Executor is a beast? [MERGE]

"Larx;c-2287872" wrote:

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.

"HokieFiend;c-2287852" wrote:


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.

"HokieFiend;c-2287852" wrote:

"Antario;c-2287849" wrote:
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.

"Shadow1989;c-2287875" wrote:

"Larx;c-2287872" wrote:
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.

"Antario;c-2287886" wrote:

"HokieFiend;c-2287852" wrote:

"Antario;c-2287849" wrote:
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.

That is clearly a bug.

"slickdealer;c-2287894" wrote:
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.

"Kisakee;c-2287895" wrote:

"slickdealer;c-2287894" wrote:
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!

"Deany;c-2287896" wrote:
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.

@Kyno @crzydroid @Ultra

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 ass 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.

"Starslayer;c-2287883" wrote:

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.