My issue is not how powerful the ship is, quite frankly an offensive ship that can easily take out the best defensive ship in the game is a nice addition to the fleet while keeping a good balance (barring the 7* vs 5* issue which definitely needs fixing). My issue is the resources it takes to unlock which should be more inline with the current GET2 ships and not nearer to a GL unlock. I would be happier if they reduced the requirements rather than buffing the ship. Maybe Piett R7, Vader/Boba R5 and the rest R3, or throw in BAM at relic if you want to weed more people out (though that would be much harder to retro fix).
great powerhouse who burns down everyone in offense and CAN be beaten sometimes from older fleets is in my opinion a perfect addition to the current meta.
That's where your argument is flawed imo.
"Burns down everyone on offense ?" True, but people at the top of the meta already did that with their current fleet.
"CAN be beaten" If it was the case, if you had a high chance of failing, that would be fine. But at the moment, it seems that Executor is reliably taken down by old meta (my shard has the same experience that what is said on the forum, i dont just repeat what i've read here); it's not the same as "can be beaten" and the difference is huge;
In Arena, high chance of failing means opponents will rather target other ships who are a sure thing. If you also are a sure thing, it wont benefit you to have unlocked her.
In GAC, a high chance of failing means a high chance of 2 shots the beast and giving the executor's owner an advantage. If your opponent doesn't have a high chance of failing, then you just relic'd meh bounty hunters while your opponent relic'd good teams, effectively giving him an advantage. So you're punished for having improved your roster with what was supposed to be a new meta team.
In TB, you dont need the executor; she's not required and Malevolence/Chimera/Executrix did the job just fine already;
In TW, we'll know today if a wall of Executors can hold the fort.
A lot of people are slamming their testing or lack thereof but I guarantee you the devs and everyone else are often on unreasonable timeframes to release... for a game that inherently becomes increasingly more complex with every variable (characters, ship, relics, gear etc) that gets added to the game. I'm fine with issues. There always are in any software release I've ever seen at my job..,just some much much smaller in impact. What we all deserve for giving this company a couple billion dollars over the years is for these issues to be prioritized and fixed immediately. "Looking at it for a potential fix in the future" doesn't cut it to me. They need to tell us this is priority one. I don't care if it impacts upcoming releases. Git gud with design, development, testing and probably most importantly forecasting time for a release if that is a huge issue for the company.
Sure, but it's not like there are a few fringe cases where someone used an under-geared Jedi Consular under a Finalizer leading to some unintended interaction.
It's pretty much just "standard" fleets beating the Executor, which to me indicates that no testing whatsoever was done and that is just mind-boggling - especially considering the way that CG talked about it before release.
Why do we need to discuss this at all? There is a simple solution to the problem.
They should change the cooldown for the Death Star annihilate ability to 0, then no other fleets will be able to touch an Executor on defense. For mirror, only speed and RNG will be decisive.
That's what we want.
In a game like this, time spent playing, diligence and/or money equate to an advantage. That advantage is all people are rightfully asking to be fixed. Nobody is saying make it impossible to beat. The biggest stain on this release to me is the disparity in viability between a lower star Executor and a maxed one. When people are dropping mods off Piett in an attempt to restore sanity that's a huge issue.
A lot of people are slamming their testing or lack thereof but I guarantee you the devs and everyone else are often on unreasonable timeframes to release... for a game that inherently becomes increasingly more complex with every variable (characters, ship, relics, gear etc) that gets added to the game. I'm fine with issues. There always are in any software release I've ever seen at my job..,just some much much smaller in impact. What we all deserve for giving this company a couple billion dollars over the years is for these issues to be prioritized and fixed immediately. "Looking at it for a potential fix in the future" doesn't cut it to me. They need to tell us this is priority one. I don't care if it impacts upcoming releases. Git gud with design, development, testing and probably most importantly forecasting time for a release if that is a huge issue for the company.
Hey, I happen to work in Software Product Support. What you are asking is the customer attitude I face everyday. I can only tell you: keep dreaming... Overselling is not equal to product defect/bug. The software works as designed. It just does not fit to your personal ROI expectation.
sry, but why is it CGs fault that someone spent 1000 Bucks on this ship?
it is your choice to spend this amount AND your choices which u farmed / geared at this time.
all this panic farming for every new shiny toon is ridiculous!
u have to much money? so please spend it! u are not statisfied with your spendings? learn your lesson from before!
