In fact, since unlock i have put it on defence and won twice, that’s 2/2. With it on offence I have won three times out of five, that’s 3/5. Seems to be performing better for me on defence than offence so far. A few more public examples.
Way too small a sample size and ignores way too many variables to draw any conclusions from.
To make the point that it is always best to put Levi on defence? Absolutely, but then that wasn’t the point I was making.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
I definitely think it will, at least for a few seasons. It may still be pretty reliably beatable with Prof, but it’s far easier to screw up now and it’ll take a bit for people to get the counter down. And far fewer people have known the Chimera counter than I’d have guessed.
To be fair we may not really see the impact of the buff this GAC. The isolate in particular requires a 7* Levi, and the proportion of those in the total Levi pool will vary over time.
Honestly I don't think the numbers will change much.
In fact, since unlock i have put it on defence and won twice, that’s 2/2. With it on offence I have won three times out of five, that’s 3/5. Seems to be performing better for me on defence than offence so far. A few more public examples.
Way too small a sample size and ignores way too many variables to draw any conclusions from.
that's what i'm trying to explain to them and that's why i wrote "overall" and the majority of us are interested in that, not in someone's wins against opponents without counters. I'm sure many know how hard is to defeat profundity without a proper counter. I'm interested in the quantity of the banners when you use it in offense and how many the opponents take when it's in defense as well - i don't like the numbers at all (in both cases). "overall" here is used when you put it in the same conditions with the opponent - everything else is a private case and private cases ain't taken into account - that's why the word "overall" exist in the vocabulary anyway. if you desire to put the private cases in it too - ok - swgoh shows that profundity and exe are better than leviathan in defense - why don't you put that into account tho - maybe they earn more wins or should i count how many times i put 7* levi in defense and it was defeated - what would you say about that then? (not seeking for an answer here). can agree that it's a good decision to put levi in defense only in one condition - profi and exe are there also.
p.s. not a while ago in gac holdo managed to hold for me the fleet zone - is she meta or the best defense fleet or what?? (putting contexts here, but kinda useless, isn't it?)
In fact, since unlock i have put it on defence and won twice, that’s 2/2. With it on offence I have won three times out of five, that’s 3/5. Seems to be performing better for me on defence than offence so far. A few more public examples.
Way too small a sample size and ignores way too many variables to draw any conclusions from.
To make the point that it is always best to put Levi on defence? Absolutely, but then that wasn’t the point I was making.
To make any point at all.
You yourself said "seems to be performing better for me on defense than offense." You can't claim that based on 2 and 5 battles, even with the "seems" qualifier.
In fact, since unlock i have put it on defence and won twice, that’s 2/2. With it on offence I have won three times out of five, that’s 3/5. Seems to be performing better for me on defence than offence so far. A few more public examples.
Way too small a sample size and ignores way too many variables to draw any conclusions from.
To make the point that it is always best to put Levi on defence? Absolutely, but then that wasn’t the point I was making.
To make any point at all.
You yourself said "seems to be performing better for me on defense than offense." You can't claim that based on 2 and 5 battles, even with the "seems" qualifier.
For a formal proof by counter example you only need to provide one example counter to the statement. The OP I was responding to was using absolute statements, and the point was simply that they are wrong by my providing one counter argument. Semantics, along with context, are important.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
I’m 4/4 vs 7* Levi with Sith Fighter since figuring out the strategy adjustments. Prof will be fine to climb with just need to not immediately panic the first 24 hours of a balance change and adjust. It will be sketchier verse Dagger I think, but still winnable.
Well, there was the buff.
I doubt Prof will have any reliability as a counter from here on out.
Still not a fan of the coin toss mechanics for mirrors. I know there are approaches that can put the win rate very high, but imo not as reliable as past mirrors.
Well, lots of princesses wanted to have their unbeatable ship, eventhough it was mentioned that the meta then would be only mirror with coin toss, now they have it. Hope they are happy
That isn't how it works, I can tell you Prof still beats it.
How reliable? 7 star Levi?
1 out of 5?
The way I see it is that either Y-wing will be isolated, which means Outrider will be gone pretty fast or if Outrider gets isolated, it's over.
The crits were also an important part to get to Ultimate.
I can't say for certain to be honest, I am the 7 star Levi owner but I do know the guy that gets payout before uses Prof and he beat out a 7 star Levi to get there and t gheuy that takes over payout after me beat out my 7 star Levi with Prof.
