Welcome to the first segment of From a Certain Point of View, where two writers have a debate on various Armada Topics.
In today’s segment, IratePooka and Gold Leader will debate whether or not Electronic Countermeasures (ECM) is essential in the current meta. First, let’s present the card:
ECM allows you to exhaust the card in order to ignore an opponent’s accuracy to spend a defense token. Most commonly it is used by ships to guarantee the use of their brace, but can be used on any token as needed.
OPENING ARGUMENTS:
DH: Well, first of all, let’s be honest, ECM is a staple card in the meta currently. With predators like the Onager and Ravager SSD on the loose, people often look for a safe space in this card. After all, what’s more comforting than knowing you get to halve the damage that your opponent is going to lob at you once per turn. But, does that mean you have to take ECM in your fleet? I would argue, no. ECM is a great card, but it’s not irreplaceable by any means. In fact, I would say it’s not even the best all around defensive retrofit, but more on that in a moment.
I think the thing that drives people to ECM these days are scary dice pools (6+ dice) with reliable methods of generating accuracies (H9/QTC). However, this combo while being very good, is not the pair you will find in every fleet. In fact, there are only 3 ships in the game with double Turbolasers: SSD, Cymoon, and MC80 Liberty. So the probability of you running into those ships is not negligible, but when you fight against Riekkan Squads, Sloane, or Mothma MSU, your use for ECM will go dramatically down.
I think in all honesty, the best all around defensive retro is Advanced Projectors for two reasons. One, it can be used multiple times per turn; two, it is harder to counter on ships with two redirects against things like Intel Officer. Of course it has issues against XI7, which are also common and likely the reason we don’t see AP as much, but AP is useful against every kind of opposing fleet, whereas ECM is really meant to stop fleets that rely heavily on big bursts of fire and accuracy to crush you in one blow. But what would a debate be without some contention? So over to Pooka for his Opening Arguments!
Thanks, Gold Leader! So basically, I’ll start by saying that I hate that I’m on this side of the debate. Not because I’m making the argument, but because I feel like I *have* to make the argument based on my own experience. The bottom line is that I think, currently, if a player is flying any large base ship that is integral to your fleet, ECM is mandatory. I hate that I have to say that, because I disagree on the best all-around defensive retrofit: I believe it’s EWS. EWS is only one point more expensive than AP, and it’s equal in cost to ECM. It is flexible in its use, and works consistently on the chosen arc, regardless of what the opponent does. It doesn’t exhaust, and it doesn’t require a defense token in order to be effective. Now, I’ll be the first to say that the best defensive retrofit for YOUR fleet is totally dependent on how you fly, what you fly, etc. But overall, I think the most useful DR card is EWS.
That said, EWS is what I was flying on my Kuat for a long time because it was ideal on my giant front arc in conjunction with 7th Fleet Star Destroyer. So, why did I switch to ECM when I’ve made clear my love for EWS? Well, friends, that comes down to a man from Chicago. Let’s call him...J. Otto. No, wait. That’s too obvious. Let’s call him Jack O. Anyway, Jack was the first opponent who ever flew a Ravager build against me, and it was AWFUL. Could I have flown better? Yeah, I’m sure I could have. Absolutely. Despite that, getting hit with the double accuracy was devastating, and there wasn’t anything I could do about it while Glads got shredded and my Kuat resorted to maybe getting use out of a second Redirect and Contain because EWS only removes one die per attack. Given a second shot at that fleet, I’m sure I’d have flown differently, and I’m just as sure that the results would have been much the same.
I agree wholeheartedly that I will not always be facing down a double Cymoon fleet, or Ravager, or a tricked out LMC80. And if one does not play competitive Armada, then fly what you want, right? The worst that happens is that you lose, and that’s really not a big deal. But if one does play competitively, and is counting on a big ship to execute a task (like I count on my Kuat, like most of us count on our large base ships), then I just don’t think ECM is optional. Which I am loathe to say, because I hate feeling as though there is a “right way” to build a ship (hence my staying away from VSDs until Harrow was released). But I do think that’s where the meta is right now. There’s the possibility that I’ll walk into a tournament and fly three rounds without ever seeing one of the aforementioned builds (and it happened! In the first tournament I played in after adding ECM!), but if I do run into said build, I hate to feel as though I’m just toast from the get go. It’s like facing off against squadrons, right? Sure, there are a lot of squadron-less fleets you might face! And there’s no guarantee you’ll see a Sloane fleet or a Rieekan Aceholes fleet! But you still need to plan for those archetypes if you’re flying competitively. If you don’t? Well, you do what you want, but you’re not allowed to complain afterward about how broken squadrons are if *you* are the one who did not prepare for them.
