Executor heal ability having the taunt may or may not make a difference in matches (I don't know I have it maxed) however the ability is better not maxed even if it doesn't heal as much. A forced taunt on a non tank in a line up that includes HT just makes no sense.
AI seems to hard targets rc (more rc is the only enemy not stealthed and not HT) and if you use it on rc with the taunt even with a full heal he won't last much longer.
With the event coming back and a bunch of people giddy about getting a 7* Executor thinking their ship arena woes are over, they've got a big shock in store. These mirrors are almost always determined by which cap ship goes first. It's the most cancerous meta this game has ever seen. We've had good players lose 5-6 times in a row solely based on cap ship coin flip to start the battle. It's only going to be worse for people with the increase in number of Executors out there.
Is this really what CG thinks is acceptable? Are you aware you are only further killing this game by not doing something about things like this?
A lot of those losses people are getting are because, YET AGAIN, CG have a major bug in-game which their so-called "testing" over both the initial shambolic Executor release, and subsequent "we tested it this time, scout's honor" re-relase, haven't yet dealt with.
When you are playing Executor on Offense (i.e. player playing it rather than AI) your Executor's 'cleanse' of all debuffs on an ally when they apply Breach isn't happening, yet the AI-played Exec on Defense is getting its allies debuffs cleared... remember how long it took them to resolve the perma-Undying Loyalty bug... players need to be requiring a fixed date for when this will be resolved or a promise from CG to refund all resources involved in getting this bug-filled Capital ship!
@CG_Doja_Fett_MINI@CG_SBCrumb_MINI@CG_MindTricks Could we please get an update on when this rather large bug is expected to be fixed? Could we also get a post from CG detailing the exact nature and depth of pre-release testing that is currently followed (if any!!) for new characters and ships since when we question the quality of the testing we keep getting told we shouldn't do so since we don't know what testing happened and so should not cast doubt on it - well it's beyond a joke now, we need to know what testing plans and processes and actions etc. are carried out prior to releasing these units. As someone who works for a software company and part-time in their software pre-release testing dept. I can tell you that even with our few thousand clients if we'd released software updates with this level of bugs with this regularity that I'd have been fired well before now, and we aren't making even close to the many hundreds of millions of pounds that CG are! Time to be honest and detailed about the testing (or lack thereof) or from this point forwards be assured that no user with half a brain will ever again trust CG when they say that a new unit/event/mode/etc. will do what CG say since there is simply ZERO trust anymore!!!
I've upgraded my Executor for 4* to 6* with the most recent event and my 6* Executor is TERRIBLE!!!! WAY worse than 4*.
The heal ability at tier 7 is AWEFUL!!!! The taunt is the WORST addition to that ability!!!
Yup that ability should always have said and should be changed to say "...they gain foresight, and if they are a Tank or no allied tanks are present they also gaint taunt for 2 turns" - simple
With the event coming back and a bunch of people giddy about getting a 7* Executor thinking their ship arena woes are over, they've got a big shock in store. These mirrors are almost always determined by which cap ship goes first. It's the most cancerous meta this game has ever seen. We've had good players lose 5-6 times in a row solely based on cap ship coin flip to start the battle. It's only going to be worse for people with the increase in number of Executors out there.
Is this really what CG thinks is acceptable? Are you aware you are only further killing this game by not doing something about things like this?
Could we also get a post from CG detailing the exact nature and depth of pre-release testing that is currently followed (if any!!) for new characters and ships since when we question the quality of the testing we keep getting told we shouldn't do so since we don't know what testing happened and so should not cast doubt on it - well it's beyond a joke now, we need to know what testing plans and processes and actions etc. are carried out prior to releasing these units.
As someone who works for a software company and part-time in their software pre-release testing dept. I can tell you that even with our few thousand clients if we'd released software updates with this level of bugs with this regularity that I'd have been fired well before now, and we aren't making even close to the many hundreds of millions of pounds that CG are! !
No, you won't get such a post, you already have a good idea of the testing situation, and they're not gonna just say it out loud.