I just lost 5 battles against one with a fully maxed Prof. Either your shard mates made lots of refreshes, they were lucky or I was unlucky... But I know that already many Prof players struggle so if it is working, then very unreliable and nothing you can use for actually climbing.
Yeah, it is still possible, but it's not reliable at all and you need insane rng to make it happen. So unless there's some unique lineup/strategy I don't know of, then it's definitely not viable for fleet arena climbing.
Problem is, the ones I face have Dorito in the start lineup.
I’m 4/4 vs 7* Levi with Sith Fighter since figuring out the strategy adjustments. Prof will be fine to climb with just need to not immediately panic the first 24 hours of a balance change and adjust. It will be sketchier verse Dagger I think, but still winnable.
Well, there was the buff.
I doubt Prof will have any reliability as a counter from here on out.
Still not a fan of the coin toss mechanics for mirrors. I know there are approaches that can put the win rate very high, but imo not as reliable as past mirrors.
Well, lots of princesses wanted to have their unbeatable ship, eventhough it was mentioned that the meta then would be only mirror with coin toss, now they have it. Hope they are happy
That isn't how it works, I can tell you Prof still beats it.
How reliable? 7 star Levi?
1 out of 5?
The way I see it is that either Y-wing will be isolated, which means Outrider will be gone pretty fast or if Outrider gets isolated, it's over.
The crits were also an important part to get to Ultimate.
I can't say for certain to be honest, I am the 7 star Levi owner but I do know the guy that gets payout before uses Prof and he beat out a 7 star Levi to get there and t gheuy that takes over payout after me beat out my 7 star Levi with Prof.
I just lost 5 battles against one with a fully maxed Prof. Either your shard mates made lots of refreshes, they were lucky or I was unlucky... But I know that already many Prof players struggle so if it is working, then very unreliable and nothing you can use for actually climbing.
Yeah, it is still possible, but it's not reliable at all and you need insane rng to make it happen. So unless there's some unique lineup/strategy I don't know of, then it's definitely not viable for fleet arena climbing.
Problem is, the ones I face have Dorito in the start lineup.
P.S. to avoid approval void: also because of the different lineup Assassin comes in as first reinforcement, applying stun mostly on Outrider and second reinforcement is then Mark destroying also almost always the Outrider.
So what you have there is nice, but definitely an easier fleet to counter. With the Dorito lineup it is almost impossible to reliably climb with Prof
In fact, since unlock i have put it on defence and won twice, that’s 2/2. With it on offence I have won three times out of five, that’s 3/5. Seems to be performing better for me on defence than offence so far. A few more public examples.
Way too small a sample size and ignores way too many variables to draw any conclusions from.
To make the point that it is always best to put Levi on defence? Absolutely, but then that wasn’t the point I was making.
To make any point at all.
You yourself said "seems to be performing better for me on defense than offense." You can't claim that based on 2 and 5 battles, even with the "seems" qualifier.
For a formal proof by counter example you only need to provide one example counter to the statement. The OP I was responding to was using absolute statements, and the point was simply that they are wrong by my providing one counter argument. Semantics, along with context, are important.
of course - your wins against someone without counters don't concern us at all - it's just a poor example which noone will take into account - not important at all
I think you may be having an issue with your keyboard. What you meant to type was clearly: “Ah, right. In the future I’ll try to avoid making such absolute statements which are prone to being shown as untrue. After all, only a sith deals in absolutes.”
There, fixed it for you. 😁
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
In fact, since unlock i have put it on defence and won twice, that’s 2/2. With it on offence I have won three times out of five, that’s 3/5. Seems to be performing better for me on defence than offence so far. A few more public examples.
Way too small a sample size and ignores way too many variables to draw any conclusions from.
To make the point that it is always best to put Levi on defence? Absolutely, but then that wasn’t the point I was making.
To make any point at all.
You yourself said "seems to be performing better for me on defense than offense." You can't claim that based on 2 and 5 battles, even with the "seems" qualifier.
For a formal proof by counter example you only need to provide one example counter to the statement. The OP I was responding to was using absolute statements, and the point was simply that they are wrong by my providing one counter argument. Semantics, along with context, are important.
of course - your wins against someone without counters don't concern us at all - it's just a poor example which noone will take into account - not important at all
I think you may be having an issue with your keyboard. What you meant to type was clearly: “Ah, right. In the future I’ll try to avoid making such absolute statements which are prone to being shown as untrue. After all, only a sith deals in absolutes.”