Executor is excatly that what i expected and not less. so i didnt even consider farming or gearing anyone in panic to get this ship day one.
are all these whales reliant on being Fleet #1 ? is it for the crystals? if yes: 500-1000 bucks for 400 crystals daily? wow....
or is it just prestige? if this, then its not a CG problem.
great powerhouse who burns down everyone in offense and CAN be beaten sometimes from older fleets is in my opinion a perfect addition to the current meta.
and burning money and crystal stashes just 7*-ing at day one tells me you dont look for a longtime resourcemanagment game
edit: please dont bring on the argument of false advertisment. this would be the case if Executor would struggle beating old meta on offense. but a 100% win ratio is no false advertisment
You and your nonsense comment again. Geez, do you think before giving your opinion.
To me your comment is nonsense and @Larx is absolutely right. It's not the ship people payed for but the ship we need. Everything else would be pay2win and that's a death sentence for games like this.
"Never make the mistake of believing forbearance equates to acceptance, or that all positions are equally valid."
- Grand Admiral Thrawn
Why do we need to discuss this at all? There is a simple solution to the problem.
They should change the cooldown for the Death Star annihilate ability to 0, then no other fleets will be able to touch an Executor on defense. For mirror, only speed and RNG will be decisive.
That's what we want.
In a game like this, time spent playing, diligence and/or money equate to an advantage. That advantage is all people are rightfully asking to be fixed. Nobody is saying make it impossible to beat. The biggest stain on this release to me is the disparity in viability between a lower star Executor and a maxed one. When people are dropping mods off Piett in an attempt to restore sanity that's a huge issue.
A lot of people are slamming their testing or lack thereof but I guarantee you the devs and everyone else are often on unreasonable timeframes to release... for a game that inherently becomes increasingly more complex with every variable (characters, ship, relics, gear etc) that gets added to the game. I'm fine with issues. There always are in any software release I've ever seen at my job..,just some much much smaller in impact. What we all deserve for giving this company a couple billion dollars over the years is for these issues to be prioritized and fixed immediately. "Looking at it for a potential fix in the future" doesn't cut it to me. They need to tell us this is priority one. I don't care if it impacts upcoming releases. Git gud with design, development, testing and probably most importantly forecasting time for a release if that is a huge issue for the company.
Hey, I happen to work in Software Product Support. What you are asking is the customer attitude I face everyday. I can only tell you: keep dreaming... Overselling is not equal to product defect/bug. The software works as designed. It just does not fit to your personal ROI expectation.
The software is not working as designed - they just posted that the fleet is underperforming.
The software is not working as designed - they just posted that the fleet is underperforming.
That is clearly a bug.
No it's not, it's just not as good as they thought it would be so they think about recoding it to make it stronger. That's totally different from being a bug.
"Never make the mistake of believing forbearance equates to acceptance, or that all positions are equally valid."
- Grand Admiral Thrawn
sry, but why is it CGs fault that someone spent 1000 Bucks on this ship?
it is your choice to spend this amount AND your choices which u farmed / geared at this time.
all this panic farming for every new shiny toon is ridiculous!
u have to much money? so please spend it! u are not statisfied with your spendings? learn your lesson from before!
Executor is excatly that what i expected and not less. so i didnt even consider farming or gearing anyone in panic to get this ship day one.
are all these whales reliant on being Fleet #1 ? is it for the crystals? if yes: 500-1000 bucks for 400 crystals daily? wow....
or is it just prestige? if this, then its not a CG problem.
great powerhouse who burns down everyone in offense and CAN be beaten sometimes from older fleets is in my opinion a perfect addition to the current meta.
and burning money and crystal stashes just 7*-ing at day one tells me you dont look for a longtime resourcemanagment game
edit: please dont bring on the argument of false advertisment. this would be the case if Executor would struggle beating old meta on offense. but a 100% win ratio is no false advertisment
You and your nonsense comment again. Geez, do you think before giving your opinion.
To me your comment is nonsense and @Larx is absolutely right. It's not the ship people payed for but the ship we need. Everything else would be pay2win and that's a death sentence for games like this.
Correct me if I'm wrong but to me it seems more the ship you feel we need! Many of us on the other hand who paid good money or for those who used there hard grinded hoarded stash feel this ship comes way short of what's required.
