Ember Won't Be Viable Until Some Changes Are Made

[Terrornaut]

9 hours ago, RealPandemonium said:

The point of a game is to have fun.  I'm not having fun going into, say, an interception, and pressing 4 every 10 seconds until extraction.  If you want to do this, you can bring Rhino and do it.  Even bring a macro so you can watch Netflix, or something? 

In Warframe, an already easy game, "objectively better" usually boils down to "shuts gameplay off," "effectively immortal," "infinite one-shots," etc.  It says something that enemies need to be double the level of what Damage 2.0 was calibrated for, in order for players to even feel like they're being challenged.  Ember is an example of a design that has some cheese but makes the player work for the win at higher levels, vs things like Rhino/Loki/etc that trivialize the game by design, or Mesa with overtuned damage potential, etc.  

Idk what you mean by Harrow being skill-based?  Headshot gimmicks or something?  Seems like a non sequitur.  

I don't have problems using Ember in Sorties.  I'm not that good at shooters; if I can do it, it shouldn't be an unreasonable standard for others to achieve.  IMO 90% of peoples' problems with Ember start with opinions they hear from others, that she's only good for afk trash clearing on sub-level 30, or that she does no damage, or other things based on hearsay and not on game knowledge.  Then they take a half-modded Ember with a duration or low range build or minimum efficiency (etc,) build to a Sortie, eat dirt, and then come to this forum.

Can pretty much use RealPanda as Ember rep, for me anyway, in this thread, and often enough.
I don't run +efficiency but we basically have the same experiences spoken of on this forum anyway.

7 hours ago, Maka.Bones said:

 Also, people praise accelerant, but i'll repeat that the CC on accelerant really doesn't last very long. 

If you have to rely on the CC of accelerant to take care of everything, you are building her subpar - your weapons aren't focused to take advantage of what she does.

4 hours ago, Maka.Bones said:

Firequake still costs less energy, last longer, and it's re-applied without requiring me to stop my movement/shooting. :) 

Flow is there for WoF/Firequake. Especially needed with the increased cost. The damage from accelerant is insignificant, since my weapons already oneshot enemies (two shots in sorties. plus adding heat damage, would only hurt my corrosive/viral procs; nty, I won't be touching heat damage for weps. It only looks good on paper)

Firequake is *Much* better than some mediocre fire damage, which your weps don't need to begin with. And better than spamming 2, every 4 seconds (make a macro, like you said... except I would prefer to spam 4, every 10 sec. Over spamming 2, every 4 sec).  It costs less energy, for time spent. It also doesn't halt your movement, so you're able to move freely and focus on gunplay--everytime you cast accelerant, ember stops moving/aiming/anything she's doing, for accelerant's 1s animation.  So that's a halt which would repeat every. four. seconds. 

In fact, I perform better by purely/only focusing on gunplay, than using accelerant at all. 

In sorties, I perform better without using any of Ember abilities--With the exception of WoF, which isn't needed.  If I would prefer to not use her abilities at all--over pure gunplay--That by itself should tell you how bad ember's kit currently is. Seeing no gameplay contribution from a warframe's kit, essentially means that the warframe is useless for that content. I only like her because the idea behind her is cool AF, and her abilities look cool. 

Holy whoa man you're going way off the deep end and I have no idea where you went.
Mediocre fire damage?
Building to her advantages and buffs is subpar?
Its like you've unlearned or somehow unseen everything people have said about dealing damage with her on these forums in the last few weeks you've been in.

3 hours ago, Maka.Bones said:

So does my tigris, corinth, vectis, lex, euphona, melee weapons.... dude the list goes on and on.

In order to actually make the damage buff useful, you'd need to use sub-par builds/weapons. Or to make your build worse, with the sole purpose of making ember's buff work. It's redundant. 

Edit: and dude.... he's using a mara detron. The weapon by itself can do that just fine. It doesn't need ember's buffs. 

I have a doc with math and numbers written out, but basically...if you have weps, one with corrosive, and one with heat, here's what happens:
6x accelerant modifier and 1.2x flash accelerant (7.2x heat damage basically).
100 damage, corrosive, vs heavy gunner.
100 becomes 175 damage because of 75% modifier.
100 heat vs heavy gunner stays 100 heat.
7.2x accelerant turns that heat to 720 heat damage.  The numbers don't catch up over time, both scale down from armor.
When you throw corrosive procs in there, yes either will do more damage. However, heat will quickly catch up and surpass, adding much more damage, especially if armor gets stripped, then all of that damage gets +50% total of its current amount, 1050ish heat, vs a shot that did 175 corrosive.  This works out in play, not on paper.