There, fixed it for you. 😁
alright - I'll give you counter argument in your style - every time i put my maxed levi at defense it was defeated - is it good enough or it doesn't fit into your obsolete contexts? (your keyboard have to explain to you that contexts ain't properly applicable in all cases)
there - i upgraded it for you 😁
(you don't think us of braindead if we weren't explained that we can defeat someone who doesn't have counters, right? your keyboard meant to type that, but you forbid it watch out with that contexts - sometimes they can put you in bad situation like someone may think you take him for brainless)
In fact, since unlock i have put it on defence and won twice, that’s 2/2. With it on offence I have won three times out of five, that’s 3/5. Seems to be performing better for me on defence than offence so far. A few more public examples.
Way too small a sample size and ignores way too many variables to draw any conclusions from.
To make the point that it is always best to put Levi on defence? Absolutely, but then that wasn’t the point I was making.
To make any point at all.
You yourself said "seems to be performing better for me on defense than offense." You can't claim that based on 2 and 5 battles, even with the "seems" qualifier.
For a formal proof by counter example you only need to provide one example counter to the statement. The OP I was responding to was using absolute statements, and the point was simply that they are wrong by my providing one counter argument. Semantics, along with context, are important.
of course - your wins against someone without counters don't concern us at all - it's just a poor example which noone will take into account - not important at all
I think you may be having an issue with your keyboard. What you meant to type was clearly: “Ah, right. In the future I’ll try to avoid making such absolute statements which are prone to being shown as untrue. After all, only a sith deals in absolutes.”
There, fixed it for you. 😁
alright - I'll give you counter argument in your style - every time i put my maxed levi at defense it was defeated - is it good enough or it doesn't fit into your obsolete contexts? (your keyboard have to explain to you that contexts ain't properly applicable in all cases)
there - i upgraded it for you 😁
(you don't think us of braindead if we weren't explained that we can defeat someone who doesn't have counters, right)
You seem to have missed the point by a few parsecs. All you’ve shown there is that in the context of your battles it was not smart to place Levi on defence, however it still doesn’t prove your absolute statement of earlier. As for me, I am making no point other than that your absolute statement of before was flawed. If you want your arguments to carry more weight you could consider using more nuanced language.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
In fact, since unlock i have put it on defence and won twice, that’s 2/2. With it on offence I have won three times out of five, that’s 3/5. Seems to be performing better for me on defence than offence so far. A few more public examples.
Way too small a sample size and ignores way too many variables to draw any conclusions from.
To make the point that it is always best to put Levi on defence? Absolutely, but then that wasn’t the point I was making.
To make any point at all.
You yourself said "seems to be performing better for me on defense than offense." You can't claim that based on 2 and 5 battles, even with the "seems" qualifier.
For a formal proof by counter example you only need to provide one example counter to the statement. The OP I was responding to was using absolute statements, and the point was simply that they are wrong by my providing one counter argument. Semantics, along with context, are important.
of course - your wins against someone without counters don't concern us at all - it's just a poor example which noone will take into account - not important at all
I think you may be having an issue with your keyboard. What you meant to type was clearly: “Ah, right. In the future I’ll try to avoid making such absolute statements which are prone to being shown as untrue. After all, only a sith deals in absolutes.”
There, fixed it for you. 😁
alright - I'll give you counter argument in your style - every time i put my maxed levi at defense it was defeated - is it good enough or it doesn't fit into your obsolete contexts? (your keyboard have to explain to you that contexts ain't properly applicable in all cases)
there - i upgraded it for you 😁
(you don't think us of braindead if we weren't explained that we can defeat someone who doesn't have counters, right)
You seem to have missed the point by a few parsecs. All you’ve shown there is that in the context of your battles it was not smart to place Levi on defence, however it still doesn’t prove your absolute statement of earlier. As for me, I am making no point other than that your absolute statement of before was flawed. If you want your arguments to carry more weight you could consider using more nuanced language.
neither yours when giving obsolete example by defeating opponent without a counter, lol
why should my be flawed then? lol
told ya - flawed example
you missed the topic by parsecs - performance in same conditions or you can have every fleet as meta if the opponent doesn't have one at all I can't afford to abuse the others by explaining them that
In fact, since unlock i have put it on defence and won twice, that’s 2/2. With it on offence I have won three times out of five, that’s 3/5. Seems to be performing better for me on defence than offence so far. A few more public examples.
