM manipulation. Players should be able to consider Profundity as WAI by now.
Well said, I agree.
If they can figure out how to still make Prof a largely reliable counter but for good, bad or terrible banners (RNG dependent) this ship would be everything they said it would be.
For sure. I think "absolutely destroyed" is a little much since it does fine in Middle (although Exec does just as well or better) but Geonosis is definitely a disappointment. Since no one's beaten it in the eight months since launch, most TB-focused people have been assuming that the mission was intentionally built to require this year's capital ship. For it to just completely flop there is a huge letdown. What's even worse is that it looks like the mission might just be bugged so that enemy ships mass assist when they shouldn't (no buzz droids or the assisting ships aren't Vulture Droids, for example). It would be really nice if CG would just come out and say whether the mission is working as intended or not.
I know that I rushed Levi SPECIFICALLY for the RotE benefits. I know I'm not the average player in that sense and that more people are concerned with Fleet Arena and GAC, but I figured there would be counters and I don't play GAC seriously anyway, so I'm not worried about getting beaten by other players in FA so long as I can climb back, and I just don't care about getting beaten in GAC.
That leaves RotE as the primary driving need for a new cap ship -- particularly a new DS cap ship. For CG to create a new meta DS ship and leave the difficulty of the first few DS Fleet missions unchanged by its arrival was an incredibly poor choice in my view. If they follow the pattern, we'll get a new LS cap ship next year, and it will be 2 years before we have a new DS cap ship.
2.5 to 3 years of waiting to be able to beat p1 and p2 Fleet missions in DS is just unacceptable. I honestly have no idea what they were thinking but in my mind this is the much greater tragedy of Leviathan. Players will always beat other players (in mirror matches if nothing else), but this is CG specifically barring us from any competitive play in DS TB fleets.
We know it's WAI. Now I want to know why I have to wait three years to play DS fleets in TB. Seriously, it's not even like we can't 3* those zones. If you're not preventing 3*, then why bother denying us the fun of playing those missions competitively? Even a 50-70% win rate would have been such a huge improvement and we could enjoy the attempt.
So why not investigate how Levi is broken vs. DS TB fleet missions, CG? We have no notice that such an investigation is ongoing, so obviously this is WAI. And if it's WAI, then this is intentional hatred for the players that enjoy TB.
It's hard not to take that personally.
I'm not sure its meta-defining at this point. Meta means dominating in different parts of the game, TB included(actually it was nobrainer to make Levi walk through TB like knife through butter), but not handling TB, even lover zones.... its huge
Yeah, Levi not cutting it in RoTE ireally s sub-par. Look at how Profundity performs by comparison.
not to worry - misery loves company
(And part of the reason people are using Prof to counter Lev, rather than mirrors, is because CG put much of Lev's functionality behind a seven-star gate.)
I don't think it should be invincible. But as the new shiny, it should only have soft counters for low banners at best.