We are beating this ship with rebels and not even optimal ones at that. Maybe if those rebel fleets were r8s Across the board including bistan and the phoniex ships then it would not be so much an issue. A g12 home one with g12 phoniex ships and go cassians though... sorry that's a big problem. If you cannot see the issue there then I say chances are you do not have the ship and are more on the lookout for yourself rather than taking a good look at the issues with all this
The software is not working as designed - they just posted that the fleet is underperforming.
That is clearly a bug.
No it's not, it's just not as good as they thought it would be so they think about recoding it to make it stronger. That's totally different from being a bug.
idk, 7 star cutie opening up with a basic and then rolling over on its tummy is a little too cute for us to be able to assume that's intended!
Correct me if I'm wrong but to me it seems more the ship you feel we need! Many of us on the other hand who paid good money or for those who used there hard grinded hoarded stash feel this ship comes way short of what's required.
We are beating this ship with rebels and not even optimal ones at that. Maybe if those rebel fleets were r8s Across the board including bistan and the phoniex ships then it would not be so much an issue. A g12 home one with g12 phoniex ships and go cassians though... sorry that's a big problem. If you cannot see the issue there then I say chances are you do not have the ship and are more on the lookout for yourself rather than taking a good look at the issues with all this
You're not wrong, i absolutely think/ feel that it is the ship we need. I'm just against pay2win in a manner where new shiny toys can't be beaten by any non-spenders/ massive hoarders at all.
"Never make the mistake of believing forbearance equates to acceptance, or that all positions are equally valid."
- Grand Admiral Thrawn
is it ok for you what @Shadow1989 is writting in the last couple of days? i do think he breaks some rules of this forum by being just offtopic rude. but that is just my opinion.
i think we have to wait for some serious datas over a few weeks to see if Executor will stay on top or is just switching with Nego and Male.
everything can change very quickly if they release a new ship, like the Punishing One. this could be the key for the new meta. wouldnt be a surprise regarding to other metas in the past.
and for the high investment of reqs - u could also argue why SEE is beating my JML all the time?
looked through the reqs again and the only real pain for unlocking this ship is TIE Pilot with R5.
Vader and Piett are great toons and most of the people had Vader already at R7.
Piett on R8 is quite a huge invest, but he is a great toon at all and being the pilot, he has his uses.
Bossk is no problem for the most.
Dengar - ok, he is also good at G13, but being R5 also helps for Crancor and maybe for his ship at some point.
Boba at R8 is also a pain in the **** for most players, but he is after all this years still a great toon and being a pilot in the lineup for the executor makes him also not useless.
IG88 is also a pilot used in the Executor fleet.
the only nonsense toon is TIE Pilot.
and for being on top of fleet arena u would have geared your pilots anyway at some point. sure, it would have been nice to decide by yourself if you want to gear them this high but as this games develope the reqs will become higher and higher. just normal stuff.
the only exception was BAM - they released him with this moderate reqs because they wanted to hop on the mandohypetrain and give new players the feeling, they could get one of the newest toon very quickly.
In GAC, a high chance of failing means a high chance of 2 shots the beast and giving the executor's owner an advantage. If your opponent doesn't have a high chance of failing, then you just relic'd meh bounty hunters while your opponent relic'd good teams, effectively giving him an advantage. So you're punished for having improved your roster with what was supposed to be a new meta team.
This is actually a really good point. I just checked my GA matchups. I have a pretty focused roster and previously ran into opponents with only 1 GL. Now, every opponent has 2 GLs except for one guy who has THREE (including JML!). In exchange... I get one fleet I can maybe use on offense (can't put it on defense since g12 rebels can beat it, and in most cases outside of top divisions I'm not so sure another fleet will be necessary on top of 2 GET2 fleets, empire fleet, and a GL-related fleet like Finalizer).
In other words, I went from easy kyber to fighting for my life in one round, after investing immense resources for a luxury fleet that I can't leave on defense. I basically blew kyrotechs and relics on a better meh BH squad and GAC losses.
Correct me if I'm wrong but to me it seems more the ship you feel we need! Many of us on the other hand who paid good money or for those who used there hard grinded hoarded stash feel this ship comes way short of what's required.
We are beating this ship with rebels and not even optimal ones at that. Maybe if those rebel fleets were r8s Across the board including bistan and the phoniex ships then it would not be so much an issue. A g12 home one with g12 phoniex ships and go cassians though... sorry that's a big problem. If you cannot see the issue there then I say chances are you do not have the ship and are more on the lookout for yourself rather than taking a good look at the issues with all this
You're not wrong, i absolutely think/ feel that it is the ship we need. I'm just against pay2win in a manner where new shiny toys can't be beaten by any non-spenders/ massive hoarders at all.