Way too small a sample size and ignores way too many variables to draw any conclusions from.
To make the point that it is always best to put Levi on defence? Absolutely, but then that wasn’t the point I was making.
To make any point at all.
You yourself said "seems to be performing better for me on defense than offense." You can't claim that based on 2 and 5 battles, even with the "seems" qualifier.
For a formal proof by counter example you only need to provide one example counter to the statement. The OP I was responding to was using absolute statements, and the point was simply that they are wrong by my providing one counter argument. Semantics, along with context, are important.
of course - your wins against someone without counters don't concern us at all - it's just a poor example which noone will take into account - not important at all
I think you may be having an issue with your keyboard. What you meant to type was clearly: “Ah, right. In the future I’ll try to avoid making such absolute statements which are prone to being shown as untrue. After all, only a sith deals in absolutes.”
There, fixed it for you. 😁
alright - I'll give you counter argument in your style - every time i put my maxed levi at defense it was defeated - is it good enough or it doesn't fit into your obsolete contexts? (your keyboard have to explain to you that contexts ain't properly applicable in all cases)
there - i upgraded it for you 😁
(you don't think us of braindead if we weren't explained that we can defeat someone who doesn't have counters, right)
You seem to have missed the point by a few parsecs. All you’ve shown there is that in the context of your battles it was not smart to place Levi on defence, however it still doesn’t prove your absolute statement of earlier. As for me, I am making no point other than that your absolute statement of before was flawed. If you want your arguments to carry more weight you could consider using more nuanced language.
neither yours when giving obsolete example by defeating opponent without a counter, lol
why should my be flawed then? lol
told ya - flawed example
you missed the topic by parsecs - performance in same conditions
Because you didn’t make that distinction in your original comment. Instead you made a broad absolute statement. That’s why your example was irrelevant to your initial statement.
Had that point been the one you initially stated I would have agreed with you, and we could have avoided what must be becoming an embarrassing situation for you.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
In fact, since unlock i have put it on defence and won twice, that’s 2/2. With it on offence I have won three times out of five, that’s 3/5. Seems to be performing better for me on defence than offence so far. A few more public examples.
Way too small a sample size and ignores way too many variables to draw any conclusions from.
To make the point that it is always best to put Levi on defence? Absolutely, but then that wasn’t the point I was making.
To make any point at all.
You yourself said "seems to be performing better for me on defense than offense." You can't claim that based on 2 and 5 battles, even with the "seems" qualifier.
For a formal proof by counter example you only need to provide one example counter to the statement. The OP I was responding to was using absolute statements, and the point was simply that they are wrong by my providing one counter argument. Semantics, along with context, are important.
of course - your wins against someone without counters don't concern us at all - it's just a poor example which noone will take into account - not important at all
I think you may be having an issue with your keyboard. What you meant to type was clearly: “Ah, right. In the future I’ll try to avoid making such absolute statements which are prone to being shown as untrue. After all, only a sith deals in absolutes.”
There, fixed it for you. 😁
alright - I'll give you counter argument in your style - every time i put my maxed levi at defense it was defeated - is it good enough or it doesn't fit into your obsolete contexts? (your keyboard have to explain to you that contexts ain't properly applicable in all cases)
there - i upgraded it for you 😁
(you don't think us of braindead if we weren't explained that we can defeat someone who doesn't have counters, right)
You seem to have missed the point by a few parsecs. All you’ve shown there is that in the context of your battles it was not smart to place Levi on defence, however it still doesn’t prove your absolute statement of earlier. As for me, I am making no point other than that your absolute statement of before was flawed. If you want your arguments to carry more weight you could consider using more nuanced language.
neither yours when giving obsolete example by defeating opponent without a counter, lol
why should my be flawed then? lol
told ya - flawed example
you missed the topic by parsecs - performance in same conditions
Because you didn’t make that distinction in your original comment. Instead you made a broad absolute statement. That’s why your example was irrelevant to your initial statement.