Honestly if you don't have an entire crowd dead by the time accelerant cc is done, your weapons are subpar and it probably isn't just the build, its how you're using them and the weapon types specifically.  If you aren't taking effective aoe weapons to make the most out of the massive accelerant damage multiplier, or using melee (and if someone gives you invis, and you are also running FQ for an extra 4x melee damage....ouch???).

Point is, you're underutilizing Ember and overall gameplay if you're having Sortie probs. You don't need to be a wf skillshot god or have arcanes or anything, you have the mods for Ember. She has probs, but damage is not really one of them.  Survivability sure, but with energy management or allies, that's taken care of.

[Terrornaut]

@Maka.Bones When you have significant time to kill.

The first 8 min is dedicated to the changes, the rest is general Ember stuff.  I don't normally do editing these days and don't have field footage but this is what I use and how I work, and this is also post atomos changes so now Atomos can be used at high levels again...though...Amprex is just flat better after the buff and then amp+ato nerfs.
 

 

[Maka.Bones]

6 hours ago, (PS4)ArtPrince17 said:

I'm not saying it needs an Ember buff, but it sure does benefit from it, especially since you want to take enemies out quickly in higher level content. This is good for it.

Not really; no weapon benefits from heat damage unless they're infested, or you're going for radiation. 

Strong weapons don't need extra 50% damage in higher lvl content, because they can already do the job on their own.... unless you're still relatively new, and need more mods. In which case, my point stands: it doesn't benefit endgame play. It helps new, incoming/progressing players (which isn't a bad thing on its own, but it still leaves ember ineffective in higher lvl content) 

[Maka.Bones]

2 hours ago, Terrornaut said:

I have a doc with math and numbers written out, but basically...if you have weps, one with corrosive, and one with heat, here's what happens:
6x accelerant modifier and 1.2x flash accelerant (7.2x heat damage basically).
100 damage, corrosive, vs heavy gunner.
100 becomes 175 damage because of 75% modifier.
100 heat vs heavy gunner stays 100 heat.
7.2x accelerant turns that heat to 720 heat damage.  The numbers don't catch up over time, both scale down from armor.
When you throw corrosive procs in there, yes either will do more damage. However, heat will quickly catch up and surpass, adding much more damage, especially if armor gets stripped, then all of that damage gets +50% total of its current amount, 1050ish heat, vs a shot that did 175 corrosive.  This works out in play, not on paper.

Honestly if you don't have an entire crowd dead by the time accelerant cc is done, your weapons are subpar and it probably isn't just the build, its how you're using them and the weapon types specifically.  If you aren't taking effective aoe weapons to make the most out of the massive accelerant damage multiplier, or using melee (and if someone gives you invis, and you are also running FQ for an extra 4x melee damage....ouch???).

Point is, you're underutilizing Ember and overall gameplay if you're having Sortie probs. You don't need to be a wf skillshot god or have arcanes or anything, you have the mods for Ember. She has probs, but damage is not really one of them.  Survivability sure, but with energy management or allies, that's taken care of.

Nah, my point is that by the time heat damage DOES become relevant (according to your maths) the enemy is *usually* already dead. Unless i'm using ember to hunt for prodman, and i need to strip the armor off the raptors, to then be able to kill them. In which case yes, I WOULD need to constantly spam accelerant to keep my arse alive. Otherwise the enemies would *very literally* oneshot me. Except that ember's accelerant doesn't affect raptors, so that's not even a viable tactic. GG tho

Point is, that i'm not going to give my weapons a sub-par mod/build, just so that I can make use of ember's sub-par damage buffs :)

 

If I was still lvling up weapons, or progressing through the star chart? yes, sure. But the reason I said *spam accelerant* is because if I wanted to make use of armor-stripping + heat damage against higher lvl enemies, I would need to spam *a stun* to keep myself alive.... If you want to understand what I mean, try doing a prodman run sometime. 