Massive hoarders get things that are expected to dominate the meta (Edward aside). They deserve an ROI too.
Non-early adopters should get what they've always gotten, a very small chance to beat it.
Correct me if I'm wrong but to me it seems more the ship you feel we need! Many of us on the other hand who paid good money or for those who used there hard grinded hoarded stash feel this ship comes way short of what's required.
We are beating this ship with rebels and not even optimal ones at that. Maybe if those rebel fleets were r8s Across the board including bistan and the phoniex ships then it would not be so much an issue. A g12 home one with g12 phoniex ships and go cassians though... sorry that's a big problem. If you cannot see the issue there then I say chances are you do not have the ship and are more on the lookout for yourself rather than taking a good look at the issues with all this
You're not wrong, i absolutely think/ feel that it is the ship we need. I'm just against pay2win in a manner where new shiny toys can't be beaten by any non-spenders/ massive hoarders at all.
Massive hoarders get things that are expected to dominate the meta (Edward aside). They deserve.
Correct me if I'm wrong but to me it seems more the ship you feel we need! Many of us on the other hand who paid good money or for those who used there hard grinded hoarded stash feel this ship comes way short of what's required.
We are beating this ship with rebels and not even optimal ones at that. Maybe if those rebel fleets were r8s Across the board including bistan and the phoniex ships then it would not be so much an issue. A g12 home one with g12 phoniex ships and go cassians though... sorry that's a big problem. If you cannot see the issue there then I say chances are you do not have the ship and are more on the lookout for yourself rather than taking a good look at the issues with all this
You're not wrong, i absolutely think/ feel that it is the ship we need. I'm just against pay2win in a manner where new shiny toys can't be beaten by any non-spenders/ massive hoarders at all.
Massive hoarders get things that are expected to dominate the meta (Edward aside). They deserve.
What ever happened to Edward? 🤔
We should send out a search party, he may be buried under a mountain of stuff....
If CG really sold us a broken fleet that can only be fixed by a new marquee ship, that is about as low as it can get.
Avoiding unsubstantiated speculation can increase enjoyment of life, and even prevent hair loss.
Dunno, expecting Dengar's ship sounds pretty substantiated to me, given that he is the only requirement without a ship. As well as the expectation that it will improve Executor fleets, because there wouldn't be much of a point otherwise.
I see a lot of “everything’s beating executor.” Where’s the proof. I HAVE beaten it using mal, and home one, it is FAR from reliable, and when executor is up to 7 star I’m literally 2-13 against it so far with testing. I have not tried negotiator yet, and have heard very little that’s been promising.
If it’s so terrible on defense, why aren’t they being targeted and dropped out of top spots everywhere in arena?
It autos everything, and holds very well. I don’t know what else you wanted, that’s top of the meta, 100%.
I think this underperforming is ****. I think it more likely that there are some cases where the fleet makeup isn't ideal and others where the ai doesn't perform optimally. I took my nominal Negotiator and my nominal Malevolence fleets in against two different 6* Executors and the Death Star destroyed them. I have not watched any strategy videos and just did what I usually do against the other fleet, but the Executor behaved as expected. A fellow member in my guild has all Executors at the top of his fleet shard.
Maybe something needs to be done about the Executor vs Executor matches - so that 4* does not defeat 7* - but making the 7* more powerful is not the answer. I think increasing the cooldown on the lower star versions would be a simple solution.
If CG really sold us a broken fleet that can only be fixed by a new marquee ship, that is about as low as it can get.
Avoiding unsubstantiated speculation can increase enjoyment of life, and even prevent hair loss.
Dunno, expecting Dengar's ship sounds pretty substantiated to me, given that he is the only requirement without a ship. As well as the expectation that it will improve Executor fleets, because there wouldn't be much of a point otherwise.
Substantiating something with a feeling..... here I was thinking evidence.... but you do you.
I see a lot of “everything’s beating executor.” Where’s the proof. I HAVE beaten it using mal, and home one, it is FAR from reliable, and when executor is up to 7 star I’m literally 2-13 against it so far with testing. I have not tried negotiator yet, and have heard very little that’s been promising.
If it’s so terrible on defense, why aren’t they being targeted and dropped out of top spots everywhere in arena?
It autos everything, and holds very well. I don’t know what else you wanted, that’s top of the meta, 100%.