Had that point been the one you initially stated I would have agreed with you, and we could have avoided what must be becoming an embarrassing situation for you.
i just avoided to abuse the others by skipping the obsolete explanations - they ain't dumb - no need to tell them they can defeat someone without counters to their teams told ya again - learn when to skip contexts
I definitely think it will, at least for a few seasons. It may still be pretty reliably beatable with Prof, but it’s far easier to screw up now and it’ll take a bit for people to get the counter down. And far fewer people have known the Chimera counter than I’d have guessed.
To be fair we may not really see the impact of the buff this GAC. The isolate in particular requires a 7* Levi, and the proportion of those in the total Levi pool will vary over time.
Honestly I don't think the numbers will change much.
I think the chimera counter will just be used more over profundity, and profundity still kinda works but chimera seems more reliable
what I don't show is the graphic is the banners which the change will definitly affect. Even if profundity wins stay about the same, the banners for a win with prof will drop.
In fact, since unlock i have put it on defence and won twice, that’s 2/2. With it on offence I have won three times out of five, that’s 3/5. Seems to be performing better for me on defence than offence so far. A few more public examples.
Way too small a sample size and ignores way too many variables to draw any conclusions from.
To make the point that it is always best to put Levi on defence? Absolutely, but then that wasn’t the point I was making.
To make any point at all.
You yourself said "seems to be performing better for me on defense than offense." You can't claim that based on 2 and 5 battles, even with the "seems" qualifier.
For a formal proof by counter example you only need to provide one example counter to the statement. The OP I was responding to was using absolute statements, and the point was simply that they are wrong by my providing one counter argument. Semantics, along with context, are important.
of course - your wins against someone without counters don't concern us at all - it's just a poor example which noone will take into account - not important at all
I think you may be having an issue with your keyboard. What you meant to type was clearly: “Ah, right. In the future I’ll try to avoid making such absolute statements which are prone to being shown as untrue. After all, only a sith deals in absolutes.”
There, fixed it for you. 😁
alright - I'll give you counter argument in your style - every time i put my maxed levi at defense it was defeated - is it good enough or it doesn't fit into your obsolete contexts? (your keyboard have to explain to you that contexts ain't properly applicable in all cases)
there - i upgraded it for you 😁
(you don't think us of braindead if we weren't explained that we can defeat someone who doesn't have counters, right)
You seem to have missed the point by a few parsecs. All you’ve shown there is that in the context of your battles it was not smart to place Levi on defence, however it still doesn’t prove your absolute statement of earlier. As for me, I am making no point other than that your absolute statement of before was flawed. If you want your arguments to carry more weight you could consider using more nuanced language.
neither yours when giving obsolete example by defeating opponent without a counter, lol
why should my be flawed then? lol
told ya - flawed example
you missed the topic by parsecs - performance in same conditions
Because you didn’t make that distinction in your original comment. Instead you made a broad absolute statement. That’s why your example was irrelevant to your initial statement.
Had that point been the one you initially stated I would have agreed with you, and we could have avoided what must be becoming an embarrassing situation for you.
i just avoided to abuse the others by skipping the obsolete explanations - they ain't dumb - no need to tell them they can defeat someone without counters to their teams told ya again - learn when to skip contexts
I’m afraid this comment doesn’t make sense in English. So can’t appropriately respond.
If this is an EAL issue then it might explain why some of the discussion of semantics and the nuances of statements in a foreign language have gone beyond you, but kudos to you for what has otherwise been acceptable discourse in your non-native tongue.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
I definitely think it will, at least for a few seasons. It may still be pretty reliably beatable with Prof, but it’s far easier to screw up now and it’ll take a bit for people to get the counter down. And far fewer people have known the Chimera counter than I’d have guessed.
To be fair we may not really see the impact of the buff this GAC. The isolate in particular requires a 7* Levi, and the proportion of those in the total Levi pool will vary over time.
Honestly I don't think the numbers will change much.
I think the chimera counter will just be used more over profundity, and profundity still kinda works but chimera seems more reliable
what I don't show is the graphic is the banners which the change will definitly affect. Even if profundity wins stay about the same, the banners for a win with prof will drop.
It almost makes it an interesting 4-way meta with Chimera and Levi joining Exe/Prof.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
I’ve heard from several people it’s still reliably winnable verse Dorito. I’m inclined to believe them, but I cant test or record any of those battles till someone on my shard leaves Dorito on defense. I’ll gladly share what I’m able to test once I get a chance.