[Terrornaut]

32 minutes ago, Maka.Bones said:

Nah, my point is that by the time heat damage DOES become relevant (according to your maths) the enemy is *usually* already dead. Unless i'm using ember to hunt for prodman, and i need to strip the armor off the raptors, to then be able to kill them. In which case yes, I WOULD need to constantly spam accelerant to keep my arse alive. Otherwise the enemies would *very literally* oneshot me. Except that ember's accelerant doesn't affect raptors, so that's not even a viable tactic. GG tho

Point is, that i'm not going to give my weapons a sub-par mod/build, just so that I can make use of ember's sub-par damage buffs :)

 

If I was still lvling up weapons, or progressing through the star chart? yes, sure. But the reason I said *spam accelerant* is because if I wanted to make use of armor-stripping + heat damage against higher lvl enemies, I would need to spam *a stun* to keep myself alive.... If you want to understand what I mean, try doing a prodman run sometime. 

Corrosive+Heat will outdo corrosive viral once it finally starts to matter, because of the initial damage, the dot, damage bonuses because viral proc only matters once, and heat damage gets boosted plenty more once corrosive procs do their work.  Viral isn't going to shave a ton of ttk off units that are heavily armored, and if they aren't heavily armored, heat will decimate them anyway (though really, prime crowds with viral or cororsive procs and then finish them with heat...)

Sub par mods or builds? You don't get it. Test it out, do math, time things or track ammo consumption.  Also, those guaranteed heat procs will keep her a lot safer when you don't manage to one shot everything.

Why you and others are so adverse to accelerant and large damage output, I'll never know.  You can literally stick a single heat mod on a tigris p, put some heat on a zarr or ogris or something, and with accelerant, massively boost that weapon's overall damage.  It is such a braindead simple concept I don't get what people's furious resistance is to it.
It works.
Things die fast.
People want to spam abilities but then they get to Ember and no no no, I don't like using skills, I shouldn't have to use things.

What is happening?

[Hypernaut1]

27 minutes ago, Terrornaut said:

Corrosive+Heat will outdo corrosive viral once it finally starts to matter, because of the initial damage, the dot, damage bonuses because viral proc only matters once, and heat damage gets boosted plenty more once corrosive procs do their work.  Viral isn't going to shave a ton of ttk off units that are heavily armored, and if they aren't heavily armored, heat will decimate them anyway (though really, prime crowds with viral or cororsive procs and then finish them with heat...)

Sub par mods or builds? You don't get it. Test it out, do math, time things or track ammo consumption.  Also, those guaranteed heat procs will keep her a lot safer when you don't manage to one shot everything.

Why you and others are so adverse to accelerant and large damage output, I'll never know.  You can literally stick a single heat mod on a tigris p, put some heat on a zarr or ogris or something, and with accelerant, massively boost that weapon's overall damage.  It is such a braindead simple concept I don't get what people's furious resistance is to it.
It works.
Things die fast.
People want to spam abilities but then they get to Ember and no no no, I don't like using skills, I shouldn't have to use things.

What is happening?

What's happening is that people had an easy mode, near AFK frame taken away from them and panic is spreading. 

If you think Ember was awesome before, she's practically the same now. Yes, WoF was "nerfed", but no... It didn't completely ruin the frame at all. 

Edited March 12, 2018 by Hypernaut1

[(PSN)thefallenloser]

2 hours ago, Maka.Bones said:

Not really; no weapon benefits from heat damage unless they're infested, or you're going for radiation. 

Strong weapons don't need extra 50% damage in higher lvl content, because they can already do the job on their own.... unless you're still relatively new, and need more mods. In which case, my point stands: it doesn't benefit endgame play. It helps new, incoming/progressing players (which isn't a bad thing on its own, but it still leaves ember ineffective in higher lvl content) 

Literally every single weapon would benefit from an added 50% more of the base damage of your weapon shot as heat. What are on about?
And saying weapons don't need extra damage if "they're good enough" is like saying "i'm going to leave this mod slot empty, because this build is good enough". There is always room to improve.

[TypeSaber]

1 hour ago, Hypernaut1 said:

What's happening is that people had an easy mode, near AFK frame taken away from them and panic is spreading. 

If you think Ember was awesome before, she's practically the same now. Yes, WoF was "nerfed", but no... It didn't completely ruin the frame at all. 

No offense but you clearly do not play Ember because.