I think this underperforming is ****. I think it more likely that there are some cases where the fleet makeup isn't ideal and others where the ai doesn't perform optimally. I took my nominal Negotiator and my nominal Malevolence fleets in against two different 6* Executors and the Death Star destroyed them. I have not watched any strategy videos and just did what I usually do against the other fleet, but the Executor behaved as expected. A fellow member in my guild has all Executors at the top of his fleet shard.
Maybe something needs to be done about the Executor vs Executor matches - so that 4* does not defeat 7* - but making the 7* more powerful is not the answer. I think increasing the cooldown on the lower star versions would be a simple solution.
The AI is fine.
The problem is the Executor at 7* has no opening move. Because of this it starts out behind and gets whooped by about any other fleet.
When the Executor moves first the AE is useless since no enemy has breach. The heal is useless because no ship has taken damage.
Slower Executor can use the AE on Turn1 since the BH ships have moved first.
My bet is we are about to get a Punishing One ship that is faster than 192.
Correct me if I'm wrong but to me it seems more the ship you feel we need! Many of us on the other hand who paid good money or for those who used there hard grinded hoarded stash feel this ship comes way short of what's required.
We are beating this ship with rebels and not even optimal ones at that. Maybe if those rebel fleets were r8s Across the board including bistan and the phoniex ships then it would not be so much an issue. A g12 home one with g12 phoniex ships and go cassians though... sorry that's a big problem. If you cannot see the issue there then I say chances are you do not have the ship and are more on the lookout for yourself rather than taking a good look at the issues with all this
You're not wrong, i absolutely think/ feel that it is the ship we need. I'm just against pay2win in a manner where new shiny toys can't be beaten by any non-spenders/ massive hoarders at all.
Massive hoarders get things that are expected to dominate the meta (Edward aside). They deserve.
What ever happened to Edward? 🤔
We should send out a search party, he may be buried under a mountain of stuff....
Looks like Edward preached his last gospel in December 2019.
Extreme hoarding has lost its most strident advocate. ☹
If CG really sold us a broken fleet that can only be fixed by a new marquee ship, that is about as low as it can get.
Avoiding unsubstantiated speculation can increase enjoyment of life, and even prevent hair loss.
Dunno, expecting Dengar's ship sounds pretty substantiated to me, given that he is the only requirement without a ship. As well as the expectation that it will improve Executor fleets, because there wouldn't be much of a point otherwise.
Substantiating something with a feeling..... here I was thinking evidence.... but you do you.
The last time a unit came out that was this underperforming it was Darth Revan.
If CG really sold us a broken fleet that can only be fixed by a new marquee ship, that is about as low as it can get.
Avoiding unsubstantiated speculation can increase enjoyment of life, and even prevent hair loss.
Dunno, expecting Dengar's ship sounds pretty substantiated to me, given that he is the only requirement without a ship. As well as the expectation that it will improve Executor fleets, because there wouldn't be much of a point otherwise.
Substantiating something with a feeling..... here I was thinking evidence.... but you do you.
The last time a unit came out that was this underperforming it was Darth Revan.
We got Malak a week or two after.
Also, expecting Dengar's ship makes sense in several aspects, but Kyno just has to be a contrarian. No point trying to reason with him.
i think we have to wait for some serious datas over a few weeks to see if Executor will stay on top or is just switching with Nego and Male.
everything can change very quickly if they release a new ship, like the Punishing One. this could be the key for the new meta. wouldnt be a surprise regarding to other metas in the past.
Agreed. Would still be disappointing, because it would mean that there are more requirements that were hidden to make it meta.
looked through the reqs again and the only real pain for unlocking this ship is TIE Pilot with R5.
Let me put it this way: it's christmas. I give enough presents to gear up: 2 characters to r8, 1 character to r7, 4 characters to r5. You can choose any character you like in your roster, just make a list. I doubt very much those executor requirements will be near the top of the list (well, probably Vader and maybe Bossk can).
and for being on top of fleet arena u would have geared your pilots anyway at some point.
Not if you already are on top of arena with your actual non-Executor fleet.
As you said, time will tell if there is a problem. But if Executor is reliably beaten by the previous meta, that's a problem. You may obviously disagree, but I hope I managed to explain why it could be seen as such. Weirdly, Executor has to be unbalanced for the balance of the game.