Your software company not making the money CG does explains why it can't get away with that level of testing--if they can do this and still make a ton of money, why improve? Look at how many people dumped gear and crystals on high star executor, even while the fleet design is clunky and mirror meta is broken.
Your software company not making the money CG does explains why it can't get away with that level of testing--if they can do this and still make a ton of money, why improve? Look at how many people dumped gear and crystals on high star executor, even while the fleet design is clunky and mirror meta is broken.
This is poor logic. If Google, Apple, Amazon, Nintendo, etc (all companies that make significantly more than EA, even if scaled to just their software dev teams) released products with this many bugs they'd be fixed within 24 hours, even if it meant paying overtime/extra consultants to supplement the staff. The issue is that those companies are both profitable and value long term brand name association with quality and customer loyalty. It's evident that EA is more concerned with syphoning what money they can to show impressive quarterly profits and riding new/exclusive IPs and hastily made releases into the ground rather than having their customers spend because they expect reliable service from a quality company.
Also EA, please make fleet enjoyable for those who spent a significant of resources/money on the Executor. At this point I'd be having a more enjoyable fleet experience if they just wiped everyone's Executor and we went back to Malev/Nego meta. There IS a sweet spot/intersection of fun and profit where you can make everyone want to own and participate in the new meta while making mirrors' outcomes based on human skilled decisions so that players can reliably/enjoyably climb. Think GAS mirrors, where the human beats the AI with 90+% Reliability and it's enjoyable, vs JKR mirrros, where the human beats the AI with ~70% reliability, and its a grindy slog vs Exec mirrors where the human wins <50% of matches because of the poor kit design and game breaking bug, and even with all things equal, the bug fixed, and both ships 7* maxed, it's down to a coin flip like the old Poe meta. That needs addressed as well, not just the bug, because the mirror isn't fun nor reliable. It's a frustrating coin flip. That is no way to treat customers who just purchased/spent hoarded gear on the most expensive cap ship released to date, by far.
It would be nice to know why the debuff cleanse bug isn't fixed yet at least. I simply cannot imagine that being a very difficult fix unless the code is in horrendous shape or it's far removed from any sort of basic object oriented principles.
It's funny the GL Kenobi meta has been one of the most enjoyable metas ever while ships is the worst. It's the story of this game isn't it. Always so close to glory and a great game... then Lucy yanks the ball from Charlie Brown.
@WookieWookie the logic's not wrong, it is what it is. CG obviously is confident that the current level of quality entails no concerning financial downside. I don't disagree with your perspective.
@WookieWookie the logic's not wrong, it is what it is. CG obviously is confident that the current level of quality entails no concerning financial downside. I don't disagree with your perspective.
yiiiikes. Makes me wonder if you'd be better off with RC RI and something like S1/ITB/HT starting
He's tried most options. The problem is that if you don't start with Xanadu or Razor then whichever non-tank 3rd starter you choose 99% of the time gets obliterated immediately plus you aren't getting enough Breaches out quickly enough to ensure that you reach the 'ultimate' before the AI fleet, so your Cap ship then gets destroyed. If you start with HT/ITB/XB (which was my suggestion in terms of putting RC as an RI) then they have to go after your tanks initially but ITB doesn't last long and you aren't getting any early damage in on enemy Razor so they get through your fleet far more quickly and also still reach ultimate quicker
The issues are of course exacerbated by the ongoing (and STILL no announcement or fix from CG!) bug whereby allied BH aren't having debuffs cleansed when applying breach so if they get marked they're dead a few seconds later
The protection/health recovery skill certainly needs to change to providing a role base bonus. Could be applied to a single selected ship or all on the field - e.g. attacker - offence up/stealth, support - speed up, tank - taunt and tenacity up.
As for how to work with what we have now, I’m finding that having RC slower than Xandu is helpful. If your RC is slower than theirs it’s also benefical.