RESPONSE:
Well it might be true that ECM does provide a great service to Large Base ships that help you survive against the horrors of Ravager, that’s still just one build against another. Take all comers doesn’t necessarily mean no weaknesses, and certainly anyone who has played competitively know their list has a Kryptonite list they are afraid of.
That being said, it’s a safe bet to say you’re going to see Ravager at least once at most events. I think this is what mostly leads us to the place where we just start with the assumption that we’re going to be taking ECM in their DR slot because it’s a safe bet. But I’m still not convinced that it makes it essential. Perhaps it is us as players who are taking the path of least resistance as opposed to the road less traveled because ECM is guaranteed insurance for that crucial brace when we absolutely need it. But then the next game we fight Riekann aces and end up with a bunch of overpriced large ships that meant less investment in protecting ourselves from enemy squadrons.
Like most list building exercises, you have to pick things to focus on, and you can’t choose everything. I think the trap is the mentality that ECM is the only counter to Ravager, whereas squadrons have lots of counters, MSU has lots of counters. While ECM is certainly the most direct counter to Ravager, it can also be overcome by out positioning it, or bringing your own firepower to bear on it quickly, or even objectives that severely disadvantage it. Since Ravager is still so new to the meta, I think we as a community slap that ECM bandaid onto it rather than planning for it as we do for squadrons and MSU. Back to you Pooka!
Sure, I don’t disagree with the notion of seeing one specific build against another. I don’t entirely disagree that ECM is often chosen simply because “ECM IS THE BEST; IT IS KNOWN,” much less an argument and much more a motto with which I definitely disagree. As I mentioned, my favorite DR is still EWS. But there are a ton of fleets out there that use a large base, and if we’ve invested in a large base, we plan on using it. The problem is not actually the Ravager build, though, right? It simply exposed a weakness in the game that previously existed, but was not necessarily as clear as it is with the Ravager build terrorizing so many players. It’s sort of like the pandemic, right? The pandemic has created its own problems, but a lot of the problems associated with the pandemic are problems American infrastructure already had. Covid simply tore away the veil.
I’d argue that Ravager has essentially done the same thing: when 2 Accuracies are rolled in a large dice pool, that could very easily mean death for whatever was shot. 1 Accuracy coming in from a TRC90 will hurt, but it won’t one-shot anything. But 1 Accuracy coming in from each of 4 TRC90s could definitely kill. When I’m facing a Sloane list, the squadrons scare me. But the follow-up shot from the ISD-II is probably what kills me. Roll an Accuracy to lock down my Brace, and that’s the show after the squadrons have done their work. Possibly in a single activation. So even against squadron fleets (which often have at least one big hitter to follow up the squadron attacks), ECM can be extremely useful! Against MSU, sure, ECM is not worth the 7 points I sunk into it. But I still have a better chance of weathering that particular storm than I do of being unprepared for Ravager sinking my battleship in one go.
I feel like “how I counter Ravager” is also its own debate, before I get too verbose about that particular issue, hehe. So for the moment, Imma let that lie because I’ll just go down that rabbit hole for another 2 pages. My bottom line, I think, is that those big dice pools aren’t just scary, right? They can be absolutely crippling. When I build a fleet, I try to think about how to turn strengths into obscenities (effective ways to utilize ALL of Tarkin’s tokens, how to ensure that my best 3 squadrons are the ones that benefit from Yavaris, the best way to drop 11 TIEs on your face so that they can all fire a shot this turn). After that, I consider my weaknesses, and rather than trying to eliminate them (because there aren’t enough points to both turn strengths into obscenities and eliminate my weaknesses), I focus on simply leveling them off so I’m not one-shotted and have a chance to respond.