A lot of people are slamming their testing or lack thereof but I guarantee you the devs and everyone else are often on unreasonable timeframes to release... for a game that inherently becomes increasingly more complex with every variable (characters, ship, relics, gear etc) that gets added to the game. I'm fine with issues. There always are in any software release I've ever seen at my job..,just some much much smaller in impact. What we all deserve for giving this company a couple billion dollars over the years is for these issues to be prioritized and fixed immediately. "Looking at it for a potential fix in the future" doesn't cut it to me. They need to tell us this is priority one. I don't care if it impacts upcoming releases. Git gud with design, development, testing and probably most importantly forecasting time for a release if that is a huge issue for the company.
They specifically stated that the Executor was planned ever since Piett was confirmed as coming to the game, which means CG have had an entire 12-Months to get this ship right and ensure it was tested prior to announcing its kit to the players. There also doesn't appear to be a specific need to half released it on the date they did as its not a requirement for any event or raid or whatever already in-game, so if they had not sufficiently tested it in that length of time then then surely could've delayed releasing it. I think many players are seeing a trend that CG release items into the game and wildly obvious flaws are identified within a few hours and they're then making hot-fixes or re-releases or nerfs etc when they SHOULD be doing properly diligent pre-announcement testing. As someone who works in software testing personally I have serious doubts and concerns about CG if they are claiming that they do actually properly test to their own standards of satisfaction since its clear that whatever those standards are they aren't acceptably rigorous or aren't being performed by people capable of understanding and doing the kind of testing necessary.
Just for reference when we were being hard sold this ship @CG_Miller said (in actual recorded words out of his mouth) the following things:
"There was a long overdue need for a meta refresh"
"We wanted to shake up the meta"
"This has been planned since Piett came out"
"The team knocked it out of the park on this ship"
"You'll be able to stick it on Defense, it'll hold its own on the defensive side"
"This ship is coming into the top of the meta"
"We wanted to ensure players who were investing in this ship were investing in a top of the meta ship and being rewarded for their investment"
"Spent days thinking about the ultimate and what this ship could do as a top of the meta ship"
"You're really just bringing Empire ships to kinda fill out the rest of the reinforcements"
"Making a top of the meta ship is a lot easier than say something in the top-5"
"This is going to be the top of the meta for a while"
"Existing top of the meta fleets against a 4-star Executor should have a chance...when there are 7-star Executors out there hopefully you'll have yours too!"
"We're requiring pilots are relic levels so If you're getting the Executor your pilots and Piett are something you don't then have to worry about"
"It is a very powerful top of the meta ship"
...So, yeah, ooh wonder why people invested in this requirement-heavy ship expecting it to be able to hold on defense and be worthy of the title of a meta changing investment (...that many of us chose instead of GL Lord Vader since we couldn't afford to do both!)
Quoting this as it should be a pinned comment at the top of each page of this thread. What one of the highest ranking spokespersons of CG deliberately went out to a content creator interview to state is extremely important and created the high expectations for those who had to decide within 24 hours to get (and for many, star up) the ship. These official comments by a CG representative on a public platform are also likely the reasons people have been able to ask for the r word and get it, and likely also cause for the urgency of the followup statement about it not meeting expectations. No matter how anyone feels about the power level of the ship and its performance, CG made some official promises on a highly viewed and prominent platform that have not borne out to be truthful in the Executor's current state. Not honoring those promises will continue to cost CG money, through r words and through people pausing their spending. We don't need platitudes or promises, we need a patch now. Whenever there is an exploit which has allowed players to gain an advantage in terms of in-game resources, there is almost always an immediate emergency patch within 24 hours. This is costing CG MONEY not just pixels. The players who invested and CG both need a remedy now.
Replies
That's where your argument is flawed imo.
"Burns down everyone on offense ?" True, but people at the top of the meta already did that with their current fleet.
"CAN be beaten" If it was the case, if you had a high chance of failing, that would be fine. But at the moment, it seems that Executor is reliably taken down by old meta (my shard has the same experience that what is said on the forum, i dont just repeat what i've read here); it's not the same as "can be beaten" and the difference is huge;
In Arena, high chance of failing means opponents will rather target other ships who are a sure thing. If you also are a sure thing, it wont benefit you to have unlocked her.
In GAC, a high chance of failing means a high chance of 2 shots the beast and giving the executor's owner an advantage. If your opponent doesn't have a high chance of failing, then you just relic'd meh bounty hunters while your opponent relic'd good teams, effectively giving him an advantage. So you're punished for having improved your roster with what was supposed to be a new meta team.