Taunt on their HT, heal (lvl6 skill max only) your RC and remove Debuffs, call RC using Xandu special (opponents RC marked), call Xandu using RC special. Then on first reinforcement use Ebon Hawk and chaff prevents target lock so you can get your cap ship payout then start working around their HT. Not 100% win rate but best strat I’ve found so far
This has been brought up, both with this and the original post Scuba made.
They are looking at the sentiment, advice given, and data to see if there is a need for intervention.
Translation: even though they *say* you should never be punished for fully upgrading something, they don't actually mean it, and they will do nothing.
If the win ratio shows that you do not have an advantage, despite the advice given, then you are not being punished. So they do mean it, but they try to back these kinds of changes up with data.
Not sure what data they'll get. People didn't realize how dumb the ability was and just upgraded it to max, because that's what you're supposed to do.
As it stands, we are currently telling everyone that hasn't upgraded it already to just leave it at level 6.
Data would be the win ratio. If you have a higher win ratio when having the ability lower or not.
Correct, and if that actually pushes a higher win ratio they are likely to take action.
Except I would bet all of the 7* owners have it at max right now. Is the win ratio because of the ability? Or simply luck? Unless you have a bunch of 7* mirrors where one side has it level 8 and the other at leve 6, not sure how any data can help anything.
Why do you think he asks for data? He knows it will be difficult to provide.
Who asked for data?
What kind of specific data are they looking for? Data can be manipulated in many ways. But you only need common sense to know that you don’t want your NON TANKS to be taunting
Data that shows it allows for a higher win rate with the ability lower.
You also only need common sense to not apply a taunt to a non tank unit.
Why would you need to pull that data if you can just play the game. Obviously the majority of the people that have a lower ability will be 5 star battling a 7 star Exec, they will obviously have a lower win rate that’s not related to the ability.
As for the other point, so you’re saying that we should just ignore the healing ability for any non tanks?
"they need to get proper data"
Well to get proper data the bug(s) would need to be fixed first.
I mean is it a coincidence that the past 2 meta fleets have had a bug to the key ship that makes it harder to win on offense? Therefore increasing the need to refresh for more battles?
This has been brought up, both with this and the original post Scuba made.
They are looking at the sentiment, advice given, and data to see if there is a need for intervention.
Translation: even though they *say* you should never be punished for fully upgrading something, they don't actually mean it, and they will do nothing.
If the win ratio shows that you do not have an advantage, despite the advice given, then you are not being punished. So they do mean it, but they try to back these kinds of changes up with data.
Not sure what data they'll get. People didn't realize how dumb the ability was and just upgraded it to max, because that's what you're supposed to do.
As it stands, we are currently telling everyone that hasn't upgraded it already to just leave it at level 6.
Data would be the win ratio. If you have a higher win ratio when having the ability lower or not.
Correct, and if that actually pushes a higher win ratio they are likely to take action.
Except I would bet all of the 7* owners have it at max right now. Is the win ratio because of the ability? Or simply luck? Unless you have a bunch of 7* mirrors where one side has it level 8 and the other at leve 6, not sure how any data can help anything.
Why do you think he asks for data? He knows it will be difficult to provide.
Who asked for data?
What kind of specific data are they looking for? Data can be manipulated in many ways. But you only need common sense to know that you don’t want your NON TANKS to be taunting
Data that shows it allows for a higher win rate with the ability lower.
You also only need common sense to not apply a taunt to a non tank unit.
Why would you need to pull that data if you can just play the game. Obviously the majority of the people that have a lower ability will be 5 star battling a 7 star Exec, they will obviously have a lower win rate that’s not related to the ability.
As for the other point, so you’re saying that we should just ignore the healing ability for any non tanks?
How is it obvious without data?
If there is no statistical advantage, they are not likely to give it a very high priority.
I'm saying you should use it as the tool it is, and yes I have used it on non tanks, but mostly on HT and mostly to cleanse RC.
