Executor is a beast? [MERGE]

Executor is terrible at the moment. It feels like another Beskar Mando esp at 7s. Total crappy kit against Rebels, miserable against Kru, all BH ships are slow and have no great kits with exception of RC and HT (which is hard countered by Rebel Ywing). Fully not tested and with false promises praised fleet. Should have told its easily beaten by most fleets...because thats the reality.

"TargetEadu;c-2289021" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288917" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2288916" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288910" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2288907" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288824" wrote:

"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.

Except that CG via CG_Doja_Fett_MINI etc. have made a habit of making this kind of "we're looking into it" type of post and then nothing happens and we also never hear from them again on the subject.

For instance the recent JMK plus Slow GR Tank situation: CG post saying they're looking into it...that was 2-months ago and they never said another word about it!

Well the players aren't going to sit around beyond the 28-day window for getting a refund from Google/Apple while CG stick their heads in the sand over this situation and hope for it to go away (or for yet another massive new muck up to come along and take the attention!)
CG have rapidly burned through any remaining crumbs of trust players had in them with regards to pre-release testing and commitments to vastly improved communications with players given that they've utterly failed on both counts more and more!

In this case they have said it is not hitting the mark, and they are "looking into it". When this has been the case can you site an example where they have not acted?

Well firstly the exact example I just gave with the JMK + slow GR Tank where they said "We are aware of an unintended interaction" and ended with "We will keep you updated" - never heard from them again!
Secondly the CAT AI vs Zombie/Brute situation where they said "We are aware of some potentially unintended interactions" and then said they were "likely to take action in the future to address" - never heard from them again!

Correct.

But we can both note that they have not had an instance where they have said X is not hitting the mark and we are looking into it, and that not lead to an action.

Unintended interactions will happen, and if they result in something more, like not hitting an expected mark, they would take further action, and we would hear about it.

Just adding a thought here - I think most of the contention is that it’s exceedingly rare for CG to post that they’re “looking into” something, and then later say anything along the lines of “we determined that we don’t want to change anything now for X reason” or “we’ll continue to look at specific interactions but for now we don’t see a need for a change”. It’s either followed by a mechanical change or by no followup at all.

Having more closure on the topics would help. I can see why such posts may be… unpopular, but it’s better than being left in the dark.

Again, they didnt just say they were looking into it.

We are not in the dark, they said this is not hitting the mark.

They do not/have not said, something was not hitting the expectations and they were looking into it, and then did nothing.

Disclaimer, there are no Executor in my shard. Our first TW opponent set none on defense.

The speed issue with 7* seems like an obvious oversight that I hope is addressed. Depending on how long they take, I also hope they compensate those that rushed for 7* just to have a worse ship than those with 5/6*.

Regarding non-mirror counters. My current exposure is only 1 GAC opponent. I was dumb enough to put rebels on D, so I can't speak to that counter. But Mal is by no means a cakewalk. I was streaming with guild mates, and they streamed some arena Mal vs Ex for me. They lost. I lost. I killed one ship. Brought in Rsddus, killed one more. Brought in Finalizer, got lucky that Breached ship was killed first, so I could dispel HT and clean up.

Taking my admittedly limited exposure, I'd say the ship is just fine vs Mal, Raddus, and Finalizer.

As for the reports about rebels being the better counter, does it not require well geared/relic'd Bistan and SRP? Not to mention Han, Chewie, and Biggs? I'll reserve judgment on that, but if relic'd rebels can soft counter Ex, I'd say that's fair. Feel free to disagree. I just don't think it's healthy to have a new meta without any soft counters.

If my initial observations turn out to be wrong, I'll gladly recant. But so far, to me, it seems like there's a lot of overreacting going on (save the 7* speed issue, which is outrageous).

"Help_me;c-2289121" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2289108" wrote:

"TargetEadu;c-2289021" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288917" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2288916" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288910" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2288907" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288824" wrote:

"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.

Except that CG via CG_Doja_Fett_MINI etc. have made a habit of making this kind of "we're looking into it" type of post and then nothing happens and we also never hear from them again on the subject.

For instance the recent JMK plus Slow GR Tank situation: CG post saying they're looking into it...that was 2-months ago and they never said another word about it!

