An old magic adage is

If you need one card to make another card good, it's a bad card.

"says Channel to FireBall"

Eh, that hasn't been a thing since before there was a cap on the number of cards you could put in a deck. That would be circa '94.

Skullclamp, great card, broken card, useless in a creatureless deck. .

I didn't bother to read all 15 pages so this might have been pointed out. But the comment about Rebels having more firepower and such silly.

FFG has put attack values in line with how many laser cannons each ship has to go pew pew pew.

The Phantom has 5, yes 5 laser cannons. 1 in each wing and two below the cockpit. So 4 attack dice. Inteceptors and X-wings, have 4, so 3 attack dice. Y-wings and Tie Fighters have 2, so 2... and so on.

The Falcon has 8 laser in total in its twin quads, but really you can only bring one set to bear on a single fighter, so its 3 attack makes sense.

FFG has put attack values in line with how many laser cannons each ship has to go pew pew pew.

Coincidence. Doesn't account for the firepower of those guns individually. (look at the size of the Outrider's guns!) FFG sets attack values partially thematically, but mostly by playtesting and game design. The Falcon has eight guns. If only one is shooting, what's the other doing? It's not even a complete coincidence as Slave 1 and the Lambda shuttle are 3 attack ships. The Firespray has two guns. The Lambda has no fewer than eight and they all face forwards.

In the other source to mechanically depict it, the TIE phantom has less gun than the TIE interceptor. Does the phantom outgun the TIE defender, Millenium Falcon, and the VT-49?

Gameplay and fun override sourcebook canon where necessary. Mechanically, the B-wing and the Y-wing outshield and outhull the TIE defender, respectively, in defiance of canon. Likewise, where did the defender's turning troubles with 90 degrees come from? Moreover, how does it have turning trouble but flips over effortlessly?

The phantom has a fourth attack dice mostly for mechanical reasons (would be played differently and likely wouldn't be worth the trouble with 3), more mechanical reasons (ACDs aside the phantom cloaks a lot, reducing the amount of time it attacks) and as for thematic? It attacks from nowhere, leaping from the shadows like an ebony-hued predator. The rebel never sees it coming and never reangles his deflectors in time...

FFG has put attack values in line with how many laser cannons each ship has to go pew pew pew.

Not even that, really (see exhibit Firespray). That's just a lucky coincidence most of the time. Game balance is the primary reason.

FFG has put attack values in line with how many laser cannons each ship has to go pew pew pew.

Coincidence. Doesn't account for the firepower of those guns individually. (look at the size of the Outrider's guns!) FFG sets attack values partially thematically, but mostly by playtesting and game design. The Falcon has eight guns. If only one is shooting, what's the other doing? It's not even a complete coincidence as Slave 1 and the Lambda shuttle are 3 attack ships. The Firespray has two guns. The Lambda has no fewer than eight and they all face forwards.

In the other source to mechanically depict it, the TIE phantom has less gun than the TIE interceptor. Does the phantom outgun the TIE defender, Millenium Falcon, and the VT-49?

Gameplay and fun override sourcebook canon where necessary. Mechanically, the B-wing and the Y-wing outshield and outhull the TIE defender, respectively, in defiance of canon. Likewise, where did the defender's turning troubles with 90 degrees come from? Moreover, how does it have turning trouble but flips over effortlessly?

The phantom has a fourth attack dice mostly for mechanical reasons (would be played differently and likely wouldn't be worth the trouble with 3), more mechanical reasons (ACDs aside the phantom cloaks a lot, reducing the amount of time it attacks) and as for thematic? It attacks from nowhere, leaping from the shadows like an ebony-hued predator. The rebel never sees it coming and never reangles his deflectors in time...

I would play the phantom at 3...

When the Interceptor's so much cheaper?

I would play the phantom at 3...

Not at current cost.

I would play the phantom at 3...

Not at current cost.

I still would... its a better arc dodge ship than a squint.

I would play the phantom at 3...

Not at current cost.

I still would... its a better arc dodge ship than a squint.

You can't always dodge firing arcs, especially when facing turrets.

I have a list you can't beat with just a single decked out phantom:

TWO Decked out phantoms!

I would play the phantom at 3...

Not at current cost.

I still would... its a better arc dodge ship than a squint.

You can't always dodge firing arcs, especially when facing turrets.

Even when you're not facing turrets... I'm an above average pilot and unless my opponent is a total newb there are times when you're going to get shot at. This goes for phantoms (echo much less so) and Interceptors.

I REALLY hate that argument.

I would play the phantom at 3...

Not at current cost.

I still would... its a better arc dodge ship than a squint.

I think you'd find it outclassed quickly. Echo is great and all but the other phantoms are not THAT much better (7pts more for 1 more hp and cloak?)

An old magic adage is

If you need one card to make another card good, it's a bad card.

"says Channel to FireBall"

Eh, that hasn't been a thing since before there was a cap on the number of cards you could put in a deck. That would be circa '94.