In TB, you dont need the executor; she's not required and Malevolence/Chimera/Executrix did the job just fine already;
In TW, we'll know today if a wall of Executors can hold the fort.
Sure, but it's not like there are a few fringe cases where someone used an under-geared Jedi Consular under a Finalizer leading to some unintended interaction.
It's pretty much just "standard" fleets beating the Executor, which to me indicates that no testing whatsoever was done and that is just mind-boggling - especially considering the way that CG talked about it before release.
Hey, I happen to work in Software Product Support. What you are asking is the customer attitude I face everyday. I can only tell you: keep dreaming... Overselling is not equal to product defect/bug. The software works as designed. It just does not fit to your personal ROI expectation.
To me your comment is nonsense and @Larx is absolutely right. It's not the ship people payed for but the ship we need. Everything else would be pay2win and that's a death sentence for games like this.
- Grand Admiral Thrawn
The software is not working as designed - they just posted that the fleet is underperforming.
That is clearly a bug.
No it's not, it's just not as good as they thought it would be so they think about recoding it to make it stronger. That's totally different from being a bug.
- Grand Admiral Thrawn
Correct me if I'm wrong but to me it seems more the ship you feel we need! Many of us on the other hand who paid good money or for those who used there hard grinded hoarded stash feel this ship comes way short of what's required.
We are beating this ship with rebels and not even optimal ones at that. Maybe if those rebel fleets were r8s Across the board including bistan and the phoniex ships then it would not be so much an issue. A g12 home one with g12 phoniex ships and go cassians though... sorry that's a big problem. If you cannot see the issue there then I say chances are you do not have the ship and are more on the lookout for yourself rather than taking a good look at the issues with all this
You're not wrong, i absolutely think/ feel that it is the ship we need. I'm just against pay2win in a manner where new shiny toys can't be beaten by any non-spenders/ massive hoarders at all.
- Grand Admiral Thrawn
is it ok for you what @Shadow1989 is writting in the last couple of days? i do think he breaks some rules of this forum by being just offtopic rude. but that is just my opinion.
@Starslayer
i think we have to wait for some serious datas over a few weeks to see if Executor will stay on top or is just switching with Nego and Male.
everything can change very quickly if they release a new ship, like the Punishing One. this could be the key for the new meta. wouldnt be a surprise regarding to other metas in the past.
and for the high investment of reqs - u could also argue why SEE is beating my JML all the time?
looked through the reqs again and the only real pain for unlocking this ship is TIE Pilot with R5.
Vader and Piett are great toons and most of the people had Vader already at R7.
Piett on R8 is quite a huge invest, but he is a great toon at all and being the pilot, he has his uses.
Bossk is no problem for the most.
Dengar - ok, he is also good at G13, but being R5 also helps for Crancor and maybe for his ship at some point.
Boba at R8 is also a pain in the **** for most players, but he is after all this years still a great toon and being a pilot in the lineup for the executor makes him also not useless.
IG88 is also a pilot used in the Executor fleet.
the only nonsense toon is TIE Pilot.
and for being on top of fleet arena u would have geared your pilots anyway at some point. sure, it would have been nice to decide by yourself if you want to gear them this high but as this games develope the reqs will become higher and higher. just normal stuff.
the only exception was BAM - they released him with this moderate reqs because they wanted to hop on the mandohypetrain and give new players the feeling, they could get one of the newest toon very quickly.
This is actually a really good point. I just checked my GA matchups. I have a pretty focused roster and previously ran into opponents with only 1 GL. Now, every opponent has 2 GLs except for one guy who has THREE (including JML!). In exchange... I get one fleet I can maybe use on offense (can't put it on defense since g12 rebels can beat it, and in most cases outside of top divisions I'm not so sure another fleet will be necessary on top of 2 GET2 fleets, empire fleet, and a GL-related fleet like Finalizer).
In other words, I went from easy kyber to fighting for my life in one round, after investing immense resources for a luxury fleet that I can't leave on defense. I basically blew kyrotechs and relics on a better meh BH squad and GAC losses.
Massive hoarders get things that are expected to dominate the meta (Edward aside). They deserve an ROI too.
Non-early adopters should get what they've always gotten, a very small chance to beat it.
What ever happened to Edward? 🤔
Avoiding unsubstantiated speculation can increase enjoyment of life, and even prevent hair loss.
We should send out a search party, he may be buried under a mountain of stuff....