Well the players aren't going to sit around beyond the 28-day window for getting a refund from Google/Apple while CG stick their heads in the sand over this situation and hope for it to go away (or for yet another massive new muck up to come along and take the attention!)
CG have rapidly burned through any remaining crumbs of trust players had in them with regards to pre-release testing and commitments to vastly improved communications with players given that they've utterly failed on both counts more and more!

In this case they have said it is not hitting the mark, and they are "looking into it". When this has been the case can you site an example where they have not acted?

Well firstly the exact example I just gave with the JMK + slow GR Tank where they said "We are aware of an unintended interaction" and ended with "We will keep you updated" - never heard from them again!
Secondly the CAT AI vs Zombie/Brute situation where they said "We are aware of some potentially unintended interactions" and then said they were "likely to take action in the future to address" - never heard from them again!

Correct.

But we can both note that they have not had an instance where they have said X is not hitting the mark and we are looking into it, and that not lead to an action.

Unintended interactions will happen, and if they result in something more, like not hitting an expected mark, they would take further action, and we would hear about it.

Just adding a thought here - I think most of the contention is that it’s exceedingly rare for CG to post that they’re “looking into” something, and then later say anything along the lines of “we determined that we don’t want to change anything now for X reason” or “we’ll continue to look at specific interactions but for now we don’t see a need for a change”. It’s either followed by a mechanical change or by no followup at all.

Having more closure on the topics would help. I can see why such posts may be… unpopular, but it’s better than being left in the dark.

Again, they didnt just say they were looking into it.

We are not in the dark, they said this is not hitting the mark.

They do not/have not said, something was not hitting the expectations and they were looking into it, and then did nothing.

Point blank. THIS SHIP SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RELEASED. There is no argument to that. It's blatantly bad. The arguments of investment are laughable because all other fleets were viable and top of meta at lower levels and everyone in the shard improved together over time. Not day 1 have these requirements or face an unbeatable (wink) fleet.

The requirements are nearly on par relic wise with most other “meta” ships, pilot preference not withstanding. I agree executor is a bit higher, but it’s not night and day by any stretch. The fact that other metas came in at lower gear also doesn’t make much sense as gear levels were lower overall at that point.

Executor is currently top of the meta. Is it unbeatable? Absolutely not. But it has a higher defense probability then anything else, and autos everything. Thankfully they didn’t make it an “IWIN” ship, though it appears we’re headed that direction

"Kelthuzil;c-2289141" wrote:

"Help_me;c-2289121" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2289108" wrote:

"TargetEadu;c-2289021" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288917" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2288916" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288910" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2288907" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288824" wrote:

"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.

Except that CG via CG_Doja_Fett_MINI etc. have made a habit of making this kind of "we're looking into it" type of post and then nothing happens and we also never hear from them again on the subject.

For instance the recent JMK plus Slow GR Tank situation: CG post saying they're looking into it...that was 2-months ago and they never said another word about it!

Well the players aren't going to sit around beyond the 28-day window for getting a refund from Google/Apple while CG stick their heads in the sand over this situation and hope for it to go away (or for yet another massive new muck up to come along and take the attention!)
CG have rapidly burned through any remaining crumbs of trust players had in them with regards to pre-release testing and commitments to vastly improved communications with players given that they've utterly failed on both counts more and more!

In this case they have said it is not hitting the mark, and they are "looking into it". When this has been the case can you site an example where they have not acted?

Well firstly the exact example I just gave with the JMK + slow GR Tank where they said "We are aware of an unintended interaction" and ended with "We will keep you updated" - never heard from them again!
Secondly the CAT AI vs Zombie/Brute situation where they said "We are aware of some potentially unintended interactions" and then said they were "likely to take action in the future to address" - never heard from them again!

Correct.

But we can both note that they have not had an instance where they have said X is not hitting the mark and we are looking into it, and that not lead to an action.

Unintended interactions will happen, and if they result in something more, like not hitting an expected mark, they would take further action, and we would hear about it.

Just adding a thought here - I think most of the contention is that it’s exceedingly rare for CG to post that they’re “looking into” something, and then later say anything along the lines of “we determined that we don’t want to change anything now for X reason” or “we’ll continue to look at specific interactions but for now we don’t see a need for a change”. It’s either followed by a mechanical change or by no followup at all.

Having more closure on the topics would help. I can see why such posts may be… unpopular, but it’s better than being left in the dark.

Again, they didnt just say they were looking into it.

We are not in the dark, they said this is not hitting the mark.