1. AFK Ember still exists. You just replace your power mods with range mods. Thats it. Early missions are still so quick that you finish them before you run out of energy so the increased cost isn't felt at all, and for endless you just use a Energy Disk.

and

2. She was only an Easy Mode frame if you never took her above 30. Above 30, especially in late game sorties she was a frame all about using fire-quake and target prioritization to stay on top of CC'd enemies before they could IKO'd her. The nerf increased Embers energy costs which when you account for the need to use accelerant spam for additional CC makes keeping WoF up very difficult, and the range drop hurts so much more because Ember has no answer to enemies who are shooting at her outside of CC'ing them. Now 42 meters of range, That's enough to reasonably CC most threats. 21 however, is just not enough. Now you could recast it to refresh but now your getting locked into the animation every 6 seconds, creating brief windows without CC and further increasing her energy requirements.

So how exactly is she the same? Because to us Ember mains she was a barely functional frame outside of 30 missions and now she only has one playable build for lategame and its not really fun to play.

Edited March 12, 2018 by TypeSaber

[Hypernaut1]

58 minutes ago, TypeSaber said:

No offense but you clearly do not play Ember because.

1. AFK Ember still exists. You just replace your power mods with range mods. Thats it. Early missions are still so quick that you finish them before you run out of energy so the increased cost isn't felt at all, and for endless you just use a Energy Disk.

and

2. She was only an Easy Mode frame if you never took her above 30. Above 30, especially in late game sorties she was a frame all about using fire-quake and target prioritization to stay on top of CC'd enemies before they could IKO'd her. The nerf increased Embers energy costs which when you account for the need to use accelerant spam for additional CC makes keeping WoF up very difficult, and the range drop hurts so much more because Ember has no answer to enemies who are shooting at her outside of CC'ing them. Now 42 meters of range, That's enough to reasonably CC most threats. 21 however, is just not enough. Now you could recast it to refresh but now your getting locked into the animation every 6 seconds, creating brief windows without CC and further increasing her energy requirements.

So how exactly is she the same? Because to us Ember mains she was a barely functional frame outside of 30 missions and now she only has one playable build for lategame and its not really fun to play.

Ember is one of my favorite frames.

WoF for cc wasnt ever all that reliable. It's not like you could stay still in high level play with it. a Player always needed to be mobile with Ember to be successful. The rework didn't change that. 

I simply recast for range and every recast hits 5x enemies at once. I could even argue she's forced to cc even more now than before.

The biggest change to my Ember builds was modding for more efficiency. I trashed my 30% efficiency builds. I never replied exclusively on WoF that much anyway. Maybe that's why I don't feel the hit as much as some people.

Personally, I'm appreciating the cc from fireball and the added damage from the fireblast ring. Fireblast knocks enemies down and you have a few seconds to pump a few rounds through the flames for a damage increase before you're in serious danger again. And I know people are going to hate to hear this, but I sometimes run with WoF at 100% for the extra damage, without maxed range and I still find it useful. I don't engage with the enemy at long range with Ember. I'm usually jumping around and WoF at 100% hits enemies. 

The new arcane set up helps with her survivability too. I use guardian for armor and in higher levels I'm trying slash resist to avoid procs. Overall, I can't say I'm doing worse with Ember than before at all

 

Edited March 13, 2018 by Hypernaut1

[BigPapiPimp]

2 hours ago, Hypernaut1 said:

What's happening is that people had an easy mode, near AFK frame taken away from them and panic is spreading. 

If you think Ember was awesome before, she's practically the same now. Yes, WoF was "nerfed", but no... It didn't completely ruin the frame at all. 

I think DE just turned over a stone with a bunch of bugs underneath it.

the stone being ember and the bugs being the player base lol. One thing I can say is that I’m glad they nerfed world on fire, because it might drop embers usement rate low enough to where they will make the rest of her kit better.

[Maka.Bones]

4 hours ago, BigPapiPimp said:

One thing I can say is that I’m glad they nerfed world on fire, because it might drop embers usement rate low enough to where they will make the rest of her kit better.

Yeah, I'm with you on this. 

 

And for everyone else, this is why I say that you need to spam accelerant every 4s, why I don't worship accelerant, and why I don't care for the damage bonus.

Mute the volume for now. I'll upload an edited version later tonight, it should fix the dsync. 

