Executor is a beast? [MERGE]

"IronCross;c-2288793" wrote:
Well at this point I just want my crystals back for the waste that is a 7* Executor. I’d gladly revert back to 6*. It’s a shame they made something worse the more you upgrade it.

I think everyone feels the same. As a longtime worker in software development and IT, I'd say hang in there and wait for what they do but it's hard for me to say that when we don't know if this is even a priority for them at all at this point. One thing I would say is that they for certain have devs in there who care about the game and don't want things like this to happen. What I don't understand though is, from my experience, I'm always checking corner cases etc, running unit tests and doing my own testing (albeit sometimes limited) on my code. With this being a SW game how much better could it get to be paid to play a game set in the SW universe that you are writing code for to make sure it's performing?!?! It's hard to understand how they missed this one with the star disparity. It's not like this was an obscure scenario which people would have easily cut them some slack on.

I'd imagine they are inundated with refund requests right now. I just can't wrap my head around the silence when they could stop the majority of it.

"Kyno;c-2288804" wrote:

"HokieFiend;c-2288694" wrote:
I hope they realize people simply aren't going to wait in order to start initiating reparations on this. They'd do themselves a huge service by simply issuing a statement today with a bit more detail than "in the future".

Unfortunately they will not issue any statement with more information until that information is in a solid place.

They can't say "this is a top priority for us at the moment" or simply "we are actively working on it" when earnings are flying out the window? We are well past the "is there really a problem?" phase.

Maybe the silence does speak louder than words.

"HokieFiend;c-2288822" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288804" wrote:

"HokieFiend;c-2288694" wrote:
I hope they realize people simply aren't going to wait in order to start initiating reparations on this. They'd do themselves a huge service by simply issuing a statement today with a bit more detail than "in the future".

Unfortunately they will not issue any statement with more information until that information is in a solid place.

They can't say "this is a top priority for us at the moment" or simply "we are actively working on it" when earnings are flying out the window? We are well past the "is there really a problem?" phase.

Maybe the silence does speak louder than words.

They will not make any promises about the activities they may be taking, as that can lead to it's own set of issues. For instance if they said we are working on testing through the weekend, and they find that the changes were not enough, people would be upset if nothing comes of it on Monday.

They said they are looking into it, and that they are investigating possible changes. That is a firm as things usually are until there are changes they can announce.

‘It does not appear to be performing at the level we intended‘. Seems pretty clear, unless they think she’s too powerful.

My only request is if they do a buff immediately run the event again so those who didn't whale the first time around can.

"Legend91;c-2288580" wrote:

"Stryde;c-2288570" wrote:

"StarSon;c-2288404" wrote:

"IronCross;c-2288403" wrote:

"HokieFiend;c-2288368" wrote:
People aren't going to wait much longer on a more detailed statement with a clear plan on fixing the issues with this ship. People spent 25k crystals 7*'ing it and are using more crystals than before trying to beat lower starred Executors.

People realize it could take a few days to code and run back through testing. "In the future" isn't good enough. People have every right to want their money/crystals back at this point. Communicate exactly what you are doing and the timeframe involved and you'll stop most of that from happening.

Wish I would have known to not upgrade my Executor to 7*. This is just another terrible deployment of the next big thing. Can’t they get just 1 thing right for once without a huge mess…

Instead of not taking mine to 7* (which I didn't realize was going to make it better) I went ahead and removed mods from Piett to slow him down.

I'm a few days behind on the forums, and I do not have the Executor myself, but if your 4* opponents do the same with Piett's mods, are you still in a negative position for having more stars?

There's no reason for mod downgrading on non 7 star Executors as you'll easily have one of your BH ships be faster than Executor. It's a maxed out 7 star Executor and Piett where it's causing problems as the only ship that's able to tie with Executors 192 speed is the IG2000 with a R8 IG88 and then you want to downgrade Pietts mods to make the Executor 1 speed slower (191).

I can visualize this scenario and your example. Thanks for elaborating!

We have a 5* and a 6* Executor in our shard and they doing quite well. I finally was able to defeat the 6* with my Negotiator, but it was a close thing. I've been blasted out of the sky by the Death Star every other time. I don't think the Executor needs to be any more powerful. I am still working towards getting one. With respect to the 4*, 5*, 6* defeating the 7* Executor if the reason they are doing this is because they get to the Death Star blast first, then the answer to that is obvious - increase the cooldown for the 4*, 5*, and 6*. If it is some other reason, I'm sure there is something else that can easily be done.

If it is some other reason, I'm sure there is something else that can easily be done.

Executor needs a BH ship to go first (and score Breach) for its opening special to be effective. 7* Executor is faster than the BH ships. Lesser Execs are slower than the BH ships, so they can use an opening special a couple turns after the 7* Executor wastes its turn using an opening basic.

Play it right and the lesser Exec will nuke a ship out of the gate, but when the 7* Exec gets their turn, they have one less assist.... which can mean that it fails to one shot a ship in return, and at that point the lesser Exec is at an advantage for the rest of the fight.

"MasterSeedy;c-2288849" wrote:

If it is some other reason, I'm sure there is something else that can easily be done.

Executor needs a BH ship to go first (and score Breach) for its opening special to be effective. 7* Executor is faster than the BH ships. Lesser Execs are slower than the BH ships, so they can use an opening special a couple turns after the 7* Executor wastes its turn using an opening basic.

Play it right and the lesser Exec will nuke a ship out of the gate, but when the 7* Exec gets their turn, they have one less assist.... which can mean that it fails to one shot a ship in return, and at that point the lesser Exec is at an advantage for the rest of the fight.

So, 7* Executor needs to have a mechanism to add speed to the fastest support ship on the first turn so that it will go before the Executor.

Or a Tm swap. Or something.

They could also add an auto inflict breach on Execs first turn... then you wouldn't need a BH ship to go first and inflict it. We will see what they come up with, but you have the idea.