Any news on Levi changes?
Please? :)
Forum Discussion
- … At 9:30pm Pacific time?
"Happygorilla;c-2431893" wrote:
What do you want to change? Destroy all enemy ships when ult? Seize not just the capital ship, but their man, women and children too?
Let's start with buffing the offense of all the fleet by 25% at least.
Have that when ult, the synergy of the captured capital changed to Sith Empire.
Give the fleet more ways to go past the buffs of the Raddus and the HT/YW tankiness.
The Leviathan is said to be the new meta. It can't be that almost every fleet has no problem beating it while the Leviathan fleet itself shows great difficulty to beat half of the current fleets"MrRandyWatson;c-2431923" wrote:
So many people on here like to fall on the exact wording CG uses when communicating to defend them. In this case, CG said:
"Profundity and Executor are the best of the best, so how do we create a Capital Ship that’d surpass them both?"
Definition of surpass:
1. exceed; be greater than.
2. be better than.
3. do or be better than ever before.
This ship is clearly not living up to what CG told us Levi would be nor what they explicitly said it would be.
Make this ship what you said it would be.
Who's defending this? It's riddled with bugs right now. There's no way to defend that, and I haven't seen anyone doing so.
They'll fix the bugs and the fleet will be much closer to meeting those descriptions. Right now, it's hot garbage. It's hot garbage that's capable of beating everything - but it's still hot garbage. I think @Scrybe summed it up really nicely - "It never feels like you have control of the match, just hanging on for dear life hoping to hit your ult in time."
That being said, let's let them fix the bugs and then re-evaluate. Clearly the fleet isn't working as intended, or as described."Nauros;c-2431900" wrote:
"Happygorilla;c-2431893" wrote:
What do you want to change? Destroy all enemy ships when ult? Seize not just the capital ship, but their man, women and children too?
They could start by not having it beaten by Holdo.
How many times have you beaten it with Holdo, and how many tries? Does your Holdo beat it 100% of the times, or was it a stroke of luck? Do you do it always with a concrete lineup, or do you do it with different lineups?
And "some youtuber did it once" is not a valid answer.- It's PURE TRASH as it stands now.
"herd_nerfer;c-2431934" wrote:
"MrRandyWatson;c-2431923" wrote:
So many people on here like to fall on the exact wording CG uses when communicating to defend them. In this case, CG said:
"Profundity and Executor are the best of the best, so how do we create a Capital Ship that’d surpass them both?"
Definition of surpass:
1. exceed; be greater than.
2. be better than.
3. do or be better than ever before.
This ship is clearly not living up to what CG told us Levi would be nor what they explicitly said it would be.
Make this ship what you said it would be.
Who's defending this? It's riddled with bugs right now.
No one. Poster is referring to how when people defend CG on other things, they use their exact verbiage. They're turning it around in what they clearly see as a huge "gotcha" moment.- It’s a bait and switch level catastrophe. They promised the best fleet. They delivered a sub par one. Profundity beats every fleet in the game on offense and has far fewer fleets that can beat it. Therefore leviathan is not surpassing profundity. Bugs aside the ship isn’t going to conform to how they billed it.
"Nauros;c-2431900" wrote:
"Happygorilla;c-2431893" wrote:
What do you want to change? Destroy all enemy ships when ult? Seize not just the capital ship, but their man, women and children too?
They could start by not having it beaten by Holdo.
If Finalizer can beat Executor and Tarkin - Profundity, then why, exactly, Leviathan should be invincible to Raddus?"Nauros;c-2431953" wrote:
"dogwelder79;c-2431948" wrote:
"Nauros;c-2431900" wrote:
"Happygorilla;c-2431893" wrote:
What do you want to change? Destroy all enemy ships when ult? Seize not just the capital ship, but their man, women and children too?
They could start by not having it beaten by Holdo.
How many times have you beaten it with Holdo, and how many tries? Does your Holdo beat it 100% of the times, or was it a stroke of luck? Do you do it always with a concrete lineup, or do you do it with different lineups?
And "some youtuber did it once" is not a valid answer.
That is the weakest straw I have seen someone grasp in defense of CG.
I don't read it as defending CG - I read it as someone asking for more proof than a single video of it being done - which I don't think is out of line. How many people have really tried it? Can we be sure it wasn't a fluke? Can someone demonstrate that it's repeatable? If so, is that because of one of the current bugs, or is it a problem with the fleet itself?
As someone with a 7* leviathan, it's in my interest to see the fleet fixed. Isn't it more constructive to have more information than less?"herd_nerfer;c-2431964" wrote:
"Nauros;c-2431953" wrote:
"dogwelder79;c-2431948" wrote:
"Nauros;c-2431900" wrote:
"Happygorilla;c-2431893" wrote:
What do you want to change? Destroy all enemy ships when ult? Seize not just the capital ship, but their man, women and children too?
They could start by not having it beaten by Holdo.
How many times have you beaten it with Holdo, and how many tries? Does your Holdo beat it 100% of the times, or was it a stroke of luck? Do you do it always with a concrete lineup, or do you do it with different lineups?
And "some youtuber did it once" is not a valid answer.
That is the weakest straw I have seen someone grasp in defense of CG.
I don't read it as defending CG - I read it as someone asking for more proof than a single video of it being done - which I don't think is out of line. How many people have really tried it? Can we be sure it wasn't a fluke? Can someone demonstrate that it's repeatable? If so, is that because of one of the current bugs, or is it a problem with the fleet itself?
As someone with a 7* leviathan, it's in my interest to see the fleet fixed. Isn't it more constructive to have more information than less?
Thanks. You understood exactly what I meant.
I add something: it's a problem if it's something consistent, and not a single stroke of luck by a youtuber. And not the most reliable youtuber in the world.