@Terrornaut and @RealPandemonium this is for the both of you. 

Edited March 13, 2018 by Maka.Bones

[RealPandemonium]

It's interesting to see how a lot of people treat Firequake like a core mod on Ember, and implying that its release was a pivotal buff that made her "usable."  

4 hours ago, Hypernaut1 said:

What's happening is that people had an easy mode, near AFK frame taken away from them and panic is spreading. 

If you think Ember was awesome before, she's practically the same now. Yes, WoF was "nerfed", but no... It didn't completely ruin the frame at all. 

Not really easy mode; more like "brainless" or "AFK" mode.

But, they don't think Ember was awesome before.  They typecast her as a "sub level 30 frame," implicitly indicating that she sucks even at her best.  Even the people who claim to be fans of Ember promote this view.  Feels like a lot of these people like the idea of Ember, but don't actually like the frame's core design at all. 

Idk, since they day I built her (soon after Overheat was removed,) Ember's design immediately "clicked" for me, and I've been a fan since.  But a lot of people don't seem to "get" it.  But that's why there are 30+ warframes to choose from, right?  If you don't like one, odds are you will like a different one.  

Edited March 13, 2018 by RealPandemonium

[Maka.Bones]

2 hours ago, RealPandemonium said:

Idk, since they day I built her (soon after Overheat was removed,) Ember's design immediately "clicked" for me, and I've been a fan since.  But a lot of people don't seem to "get" it.  But that's why there are 30+ warframes to choose from, right?  If you don't like one, odds are you will like a different one.  

+1.... and tbh, i'm not sure that "I get [her]" so i'm probably one of those people you speak of. In my head, it just doesn't make sense to me to rely on ember's abilities outside of being mainly used for CC, and looking cool AF. Especially not when there are many more optimal choices. She's mostly a guilty pleasure for me.

It just doesn't seem fair that so many other warframes are much more balanced than she is. And that "not all warframes should be good" is BS logic. She's literally at the bottom of the totem-pole in comparison to almost every frame. 

Edited March 13, 2018 by Maka.Bones

[Maka.Bones]

7 hours ago, Hypernaut1 said:

WoF for cc wasnt ever all that reliable. It's not like you could stay still in high level play with it. a Player always needed to be mobile with Ember to be successful. The rework didn't change that.

This is why it frustrates me that now people say "why, because you need to be mobile and aCtUalLY play the game?!?! dur dur dur"

That was already the case. WoF didn't exactly work well as a CC, if you just stood still in one spot. It also doesn't function well if you constantly need to toggle it on and off. At higher lvls, it wasn't meant for killing enemies mindlessly. It was meant to interrupt their actions, while you focus on killing them. With that being said, it was still her most efficient CC (If you're moving around)

7 hours ago, Hypernaut1 said:

Fireblast knocks enemies down and you have a few seconds to pump a few rounds through the flames for a damage increase before you're in serious danger again.

Yeah, it just sucks that the KD effect (Or accelerant's stun) doesn't last a second, or two longer. I often find it more time efficient to run with WoF at 100%, and just bullet jump to the enemies, all while shooting them in the face. Since this way, my movement isn't halted by extra animations--plus WoF automatically re-applies the KD effect.

 

Ember's rework didn't change much for me, aside from the added energy cost, and reducing the effectiveness of accelerant if i'm running a full-range build. Oh, and also aside from getting a really cool fireball effect.That fireball is sweet. 

I'm just frustrated that they didn't do *more* to optimize ember. I don't need a mindless playstyle... If I wanted that, i would play chromatic blade excalibur. I would just like to be able to rely on ember's abilities as my main source of damage/kills--like we can do with nidus. 

Edited March 13, 2018 by Maka.Bones

[Maka.Bones]

6 hours ago, (PS4)ArtPrince17 said:

Literally every single weapon would benefit from an added 50% more of the base damage of your weapon shot as heat. What are on about?
And saying weapons don't need extra damage if "they're good enough" is like saying "i'm going to leave this mod slot empty, because this build is good enough". There is always room to improve.

When your weapon is already getting +800% damage from other sources, that extra 50% damage is very small in comparison. I don't need the animation delay, if my weapon can two shot the enemy both with, and without the damage buff from ember.