They do not/have not said, something was not hitting the expectations and they were looking into it, and then did nothing.

Point blank. THIS SHIP SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RELEASED. There is no argument to that. It's blatantly bad. The arguments of investment are laughable because all other fleets were viable and top of meta at lower levels and everyone in the shard improved together over time. Not day 1 have these requirements or face an unbeatable (wink) fleet.

The requirements are nearly on par relic wise with most other “meta” ships, pilot preference not withstanding. I agree executor is a bit higher, but it’s not night and day by any stretch. The fact that other metas came in at lower gear also doesn’t make much sense as gear levels were lower overall at that point.

Executor is currently top of the meta. Is it unbeatable? Absolutely not. But it has a higher defense probability then anything else, and autos everything. Thankfully they didn’t make it an “IWIN” ship, though it appears we’re headed that direction

There are no "requirements" for the Nego and Male fleets and most other fleets/ships such as Finalizer or the HMF just asked for star levels.
A Nego fleet is absolutely functioning on a non-maxed level. For example you can do absolutely fine with a relic 3 Nego lineup - r3 GK with r3 Ani, r3 Ahsoka, Y-wing startup and g11 Plo, g12 Fives/Rex RIs vs Males. Or you can be fine with a low investment Male lineup - r3 GG with g12 SF, Hyena and Vulture startup and g12 Spy, g12-g13 HT RIs against Negotiators.
Executor is the first ship to ask for specific gear/relic requirements and they are very high, comparable to GLs.

"Legend91;c-2289147" wrote:

"Kelthuzil;c-2289141" wrote:

"Help_me;c-2289121" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2289108" wrote:

"TargetEadu;c-2289021" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288917" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2288916" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288910" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2288907" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288824" wrote:

"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.

Except that CG via CG_Doja_Fett_MINI etc. have made a habit of making this kind of "we're looking into it" type of post and then nothing happens and we also never hear from them again on the subject.

For instance the recent JMK plus Slow GR Tank situation: CG post saying they're looking into it...that was 2-months ago and they never said another word about it!

Well the players aren't going to sit around beyond the 28-day window for getting a refund from Google/Apple while CG stick their heads in the sand over this situation and hope for it to go away (or for yet another massive new muck up to come along and take the attention!)
CG have rapidly burned through any remaining crumbs of trust players had in them with regards to pre-release testing and commitments to vastly improved communications with players given that they've utterly failed on both counts more and more!

In this case they have said it is not hitting the mark, and they are "looking into it". When this has been the case can you site an example where they have not acted?

Well firstly the exact example I just gave with the JMK + slow GR Tank where they said "We are aware of an unintended interaction" and ended with "We will keep you updated" - never heard from them again!
Secondly the CAT AI vs Zombie/Brute situation where they said "We are aware of some potentially unintended interactions" and then said they were "likely to take action in the future to address" - never heard from them again!

Correct.

But we can both note that they have not had an instance where they have said X is not hitting the mark and we are looking into it, and that not lead to an action.

Unintended interactions will happen, and if they result in something more, like not hitting an expected mark, they would take further action, and we would hear about it.

Just adding a thought here - I think most of the contention is that it’s exceedingly rare for CG to post that they’re “looking into” something, and then later say anything along the lines of “we determined that we don’t want to change anything now for X reason” or “we’ll continue to look at specific interactions but for now we don’t see a need for a change”. It’s either followed by a mechanical change or by no followup at all.

Having more closure on the topics would help. I can see why such posts may be… unpopular, but it’s better than being left in the dark.

Again, they didnt just say they were looking into it.

We are not in the dark, they said this is not hitting the mark.

They do not/have not said, something was not hitting the expectations and they were looking into it, and then did nothing.

Point blank. THIS SHIP SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RELEASED. There is no argument to that. It's blatantly bad. The arguments of investment are laughable because all other fleets were viable and top of meta at lower levels and everyone in the shard improved together over time. Not day 1 have these requirements or face an unbeatable (wink) fleet.

The requirements are nearly on par relic wise with most other “meta” ships, pilot preference not withstanding. I agree executor is a bit higher, but it’s not night and day by any stretch. The fact that other metas came in at lower gear also doesn’t make much sense as gear levels were lower overall at that point.