@Kyno We're fast approaching the third run of the event. Is there at least any word on a fix for the 'cleanse when BH inflict breech' not working on offense but working on defense? Anakin's immortality bug was annoying but happened only once in maybe a dozen battles, and the meta wasn't a monolith. This bug happens in literally every mirror, and CG has sold the Executor as the meta, with generally the only safe counter to a 7* Exec being another 7* Exec. Not sure if I'm willing to spend 8k gems to bring my 6* to 7* if I still won't even expect a 50+% win rate on offense because of this bug, and I'm sure there are many silent players who are forgoing this cancerous monolith RNG meta entirely because in addition to the coin flip issue ala Poe mirrors, the human attacker is also disadvantaged by a part of the kit just straight not working on offense two months after release.
Seriously, give us a post that devs REALLY GOING to fix RC bug when it doesn't dispell debuffs on human side but does on AI side, frustrating as hell. Turns your "top fleet" into "top rng garbage that makes people leave" actually
This is honestly ridiculous that the bug for cleansing when you breach on offence hasn’t been fixed yet. A lot of people are losing crystals due to this. The sentiment of the community is only going to deteriorate further until this acknowledged bug is resolved.
You would do well to include a make do for executor owners when you fix it, this is currently a stupid situation to be in.
Yeah, 7 star mirrors coming down to a coin flip and/or having to remove mods to get speeds right is just....a really bad experience. I understand the developer's primary goal is to make money. I don't understand why they have to do it in a way that makes their product lack entertainment. It's almost like the Marquis de Sade took over product development for them.
It's like we could now do with a new light side capital ship to mix things up a bit. At least with the Mal / Negotiator meta, there was the opportunity to avoid mirror matches. As it stands it just going to get worse with the passing of each month.
I'm also heartily feed up with seeing the Hounds Tooth everywhere. It's been like it for ages already and seemingly it's going nowhere.
Replies
AI seems to hard targets rc (more rc is the only enemy not stealthed and not HT) and if you use it on rc with the taunt even with a full heal he won't last much longer.
A lot of those losses people are getting are because, YET AGAIN, CG have a major bug in-game which their so-called "testing" over both the initial shambolic Executor release, and subsequent "we tested it this time, scout's honor" re-relase, haven't yet dealt with.
When you are playing Executor on Offense (i.e. player playing it rather than AI) your Executor's 'cleanse' of all debuffs on an ally when they apply Breach isn't happening, yet the AI-played Exec on Defense is getting its allies debuffs cleared... remember how long it took them to resolve the perma-Undying Loyalty bug... players need to be requiring a fixed date for when this will be resolved or a promise from CG to refund all resources involved in getting this bug-filled Capital ship!
@CG_Doja_Fett_MINI @CG_SBCrumb_MINI @CG_MindTricks Could we please get an update on when this rather large bug is expected to be fixed? Could we also get a post from CG detailing the exact nature and depth of pre-release testing that is currently followed (if any!!) for new characters and ships since when we question the quality of the testing we keep getting told we shouldn't do so since we don't know what testing happened and so should not cast doubt on it - well it's beyond a joke now, we need to know what testing plans and processes and actions etc. are carried out prior to releasing these units. As someone who works for a software company and part-time in their software pre-release testing dept. I can tell you that even with our few thousand clients if we'd released software updates with this level of bugs with this regularity that I'd have been fired well before now, and we aren't making even close to the many hundreds of millions of pounds that CG are! Time to be honest and detailed about the testing (or lack thereof) or from this point forwards be assured that no user with half a brain will ever again trust CG when they say that a new unit/event/mode/etc. will do what CG say since there is simply ZERO trust anymore!!!
The heal ability at tier 7 is AWEFUL!!!! The taunt is the WORST addition to that ability!!!
Yup that ability should always have said and should be changed to say "...they gain foresight, and if they are a Tank or no allied tanks are present they also gaint taunt for 2 turns" - simple
Your software company not making the money CG does explains why it can't get away with that level of testing--if they can do this and still make a ton of money, why improve? Look at how many people dumped gear and crystals on high star executor, even while the fleet design is clunky and mirror meta is broken.