Skullclamp, great card, broken card, useless in a creatureless deck. .

There's a world of difference between a situationally useless card and a bad one. Supreme Verdict is an amazing card, but does nothing against the likes of a Pyromancer's Ascension deck. A card that has no intrinsic value of its own, and that only interacts with a single other card in your deck, is generally a bad gamble. Skullclamp isn't one of those cards; it interacts with every creature you have in your deck.

There are exceptions, of course, but they're usually strong, self-sustaining combo pieces. There was a deck several years back that relied on Ad Nauseum and Death's Shadow as a win condition, and while it wasn't exactly tier 1 material, it did prove that there's still a place for simple Channel/Fireball type decks.

That having been said, Vanor pretty much hit the nail on the head. There are plenty of fair comparisons to be drawn between Magic (or any other game) and X-Wing, but this isn't one of them.

FFG has put attack values in line with how many laser cannons each ship has to go pew pew pew.

Not even that, really (see exhibit Firespray). That's just a lucky coincidence most of the time. Game balance is the primary reason.

I didn't say it was perfect, but in line with. The Firespray has a cannon upgrade so you can get 4.

FFG has put attack values in line with how many laser cannons each ship has to go pew pew pew.

Not even that, really (see exhibit Firespray). That's just a lucky coincidence most of the time. Game balance is the primary reason.

I didn't say it was perfect, but in line with. The Firespray has a cannon upgrade so you can get 4.

You do know that each of the guns on the Firespray are twin blasters right? Meaning that it does have 4 cannons stock.

What Revanchist said.

Boy has this thread derailed lol.

But it never ends

Makes for a good read

Boy has this thread derailed lol.

But it never ends

Makes for a good read

It's better than where it started, that's for sure.

While we are way of topic.

How do you post pictures anyway?

I usually on my cell, and I don't see a way.

So you have to do it from a pc/laptop?

And do you usually upload to another site first?

While we are way of topic.

How do you post pictures anyway?

I usually on my cell, and I don't see a way.

So you have to do it from a pc/laptop?

And do you usually upload to another site first?

Upload to a site, though you could upload here should you choose to. External images are usally easier to manage. .

Apart from using the img button, you can just type out the tags, without spaces

How would I upload to here?

Like I said in usually on my cell.

Don't see an image button, unless

I'm over looking looking something

Looked under help, and under gallery. Says there is a gallery option at top of page but I'm not seeing it. Maybe can't on cell?

An old magic adage is

If you need one card to make another card good, it's a bad card.

"says Channel to FireBall"

Eh, that hasn't been a thing since before there was a cap on the number of cards you could put in a deck. That would be circa '94.

Skullclamp, great card, broken card, useless in a creatureless deck. .

There's a world of difference between a situationally useless card and a bad one. Supreme Verdict is an amazing card, but does nothing against the likes of a Pyromancer's Ascension deck. A card that has no intrinsic value of its own, and that only interacts with a single other card in your deck, is generally a bad gamble. Skullclamp isn't one of those cards; it interacts with every creature you have in your deck.

There are exceptions, of course, but they're usually strong, self-sustaining combo pieces. There was a deck several years back that relied on Ad Nauseum and Death's Shadow as a win condition, and while it wasn't exactly tier 1 material, it did prove that there's still a place for simple Channel/Fireball type decks.

That having been said, Vanor pretty much hit the nail on the head. There are plenty of fair comparisons to be drawn between Magic (or any other game) and X-Wing, but this isn't one of them.

Is Stone Forge Mystic a good card all by itself? Nope it sucks unless you have equipment in you deck. Yet, they had to ban this card because it sucked so bad right?

You're obviously being sarcastic, but I can't tell if that means you agree with me or not, since I in no way inferred that a card must be good "all by itself" in order to be competitive. Do I really need to explain why Stoneforge Mystic is good? I picked up my play set a full month before they went from being an eight dollar card to somewhere above twenty. I also stopped playing standard right around the time Caw-Blade completely warped the format. It was so bad that it completely trivialized one of the best designed sets in years, New Phyrexia.

Must...

not...

look...

at Gatherer...

It's always frightening to see how addictive that game can be. I've not bought anything in years now but still, the lure of the Cardboard Side is strong.

Must...

not...

look...

at Gatherer...

It's always frightening to see how addictive that game can be. I've not bought anything in years now but still, the lure of the Cardboard Side is strong.

Commander is a real killer at the moment. I think I've spent more money collecting cards for EDH these past few years than I ever have on standard. I count myself a little lucky, I picked up a Polluted Delta back when they were only $30. Now I'm wishing I'd done the same when Imperial Recruiter was only eighty.

Have you seen the new sealed multiplayer set, Conspiracy? It's supposed to be a lot of fun to draft, and there really aren't any money cards. I picked up all the singles I wanted from the set for under ten bucks, including a badass alternate art Rout featuring Elesh Norn.