To that end, unfortunately, that’s where I feel ECM falls in the current meta: it’s the DR that is most likely to serve me best in a tournament setting wherein I’m playing anywhere from 3-5 rounds. The current meta dictates that odds are I will see Ravager, a Sloane fleet with an ISD-II, any number of Onagers, or one of the 4 (8, if you count the various chasses!) Rebel large ships at some point in that tourney. If I can mitigate a big shot so I can take my own, that might be the difference. Recently, Warmaster hit me in the face with 3 red dice, 2 blue, and 2 black. It would’ve been 4 red, but for my EWS. He landed 2 accuracies, 8 damage, and APTs. And I couldn’t do a damn thing about it. I had burned my Brace earlier because I wasn’t fielding ECMs, so I knew with his guaranteed 1 accuracy, I couldn’t Brace a big hit anyway. His dice did what they needed to, and my carrier burned. The rest was mop up for him, because I had no way to push my squadrons, and at least one of my ships needed 1 more turn of cover to get clear of the threat.
Now, as always, I’m sure I could’ve flown better. That’s always a given. But I do not believe I made any singularly big errors in this match. Warmaster had a nasty build, I did the best I could against it, and it wasn’t enough. EWS definitely did work. No question. But would ECM have been better? In this instance, I don’t know so, but the question remains. The question always remains, as long as this is our meta. Now, some changes are coming with CW and other presumed 1.5 changes in addition to XI7 and Leia. And we now know, courtesy of Steel Command (thanks, y’all!), there’s a squadron ace cap. I’m sure these aren’t the only changes. Maybe the new meta will see less need for ECM. And I agree that ECM is often chosen simply because “IT IS KNOWN.” But if I now feel as though I have to fly MSU because it’s the only way I think I survive Ravager (and I don’t feel this way, for the record, just trying to pick up the thread of the argument I so carelessly tossed aside wwaaaaaayyyy back there), then doesn’t that tell us there’s a problem with the meta? The fact that I’m looking specifically at builds that don’t need ECM because they don’t feature big ships tells me that ECM is, in fact, a necessity in the current meta if you want to fly with big ships (outside of the ships that can’t take a DR, such as the SSD, Starhawk, and LMC80, of course). Gold Leader?
CLOSING ARGUMENTS:
So for closing arguments, I think there’s certainly a distinction that is made between something being essential and something being good. Access to quality tacos is a good thing, but life can continue without them (learn how to cook good tacos is my suggestion). While my fleet can take ECM, and probably benefit from it during most matchups, I don’t think having it is a prerequisite for success.
There are certain non-negotiables that I think are essential to fleet building: objectives that fit how my fleet flies, an answer for squadrons, and a strategy for how I am going to handle MSU and Big Heavy fleets. While ECM can be a part of the strategy, I’m still not convinced that the fleet is a failure if it doesn’t make the cut. I guess that’s just where I fall on where ECM is now. Certainly it’s a card that punches above its weight, and as long as Ravager persists it will remain a hot topic in fleet building. In the meantime, take Intel Officer and laugh when they lose their brace anyways! Take us home Pooka.
This was just a friendly debate until you mentioned that life could continue without access to quality tacos. But now…
That horrendous untruth aside, I’ll say this: there’s a big difference between using my Brace and losing it to Intel Officer versus not being able to use it in the first place before my ship blows up. I think, at this moment in time and in our meta, there are a couple of very heavy hitters that necessitate the use of ECM in order to be successful. That may change, it may not. And if you think I’m wrong because “git gud, scrub,” I’m honestly not sure I’ve got a counterargument for that! But I think if we define the meta as what we’re seeing most commonly in competition and what we need to overcome to win competitions, then I think there’s a very, very select group of players at the very, very top who can fly large ships without ECMs and win. Otherwise, yes, I do think ECM on large ships is currently essential to do well in this meta of Ravager, Onagers (any number of them, apparently!), and Starhawks.
Guess we need to get better at the debate thing, since neither of us actually changed the other’s mind, eh, Gold Leader? Womp womp…
Well there you have it! We’ve both given our perspective on the issue, but now it is your turn to decide! Let us know your thoughts in the comments.
No comments:
Post a Comment