Executor is currently top of the meta. Is it unbeatable? Absolutely not. But it has a higher defense probability then anything else, and autos everything. Thankfully they didn’t make it an “IWIN” ship, though it appears we’re headed that direction

There are no "requirements" for the Nego and Male fleets and most other fleets/ships such as Finalizer or the HMF just asked for star levels.
A Nego fleet is absolutely functioning on a non-maxed level. For example you can do absolutely fine with a relic 3 Nego lineup - r3 GK with r3 Ani, r3 Ahsoka, Y-wing startup and g11 Plo, g12 Fives/Rex RIs vs Males. Or you can be fine with a low investment Male lineup - r3 GG with g12 SF, Hyena and Vulture startup and g12 Spy, g12-g13 HT RIs against Negotiators.
Executor is the first ship to ask for specific gear/relic requirements and they are very high, comparable to GLs.

That’s an accurate statement for unlock purposes, completely inaccurate for gameplay though. Your r3 negotiator lineup is dead before it moves against r8 gk. Mal I’ve said before can be run at lower gear simply because of its mechanics.

My point is gameplay, not unlock. Heck yeah executor unlock is way higher, but gear required to be effective (which at the end of the day is the point) is within striking distance.

"Kyno;c-2289108" wrote:

"TargetEadu;c-2289021" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288917" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2288916" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288910" wrote:

"Beeblebrox;c-2288907" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2288824" wrote:

"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.

Except that CG via CG_Doja_Fett_MINI etc. have made a habit of making this kind of "we're looking into it" type of post and then nothing happens and we also never hear from them again on the subject.

For instance the recent JMK plus Slow GR Tank situation: CG post saying they're looking into it...that was 2-months ago and they never said another word about it!

Well the players aren't going to sit around beyond the 28-day window for getting a refund from Google/Apple while CG stick their heads in the sand over this situation and hope for it to go away (or for yet another massive new muck up to come along and take the attention!)
CG have rapidly burned through any remaining crumbs of trust players had in them with regards to pre-release testing and commitments to vastly improved communications with players given that they've utterly failed on both counts more and more!

In this case they have said it is not hitting the mark, and they are "looking into it". When this has been the case can you site an example where they have not acted?

Well firstly the exact example I just gave with the JMK + slow GR Tank where they said "We are aware of an unintended interaction" and ended with "We will keep you updated" - never heard from them again!
Secondly the CAT AI vs Zombie/Brute situation where they said "We are aware of some potentially unintended interactions" and then said they were "likely to take action in the future to address" - never heard from them again!

Correct.

But we can both note that they have not had an instance where they have said X is not hitting the mark and we are looking into it, and that not lead to an action.

Unintended interactions will happen, and if they result in something more, like not hitting an expected mark, they would take further action, and we would hear about it.

Just adding a thought here - I think most of the contention is that it’s exceedingly rare for CG to post that they’re “looking into” something, and then later say anything along the lines of “we determined that we don’t want to change anything now for X reason” or “we’ll continue to look at specific interactions but for now we don’t see a need for a change”. It’s either followed by a mechanical change or by no followup at all.

Having more closure on the topics would help. I can see why such posts may be… unpopular, but it’s better than being left in the dark.

Again, they didnt just say they were looking into it.

We are not in the dark, they said this is not hitting the mark.

They do not/have not said, something was not hitting the expectations and they were looking into it, and then did nothing.

In this case they seem to have already decided something needs to change, they’re just figuring out what. The problem is this is the first time we’ve ever had an announcement of that step, and without an announcement of “we’re looking into it”.

If I’m reading this right, the order of operations is 1) “CG starts looking into an issue” —> 2) “CG determines if an issue needs changing” —> 3) “CG decides on a change (if needed)”.

Usually we only get announcements for “CG looking into an issue”, then nothing on what they determine until a change is ready, when we get an announcement on “CG’s decision on a change”.

But no step 2 announcement saying “we will make a change for this issue”, and more importantly no announcement saying there WON’T be a change. In that case the issue is just left aside, and the players are mostly in the dark about whether a change is coming late or whether CG determined it to be WAI.


In this case, Doja Fett said the Executor “does not appear to be performing at the level we intended. As such, we will continue monitoring the ship and are investigating potential changes in the future.” I think we’re trying to figure out if that’s step 1 or 2. They didn’t say definitively that there will be changes, but they did comment on how it appears to be less powerful than intended.

