Executor is a beast? [MERGE]

"ZeTwitch;c-2287981" wrote:

"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.

According to .gg only 88's ships can match 192 (Executor's speed). R8 XB/RC cap out at 186/188. So the only way to get them to act first is to do what they say we shouldn't ever do: intentionally gimp a character for better performance.

"ZeTwitch;c-2287981" wrote:

"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.

Got it. I just realized my Piett is not maxed on his leader ability, which is why mine was slower than 192.

"StarSon;c-2287984" wrote:

"ZeTwitch;c-2287981" wrote:

"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.

According to .gg only 88's ships can match 192 (Executor's speed). R8 XB/RC cap out at 186/188. So the only way to get them to act first is to do what they say we shouldn't ever do: intentionally gimp a character for better performance.

I assumed he was mistaken and meant IG-2000 since he said he wasn’t sure.

But everything you said is correct. ?

"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.

This is flat out wrong.

IG88s ship will equal the Executor (192 speed) at relic 8 + zeta. It is impossible to get any other BH ship faster than Executor.

RC tops out at 188. XB tops out at 186.

Even with a tie at 192, it is a coin flip who goes first. There is no reliable strategy without taking mods off Piett.

"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.

R8 IG2k can get a coinflip against Piett, although it's also a ship that tends to get annihilated by other fleets that have fast ships (rebels, AT), (among some other issues).

"ZeTwitch;c-2287988" wrote:

"StarSon;c-2287984" wrote:

"ZeTwitch;c-2287981" wrote:

"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.

According to .gg only 88's ships can match 192 (Executor's speed). R8 XB/RC cap out at 186/188. So the only way to get them to act first is to do what they say we shouldn't ever do: intentionally gimp a character for better performance.

I assumed he was mistaken and meant IG-2000 since he said he wasn’t sure.

But everything you said is correct. ?

Yes, my bad.

"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.

Wrong, No BH ship outruns Exec, even with R8. IG-2000 has the same speed at R8, which turns the outcome of the start into a coin toss. You would need to remove a mod from Piett to fix that, which clearly is a terrible solution.

"Granolo;c-2287995" wrote:

"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.

Wrong, No BH ship outruns Exec, even with R8. IG-2000 has the same speed at R8, which turns the outcome of the start into a coin toss. You would need to remove a mod from Piett to fix that, which clearly is a terrible solution.

And this will only get you slower than 1 ship, one that isn’t even good as a starting ship.

You need multiple R8s and remove all mods from Piett to get the optimal turn order.

"slickdealer;c-2287997" wrote:

"Granolo;c-2287995" wrote:

"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.

Wrong, No BH ship outruns Exec, even with R8. IG-2000 has the same speed at R8, which turns the outcome of the start into a coin toss. You would need to remove a mod from Piett to fix that, which clearly is a terrible solution.

And this will only get you slower than 1 ship, one that isn’t even good as a starting ship.

You need multiple R8s and remove all mods from Piett to get the optimal turn order.

True.

And the fact that they didn't caught this in testing shows how lackluster the testing was. Having to start with a Basic on your capital because there's nothing else you can do with a maxed Exec, is a huge oversight.

"Granolo;c-2287998" wrote:

"slickdealer;c-2287997" wrote:

"Granolo;c-2287995" wrote:

"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.

Wrong, No BH ship outruns Exec, even with R8. IG-2000 has the same speed at R8, which turns the outcome of the start into a coin toss. You would need to remove a mod from Piett to fix that, which clearly is a terrible solution.

And this will only get you slower than 1 ship, one that isn’t even good as a starting ship.

You need multiple R8s and remove all mods from Piett to get the optimal turn order.

True.

And the fact that they didn't caught this in testing shows how lackluster the testing was. Having to start with a Basic on your capital because there's nothing else you can do with a maxed Exec, is a huge oversight.

Or it was caught in testing, but we need a new ship (one capable of exceeding 192 speed) that is unreleased.

Pretty garbage to release this thing in this state.