Dunno, expecting Dengar's ship sounds pretty substantiated to me, given that he is the only requirement without a ship. As well as the expectation that it will improve Executor fleets, because there wouldn't be much of a point otherwise.
Not completely unsubstantiated. Something here isn’t working and CG admitted it.
Either they didn’t test or they only tested with a new ship we don’t have.
I doubt they didn’t test.
I think this underperforming is ****. I think it more likely that there are some cases where the fleet makeup isn't ideal and others where the ai doesn't perform optimally. I took my nominal Negotiator and my nominal Malevolence fleets in against two different 6* Executors and the Death Star destroyed them. I have not watched any strategy videos and just did what I usually do against the other fleet, but the Executor behaved as expected. A fellow member in my guild has all Executors at the top of his fleet shard.
Maybe something needs to be done about the Executor vs Executor matches - so that 4* does not defeat 7* - but making the 7* more powerful is not the answer. I think increasing the cooldown on the lower star versions would be a simple solution.
Correct, admitting they are looking at the current setup, as it's not hitting the mark.
That is literally the opposite of needing to add a new element to it to make it work.
Those are not the only options.
Substantiating something with a feeling..... here I was thinking evidence.... but you do you.
The AI is fine.
The problem is the Executor at 7* has no opening move. Because of this it starts out behind and gets whooped by about any other fleet.
When the Executor moves first the AE is useless since no enemy has breach. The heal is useless because no ship has taken damage.
Slower Executor can use the AE on Turn1 since the BH ships have moved first.
My bet is we are about to get a Punishing One ship that is faster than 192.
Looks like Edward preached his last gospel in December 2019.
Extreme hoarding has lost its most strident advocate. ☹
The last time a unit came out that was this underperforming it was Darth Revan.
We got Malak a week or two after.
Also, expecting Dengar's ship makes sense in several aspects, but Kyno just has to be a contrarian. No point trying to reason with him.
Agreed. Would still be disappointing, because it would mean that there are more requirements that were hidden to make it meta.
It's hard to compare ground units with fleets, as fleet doesn't have a GL meta (yet).
Let me put it this way: it's christmas. I give enough presents to gear up: 2 characters to r8, 1 character to r7, 4 characters to r5. You can choose any character you like in your roster, just make a list. I doubt very much those executor requirements will be near the top of the list (well, probably Vader and maybe Bossk can).
Not if you already are on top of arena with your actual non-Executor fleet.
As you said, time will tell if there is a problem. But if Executor is reliably beaten by the previous meta, that's a problem. You may obviously disagree, but I hope I managed to explain why it could be seen as such. Weirdly, Executor has to be unbalanced for the balance of the game.
They specifically stated that the Executor was planned ever since Piett was confirmed as coming to the game, which means CG have had an entire 12-Months to get this ship right and ensure it was tested prior to announcing its kit to the players. There also doesn't appear to be a specific need to half released it on the date they did as its not a requirement for any event or raid or whatever already in-game, so if they had not sufficiently tested it in that length of time then then surely could've delayed releasing it. I think many players are seeing a trend that CG release items into the game and wildly obvious flaws are identified within a few hours and they're then making hot-fixes or re-releases or nerfs etc when they SHOULD be doing properly diligent pre-announcement testing. As someone who works in software testing personally I have serious doubts and concerns about CG if they are claiming that they do actually properly test to their own standards of satisfaction since its clear that whatever those standards are they aren't acceptably rigorous or aren't being performed by people capable of understanding and doing the kind of testing necessary.
Quoting this as it should be a pinned comment at the top of each page of this thread. What one of the highest ranking spokespersons of CG deliberately went out to a content creator interview to state is extremely important and created the high expectations for those who had to decide within 24 hours to get (and for many, star up) the ship. These official comments by a CG representative on a public platform are also likely the reasons people have been able to ask for the r word and get it, and likely also cause for the urgency of the followup statement about it not meeting expectations. No matter how anyone feels about the power level of the ship and its performance, CG made some official promises on a highly viewed and prominent platform that have not borne out to be truthful in the Executor's current state. Not honoring those promises will continue to cost CG money, through r words and through people pausing their spending. We don't need platitudes or promises, we need a patch now. Whenever there is an exploit which has allowed players to gain an advantage in terms of in-game resources, there is almost always an immediate emergency patch within 24 hours. This is costing CG MONEY not just pixels. The players who invested and CG both need a remedy now.