Executor is a beast? [MERGE]

"Nauros;c-2287949" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2287948" wrote:

"slickdealer;c-2287942" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2287933" wrote:

"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.

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.

In all likelihood they did test, but tested with a ship we don’t have.

CG gave us one day to figure out they sold us a broken fleet that will be fixed with a $300 marquee.

Imagine if Lord Vader comes out and is terrible without a marquee that comes out later.

LV may very well be the same without Maul.

Didn't they actually say that Maul will be an integral part of LV teams?

I think they said Maul was anti-Kenobi. not sure they talked about him in BBQ Ani teams. But I doubt they'd have any faction synergy. Maul is Mandalorian. BBQ Ani isn't Mandalorian.

"Nauros;c-2287949" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2287948" wrote:

"slickdealer;c-2287942" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2287933" wrote:

"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.

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.

In all likelihood they did test, but tested with a ship we don’t have.

CG gave us one day to figure out they sold us a broken fleet that will be fixed with a $300 marquee.

Imagine if Lord Vader comes out and is terrible without a marquee that comes out later.

LV may very well be the same without Maul.

Didn't they actually say that Maul will be an integral part of LV teams?

Yes, Crumb said almost exactly that in the ra video.

"InyakSolomon88;c-2287952" wrote:

"Nauros;c-2287949" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2287948" wrote:

"slickdealer;c-2287942" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2287933" wrote:

"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.

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.

In all likelihood they did test, but tested with a ship we don’t have.

CG gave us one day to figure out they sold us a broken fleet that will be fixed with a $300 marquee.

Imagine if Lord Vader comes out and is terrible without a marquee that comes out later.

LV may very well be the same without Maul.

Didn't they actually say that Maul will be an integral part of LV teams?

I think they said Maul was anti-Kenobi. not sure they talked about him in BBQ Ani teams. But I doubt they'd have any faction synergy. Maul is Mandalorian. BBQ Ani isn't Mandalorian.

"InyakSolomon88;c-2287952" wrote:

"Nauros;c-2287949" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2287948" wrote:

"slickdealer;c-2287942" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2287933" wrote:

"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.

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.

In all likelihood they did test, but tested with a ship we don’t have.

CG gave us one day to figure out they sold us a broken fleet that will be fixed with a $300 marquee.

Imagine if Lord Vader comes out and is terrible without a marquee that comes out later.

LV may very well be the same without Maul.

Didn't they actually say that Maul will be an integral part of LV teams?

I think they said Maul was anti-Kenobi. not sure they talked about him in BBQ Ani teams. But I doubt they'd have any faction synergy. Maul is Mandalorian. BBQ Ani isn't Mandalorian.

They said in the road ahead video at the 4:30 mark that similar to how CAT worked with JMK Maul would bring LVs squad to the next level.

Seems to me this is CG's MO as of late. JMK, even with KAM, was a reliable win with older metas. DR without Malak was a semi-reliable win with JKR or EP.

I'm not defending CG nor am I saying Dengar's ship is coming and will make Executor crazy dominant, but I think those that rushed this ship should have known this was a reasonable possibility. I'd still be angry if I were them, but I wouldn't be surprised.

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2287958" wrote:
Seems to me this is CG's MO as of late. JMK, even with KAM, was a reliable win with older metas. DR without Malak was a semi-reliable win with JKR or EP.

I'm not defending CG nor am I saying Dengar's ship is coming and will make Executor crazy dominant, but I think those that rushed this ship should have known this was a reasonable possibility. I'd still be angry if I were them, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Agreed. There has been a pattern (whether that is intended or a consequence of problems in the testing process is only known by CG).

But yes, can understand the annoyance.

This is why you never buy a car before test driving it yourself.

I want to laugh when I see people arguing that they test executor at 7* and not 4*.

C'mon, a billion dollar company. Of course they shoud have test 4*, 5*, 6*, 7* and against all the other fleets. And do it again, iteration iteration and so on. That is testing. The problem we all see in 1 day clearly show that there is a huge problem in their testing pipeline (not enough money spent in this department probably)

I am pretty sure their iteration tests for business model (requirement, 1 day releasing, thousands of cristals needed) are perfectly fine and detailed (lots of money spend on this department probably).

CG has to do something about this, it is not normal to ALWAYS have problem with toon releasing.

"slickdealer;c-2287923" wrote:

"nottenst;c-2287920" wrote:

"Kelthuzil;c-2287834" wrote:
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.

I believe an r7/r8, XB and RC I forget which ones which, will out speed an r8 capital ship. I saw someone posting their speeds in a different thread. So again, no extra ship needed to execute this strategy. Just an FYI.

"Nauros;c-2287927" wrote:

"slickdealer;c-2287926" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2287922" wrote:

"slickdealer;c-2287919" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2287914" wrote:

"slickdealer;c-2287910" wrote:
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.

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.

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.

"Nauros;c-2287918" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2287914" wrote:

"slickdealer;c-2287910" wrote:
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.

He doesnt have a ship, that can be said for a fair amount of characters, many of which are very noted pilots.

What other reasons have been given?

I'm not being contrarian, I'm just looking for the writing on the wall that doesnt seem to be there.

"Kyno;c-2287973" wrote:

"slickdealer;c-2287923" wrote:

"nottenst;c-2287920" wrote:

"Kelthuzil;c-2287834" wrote:
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.

I believe an r7/r8, XB and RC I forget which ones which, will out speed an r8 capital ship. I saw someone posting their speeds in a different thread. So again, no extra ship needed to execute this strategy. Just an FYI.

They’re equal at 192 but depending on mods or the coin flip.