Also, for CG to outright say that something isn’t hitting the mark is… very rare, especially when it’s about buffing a character instead of nerfing one. The only instances I could think of / find were when Malak was buffed to not get countered by Palpatine (and in that case, CG explicitly said there would be changes coming in the first post) and when SLKR was buffed to not get countered by GAS + Echo. That case is probably the most similar, as it was one post addressing the issue and then a second (game update) buffing SLKR’s kit.

Not sure how its was any different before executor, it was all mirror match before either Nego v Nego or Malevolence v Malevolence with a sprinkle of Nego v Malevolence. Ship been mirror for 3 yrs since they made starting ship lineup 3 instead 5, tbh it was harder when it was 5 starting ship lineup because then you could actually hold if your pilots were geared. CG out to make money so they hype a ship and its pretty underperforming on defense

Ok I try not to say anything but it’s comments like this that show you know nothing about true counters. In my fleet which is day one players with high everything. You don’t just mirror match stuff. Sure you go against GK vs GK but it depends on the lineup. Mostly it’s Mal vs GK or GK vs Mal because of the fleet lineup. Mal Vs Mal is aggravating and so is GK it just depends like I said who is there. I never mirror match in my fleet. It’s either I pic Mal vs GK or GK vs Mal. Now it’s Mal vs Exec or Hux vs Exec. If your able to mirror match then your fleet doesn’t know how to mod and I don’t care who disagrees with me because I auto GK with my Mal or auto Mal with my GK. If you want to argue I got the easy counters for ya. Make a better argument man and speak on things which is actually true. There is no sprinkle of anything there

"AngelVazzana;c-2289288" wrote:


Ok I try not to say anything but it’s comments like this that show you know nothing about true counters. In my fleet which is day one players with high everything. You don’t just mirror match stuff. Sure you go against GK vs GK but it depends on the lineup. Mostly it’s Mal vs GK or GK vs Mal because of the fleet lineup. Mal Vs Mal is aggravating and so is GK it just depends like I said who is there. I never mirror match in my fleet. It’s either I pic Mal vs GK or GK vs Mal. Now it’s Mal vs Exec or Hux vs Exec. If your able to mirror match then your fleet doesn’t know how to mod and I don’t care who disagrees with me because I auto GK with my Mal or auto Mal with my GK. If you want to argue I got the easy counters for ya. Make a better argument man and speak on things which is actually true. There is no sprinkle of anything there

Genuinely interested in mal line up that auto neg. Care to share your line up and gear needed against which neg line up ?

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2289139" wrote:
Disclaimer, there are no Executor in my shard. Our first TW opponent set none on defense.

The speed issue with 7* seems like an obvious oversight that I hope is addressed. Depending on how long they take, I also hope they compensate those that rushed for 7* just to have a worse ship than those with 5/6*.

Regarding non-mirror counters. My current exposure is only 1 GAC opponent. I was dumb enough to put rebels on D, so I can't speak to that counter. But Mal is by no means a cakewalk. I was streaming with guild mates, and they streamed some arena Mal vs Ex for me. They lost. I lost. I killed one ship. Brought in Rsddus, killed one more. Brought in Finalizer, got lucky that Breached ship was killed first, so I could dispel HT and clean up.

Taking my admittedly limited exposure, I'd say the ship is just fine vs Mal, Raddus, and Finalizer.

As for the reports about rebels being the better counter, does it not require well geared/relic'd Bistan and SRP? Not to mention Han, Chewie, and Biggs? I'll reserve judgment on that, but if relic'd rebels can soft counter Ex, I'd say that's fair. Feel free to disagree. I just don't think it's healthy to have a new meta without any soft counters.

If my initial observations turn out to be wrong, I'll gladly recant. But so far, to me, it seems like there's a lot of overreacting going on (save the 7* speed issue, which is outrageous).

The speed issue is obviously the main problem with the ship. Ironically, somehow I'm even kind of "glad" that the lack of conquest and therefore, relic 8 materials, excluded me from being able to play the Executor event the first time it came. I'm still sitting on my stockpile of g13 mats and won't gear up anything, as long as it's not confirmed what's going to happen.
Imho it would be perfectly fine if Malevolence and Negotiator would remain soft counters to the Executor, as they have been the previous meta and it took a lot of people long enough to get them, they are also limited to being in a relatively strong guild. If rebels need extreme relics, I could live with that, too. But, when B fleets such as Finalizer or Raddus get through, that is a problem, because those fleets are cheap side farms.