I’m 4/4 vs 7* Levi with Sith Fighter since figuring out the strategy adjustments. Prof will be fine to climb with just need to not immediately panic the first 24 hours of a balance change and adjust. It will be sketchier verse Dagger I think, but still winnable.
Well, there was the buff.
I doubt Prof will have any reliability as a counter from here on out.
Still not a fan of the coin toss mechanics for mirrors. I know there are approaches that can put the win rate very high, but imo not as reliable as past mirrors.
Well, lots of princesses wanted to have their unbeatable ship, eventhough it was mentioned that the meta then would be only mirror with coin toss, now they have it. Hope they are happy
That isn't how it works, I can tell you Prof still beats it.
How reliable? 7 star Levi?
1 out of 5?
The way I see it is that either Y-wing will be isolated, which means Outrider will be gone pretty fast or if Outrider gets isolated, it's over.
The crits were also an important part to get to Ultimate.
I can't say for certain to be honest, I am the 7 star Levi owner but I do know the guy that gets payout before uses Prof and he beat out a 7 star Levi to get there and t gheuy that takes over payout after me beat out my 7 star Levi with Prof.
I just lost 5 battles against one with a fully maxed Prof. Either your shard mates made lots of refreshes, they were lucky or I was unlucky... But I know that already many Prof players struggle so if it is working, then very unreliable and nothing you can use for actually climbing.
Yeah, it is still possible, but it's not reliable at all and you need insane rng to make it happen. So unless there's some unique lineup/strategy I don't know of, then it's definitely not viable for fleet arena climbing.
Problem is, the ones I face have Dorito in the start lineup.
I’ve heard from several people it’s still reliably winnable verse Dorito. I’m inclined to believe them, but I cant test or record any of those battles till someone on my shard leaves Dorito on defense. I’ll gladly share what I’m able to test once I get a chance.
I’m 4/4 vs 7* Levi with Sith Fighter since figuring out the strategy adjustments. Prof will be fine to climb with just need to not immediately panic the first 24 hours of a balance change and adjust. It will be sketchier verse Dagger I think, but still winnable.
Well, there was the buff.
I doubt Prof will have any reliability as a counter from here on out.
Still not a fan of the coin toss mechanics for mirrors. I know there are approaches that can put the win rate very high, but imo not as reliable as past mirrors.
Well, lots of princesses wanted to have their unbeatable ship, eventhough it was mentioned that the meta then would be only mirror with coin toss, now they have it. Hope they are happy
That isn't how it works, I can tell you Prof still beats it.
How reliable? 7 star Levi?
1 out of 5?
The way I see it is that either Y-wing will be isolated, which means Outrider will be gone pretty fast or if Outrider gets isolated, it's over.
The crits were also an important part to get to Ultimate.
I can't say for certain to be honest, I am the 7 star Levi owner but I do know the guy that gets payout before uses Prof and he beat out a 7 star Levi to get there and t gheuy that takes over payout after me beat out my 7 star Levi with Prof.
I just lost 5 battles against one with a fully maxed Prof. Either your shard mates made lots of refreshes, they were lucky or I was unlucky... But I know that already many Prof players struggle so if it is working, then very unreliable and nothing you can use for actually climbing.
Yeah, it is still possible, but it's not reliable at all and you need insane rng to make it happen. So unless there's some unique lineup/strategy I don't know of, then it's definitely not viable for fleet arena climbing.
Problem is, the ones I face have Dorito in the start lineup.
I have searched for Videos but almost all of them are only with Sith Assassin. I found only 2 with the Dorito but in 1 battle the RNG was extremely good for the uploader with more assists than you normally get and the other was with "weaker" ships/pilots.
Mind you this was like 10 hours ago and I am hoping...
It would definitely be appreciated if you are so kind to share if you get the opportunity to find the lineup.
Thrawn and profundity still beat it. There's no reason for it to be coin flip meta, though I completely agree that the mess that is the leviathan kit means that's what it could be. Profundity and executor mirror weren't a coin flip, if we had better developers this wouldn't be either
Just a question somewhat on topic: Can Chinera beat exec? if so, what team? it would be greatly appreciated. if it can’t, then there is no way in heck it should be able to beat Levi.
Chimaera can absolutely beat Executor. The most accessible lineup is TIE/Fighter, TIE/Advanced, and TIE/Bomber in the starting lineup, and TIE/Defender and Interceptor in RI. It relies on feeding Thrawn tons of TM from Defender dodges, and CD reduction from Interceptor in RI, to get to the ult and nuke HT fast. Then it's just cleanup from there.