I made a video, and with the corrosion build tigris only took a couple of shots to take down a lvl 130, corrupted heavy gunner eximus. With ember's accelerant damage buff, my tigris took the exact amount of shots to kill the same enemy. Sure it helped, just like 10 extra damage can help; the benefit was barely noticable.  

If you don't believe me, just watch the entire video. (should probably mute it too.... sorry I don't have good video-editing software atm)

Edited March 13, 2018 by Maka.Bones

[RealPandemonium]

41 minutes ago, Maka.Bones said:

It just doesn't seem fair that so many other warframes are much more balanced than she is.

Ember is balanced, compared to most frames.  A lot of frames just nullify gameplay in general with ~0 effort.  That's the whole deal, yo.  

'

[Maka.Bones]

4 minutes ago, RealPandemonium said:

Ember is balanced, compared to most frames.  A lot of frames just nullify gameplay in general with ~0 effort.  That's the whole deal, yo.  

'

If you mean ember easily gets oneshot by most enemies, especially considering this is a fastpaced-hordes game... then yes... she's "balanced". Otherwise, if *most frames* are like that... I don't think the game (or most players) agrees with your definition of "balanced" or fun. 

If most frames are capable of effective use/gameplay with ~0 effort (here you go again, flaunting "muh skills") then I must say, that's a very clear indication of that being direction that the game wants to take.... so... it would mean that ember is in fact, NOT balanced. 

[RealPandemonium]

20 minutes ago, Maka.Bones said:

If you mean ember easily gets oneshot by most enemies, especially considering this is a fastpaced-hordes game... then yes... she's "balanced". Otherwise, if *most frames* are like that... I don't think the game (or most players) agrees with your definition of "balanced" or fun. 

If most frames are capable of effective use/gameplay with ~0 effort (here you go again, flaunting "muh skills") then I must say, that's a very clear indication of that being direction that the game wants to take.... so... it would mean that ember is in fact, NOT balanced. 

If your enemies can't fight back, then are you playing a game?  Or just [maybe] acquiring a riven?  

[Maka.Bones]

1 hour ago, RealPandemonium said:

If your enemies can't fight back, then are you playing a game?  Or just [maybe] acquiring a riven?  

If your enemies can't fight back, because you're making effective use of your abilities & kit, staying mobile, not letting enemies hit you, and trying to make effective use of your arsenal? You're playing a game. Don't call it "OP" just because the player is able to be effective.

If your enemies can't fight back because you Rhino-Stomp? Well that's why I don't play rhino very often... But it does have its uses (like carrying lesser geared friends)

Edited March 13, 2018 by Maka.Bones

[BigPapiPimp]

On 3/12/2018 at 8:18 PM, RealPandemonium said:

Even the people who claim to be fans of Ember promote this view.

I don’t think stating it is promoting it (I have). It’s being realistic to what 90% of all her game use was, from players of any level. I wonder if ember gets no changes, what her play rate from last December will look like compared to next month.

+1 still

Edited March 15, 2018 by BigPapiPimp

[BigPapiPimp]

1 hour ago, RealPandemonium said:

Ember is balanced, compared to most frames.  A lot of frames just nullify gameplay in general with ~0 effort.  That's the whole deal, yo.  

'

Can you explain? What do you think “ember” is supposed to be?

i can tell you what she’s played as.

a brainless easy low level sweeper (rip those without 2 brain cells post “nerf”, time to move on to greener pastures).

a casual fun to play frame with a bunch of emotive and fun to cast abilities

a chicken with its head cut off, bullet jumping, squirting propane in peoples eyes, casting fireblast (or maybe it’s true, some people might have used firequake), maybe shooting once, then repeating steps 2-4 or bullet jumping away if your work is done/it was too much for you to handle.

only the last of those builds worked in anything above level 40.

guess which one. The one undoubtably least fun to play.

ember has to sacrifice more, and gets less.

Edited March 13, 2018 by BigPapiPimp

[Maka.Bones]

^That.

[MindHoney]

You dont explain why shes not vibile, just that they nurfed her 4..... 

[(PSN)thefallenloser]

2 hours ago, MindHoney said:

You dont explain why shes not vibile, just that they nurfed her 4..... 

Go back and read the post.

[Maka.Bones]

1 hour ago, (PS4)ArtPrince17 said:

Go back and read the post.

No u.

Jk, I meant to say "Ha gotem!"