This is poor logic. If Google, Apple, Amazon, Nintendo, etc (all companies that make significantly more than EA, even if scaled to just their software dev teams) released products with this many bugs they'd be fixed within 24 hours, even if it meant paying overtime/extra consultants to supplement the staff. The issue is that those companies are both profitable and value long term brand name association with quality and customer loyalty. It's evident that EA is more concerned with syphoning what money they can to show impressive quarterly profits and riding new/exclusive IPs and hastily made releases into the ground rather than having their customers spend because they expect reliable service from a quality company.
Also EA, please make fleet enjoyable for those who spent a significant of resources/money on the Executor. At this point I'd be having a more enjoyable fleet experience if they just wiped everyone's Executor and we went back to Malev/Nego meta. There IS a sweet spot/intersection of fun and profit where you can make everyone want to own and participate in the new meta while making mirrors' outcomes based on human skilled decisions so that players can reliably/enjoyably climb. Think GAS mirrors, where the human beats the AI with 90+% Reliability and it's enjoyable, vs JKR mirrros, where the human beats the AI with ~70% reliability, and its a grindy slog vs Exec mirrors where the human wins <50% of matches because of the poor kit design and game breaking bug, and even with all things equal, the bug fixed, and both ships 7* maxed, it's down to a coin flip like the old Poe meta. That needs addressed as well, not just the bug, because the mirror isn't fun nor reliable. It's a frustrating coin flip. That is no way to treat customers who just purchased/spent hoarded gear on the most expensive cap ship released to date, by far.
... and why the hell can't I just heal my soft BH ships without forcing them to die the next turn via Taunt.
It's funny the GL Kenobi meta has been one of the most enjoyable metas ever while ships is the worst. It's the story of this game isn't it. Always so close to glory and a great game... then Lucy yanks the ball from Charlie Brown.
yiiiikes. Makes me wonder if you'd be better off with RC RI and something like S1/ITB/HT starting
He's tried most options. The problem is that if you don't start with Xanadu or Razor then whichever non-tank 3rd starter you choose 99% of the time gets obliterated immediately plus you aren't getting enough Breaches out quickly enough to ensure that you reach the 'ultimate' before the AI fleet, so your Cap ship then gets destroyed. If you start with HT/ITB/XB (which was my suggestion in terms of putting RC as an RI) then they have to go after your tanks initially but ITB doesn't last long and you aren't getting any early damage in on enemy Razor so they get through your fleet far more quickly and also still reach ultimate quicker
The issues are of course exacerbated by the ongoing (and STILL no announcement or fix from CG!) bug whereby allied BH aren't having debuffs cleansed when applying breach so if they get marked they're dead a few seconds later
As for how to work with what we have now, I’m finding that having RC slower than Xandu is helpful. If your RC is slower than theirs it’s also benefical.
Taunt on their HT, heal (lvl6 skill max only) your RC and remove Debuffs, call RC using Xandu special (opponents RC marked), call Xandu using RC special. Then on first reinforcement use Ebon Hawk and chaff prevents target lock so you can get your cap ship payout then start working around their HT. Not 100% win rate but best strat I’ve found so far
Why would you need to pull that data if you can just play the game. Obviously the majority of the people that have a lower ability will be 5 star battling a 7 star Exec, they will obviously have a lower win rate that’s not related to the ability.
As for the other point, so you’re saying that we should just ignore the healing ability for any non tanks?
I mean is it a coincidence that the past 2 meta fleets have had a bug to the key ship that makes it harder to win on offense? Therefore increasing the need to refresh for more battles?
How is it obvious without data?
If there is no statistical advantage, they are not likely to give it a very high priority.
I'm saying you should use it as the tool it is, and yes I have used it on non tanks, but mostly on HT and mostly to cleanse RC.
You would do well to include a make do for executor owners when you fix it, this is currently a stupid situation to be in.
I'm also heartily feed up with seeing the Hounds Tooth everywhere. It's been like it for ages already and seemingly it's going nowhere.