Just a question somewhat on topic: Can Chinera beat exec? if so, what team? it would be greatly appreciated. if it can’t, then there is no way in heck it should be able to beat Levi.
Chimaera can absolutely beat Executor. The most accessible lineup is TIE/Fighter, TIE/Advanced, and TIE/Bomber in the starting lineup, and TIE/Defender and Interceptor in RI. It relies on feeding Thrawn tons of TM from Defender dodges, and CD reduction from Interceptor in RI, to get to the ult and nuke HT fast. Then it's just cleanup from there.
Just a question somewhat on topic: Can Chinera beat exec? if so, what team? it would be greatly appreciated. if it can’t, then there is no way in heck it should be able to beat Levi.
Just to add, I am still able to beat levi with executor, seemingly easier than before the update. So it can be beaten by the 2 previous meta fleets and one ancient meta+ conquest unit fleet.
I'm still going to get it soonish, but in comparison to when exe got its first few tweaks, it still seems somewhat underwhelming.
I get that a coin flip meta is annoying, but at least the chimera counter should be obsolete, even accounting the conquest units, since levi needs two conquest units just for its unlock.
Thrawn and profundity still beat it. There's no reason for it to be coin flip meta, though I completely agree that the mess that is the leviathan kit means that's what it could be. Profundity and executor mirror weren't a coin flip, if we had better developers this wouldn't be either
Executor mirror has a series of RNG checks, so while not exactly a coin flip, there is still a lot of RNG there.
Thrawn and profundity still beat it. There's no reason for it to be coin flip meta, though I completely agree that the mess that is the leviathan kit means that's what it could be. Profundity and executor mirror weren't a coin flip, if we had better developers this wouldn't be either
Executor mirror has a series of RNG checks, so while not exactly a coin flip, there is still a lot of RNG there.
Except Exec mirrors were essentially solved with Ebon Hawk and Prof mirrors were solved with TIE Bomber.
Thrawn and profundity still beat it. There's no reason for it to be coin flip meta, though I completely agree that the mess that is the leviathan kit means that's what it could be. Profundity and executor mirror weren't a coin flip, if we had better developers this wouldn't be either
Executor mirror has a series of RNG checks, so while not exactly a coin flip, there is still a lot of RNG there.
Except Exec mirrors were essentially solved with Ebon Hawk and Prof mirrors were solved with TIE Bomber.
I can't speak to Prof mirrors, but even with EH the Exec mirrors have a bunch of RNG. EH minimizes some of it, but it doesn't stop enemy RC from evading the opening and keeping Ten Up.
Thrawn and profundity still beat it. There's no reason for it to be coin flip meta, though I completely agree that the mess that is the leviathan kit means that's what it could be. Profundity and executor mirror weren't a coin flip, if we had better developers this wouldn't be either
Executor mirror has a series of RNG checks, so while not exactly a coin flip, there is still a lot of RNG there.
Except Exec mirrors were essentially solved with Ebon Hawk and Prof mirrors were solved with TIE Bomber.
I can't speak to Prof mirrors, but even with EH the Exec mirrors have a bunch of RNG. EH minimizes some of it, but it doesn't stop enemy RC from evading the opening and keeping Ten Up.
You don’t need to focus RC at the opening- go for XB instead. And Prof mirrors could easily be done with tie bomber as first reinforcement, cause burned rebels can’t assist.
Replies
To make the point that it is always best to put Levi on defence? Absolutely, but then that wasn’t the point I was making.
that's what i'm trying to explain to them and that's why i wrote "overall" and the majority of us are interested in that, not in someone's wins against opponents without counters. I'm sure many know how hard is to defeat profundity without a proper counter. I'm interested in the quantity of the banners when you use it in offense and how many the opponents take when it's in defense as well - i don't like the numbers at all (in both cases). "overall" here is used when you put it in the same conditions with the opponent - everything else is a private case and private cases ain't taken into account - that's why the word "overall" exist in the vocabulary anyway. if you desire to put the private cases in it too - ok - swgoh shows that profundity and exe are better than leviathan in defense - why don't you put that into account tho - maybe they earn more wins or should i count how many times i put 7* levi in defense and it was defeated - what would you say about that then? (not seeking for an answer here). can agree that it's a good decision to put levi in defense only in one condition - profi and exe are there also.
p.s. not a while ago in gac holdo managed to hold for me the fleet zone - is she meta or the best defense fleet or what?? (putting contexts here, but kinda useless, isn't it?)
To make any point at all.
You yourself said "seems to be performing better for me on defense than offense." You can't claim that based on 2 and 5 battles, even with the "seems" qualifier.
For a formal proof by counter example you only need to provide one example counter to the statement. The OP I was responding to was using absolute statements, and the point was simply that they are wrong by my providing one counter argument. Semantics, along with context, are important.
Problem is, the ones I face have Dorito in the start lineup.
P.S. to avoid approval void: also because of the different lineup Assassin comes in as first reinforcement, applying stun mostly on Outrider and second reinforcement is then Mark destroying also almost always the Outrider.
So what you have there is nice, but definitely an easier fleet to counter. With the Dorito lineup it is almost impossible to reliably climb with Prof
I think you may be having an issue with your keyboard. What you meant to type was clearly: “Ah, right. In the future I’ll try to avoid making such absolute statements which are prone to being shown as untrue. After all, only a sith deals in absolutes.”
There, fixed it for you. 😁
alright - I'll give you counter argument in your style - every time i put my maxed levi at defense it was defeated - is it good enough or it doesn't fit into your obsolete contexts? (your keyboard have to explain to you that contexts ain't properly applicable in all cases)
there - i upgraded it for you 😁
(you don't think us of braindead if we weren't explained that we can defeat someone who doesn't have counters, right? your keyboard meant to type that, but you forbid it
You seem to have missed the point by a few parsecs. All you’ve shown there is that in the context of your battles it was not smart to place Levi on defence, however it still doesn’t prove your absolute statement of earlier. As for me, I am making no point other than that your absolute statement of before was flawed. If you want your arguments to carry more weight you could consider using more nuanced language.
neither yours when giving obsolete example by defeating opponent without a counter, lol
why should my be flawed then? lol
told ya - flawed example
you missed the topic by parsecs - performance in same conditions or you can have every fleet as meta if the opponent doesn't have one at all
Because you didn’t make that distinction in your original comment. Instead you made a broad absolute statement. That’s why your example was irrelevant to your initial statement.
Had that point been the one you initially stated I would have agreed with you, and we could have avoided what must be becoming an embarrassing situation for you.
i just avoided to abuse the others by skipping the obsolete explanations - they ain't dumb - no need to tell them they can defeat someone without counters to their teams
lol ok ok 😂
I think the chimera counter will just be used more over profundity, and profundity still kinda works but chimera seems more reliable
what I don't show is the graphic is the banners which the change will definitly affect. Even if profundity wins stay about the same, the banners for a win with prof will drop.
I’m afraid this comment doesn’t make sense in English. So can’t appropriately respond.
If this is an EAL issue then it might explain why some of the discussion of semantics and the nuances of statements in a foreign language have gone beyond you, but kudos to you for what has otherwise been acceptable discourse in your non-native tongue.
It almost makes it an interesting 4-way meta with Chimera and Levi joining Exe/Prof.
I have searched for Videos but almost all of them are only with Sith Assassin. I found only 2 with the Dorito but in 1 battle the RNG was extremely good for the uploader with more assists than you normally get and the other was with "weaker" ships/pilots.
Mind you this was like 10 hours ago and I am hoping...
It would definitely be appreciated if you are so kind to share if you get the opportunity to find the lineup.
good to know, thanks!
I'm still going to get it soonish, but in comparison to when exe got its first few tweaks, it still seems somewhat underwhelming.
I get that a coin flip meta is annoying, but at least the chimera counter should be obsolete, even accounting the conquest units, since levi needs two conquest units just for its unlock.
Executor mirror has a series of RNG checks, so while not exactly a coin flip, there is still a lot of RNG there.
Except Exec mirrors were essentially solved with Ebon Hawk and Prof mirrors were solved with TIE Bomber.
I can't speak to Prof mirrors, but even with EH the Exec mirrors have a bunch of RNG. EH minimizes some of it, but it doesn't stop enemy RC from evading the opening and keeping Ten Up.
You don’t need to focus RC at the opening- go for XB instead. And Prof mirrors could easily be done with tie bomber as first reinforcement, cause burned rebels can’t assist.