And if you are one of those players who hinges their entire strategy on 2-4 green dice, then I salute you - but that is not for me and frankly, I think that that is poor design of game mechanics.

Good thing there are dozens of other ships for you to play.

There are and that IS good, but what if I wanted to play a Phantom, with something other than VI/a poor implementation of cloaking?

There's a new 4 dice primary ship called the Ghost... or you could add a cloak to any number of Scum ships. Not to mention the Imperial navy has plenty of other glass cannons for you to utilize. See: Interceptor.

And if you are one of those players who hinges their entire strategy on 2-4 green dice, then I salute you - but that is not for me and frankly, I think that that is poor design of game mechanics.

Good thing there are dozens of other ships for you to play.

There are and that IS good, but what if I wanted to play a Phantom, with something other than VI/a poor implementation of cloaking?

There's a new 4 dice primary ship called the Ghost... or you could add a cloak to any number of Scum ships. Not to mention the Imperial navy has plenty of other glass cannons for you to utilize. See: Interceptor.

Thanks, but that doesn't improve upon the real Phantom's design.

Ok so I just read this entire thread and I'd like to weigh in with my opinion. I have been playing Phantom's since they came out and of course I loved them pre nerf(so easy to kill things) and I used them regularly pre nerf. Alot of people did. And the definitely helped create the Fat Turret meta that is only recently going away, thanks to the nerf. I totally agree with the nerf, as it makes the ship into a risk/reward type of scenario. So to answer the OP question, no I don't think it would be a good idea to reverse the nerf. That said, I do feel that Tie Phantom players at this point are more die hard fans of the ship/players who are crazy good and out to prove it. In competitive Xwing, a good player will try to minimize the effects of dice. And unfortunately the Phantom is a 40 point ship that heavily relies on rolling 4 green dice to save it's bacon and 4 red dice to earn it's inclusion into the squad and "pay for itself" so to speak. I think it is slightly over costed post nerf only because it is so hit or miss. It only takes one bad roll and 1/3 of your list is gone. If it was even 3 points cheaper or had a free title that gave it a little something, I think it would be more enticing to players.

At the risk of being considered "uncivil," "immature," or "unintelligent," I present to you this data[1].

Of the Store Championships held this year which had at least 24 players[2] and were entered into List Juggler:

- 175 had at least one TIE Phantom

- 44 made the Top 8 cut

- 34 made the Top 4 cut

- 21 made the final table

- 7 won

[1] Yes I checked the dates.

[2] I chose this cutoff because it requires at least 4 rounds of Swiss a top 4 cut, which should give us decent signal.

While this data proves that Phantoms are represented at a high level of play, I would be curious to see the same stats for Poe, of Soonrir, or Brobots, etc. Only roughly 25% of Phantoms make top tables. I wonder what the rates on other common meta ships are?

At the risk of being considered "uncivil," "immature," or "unintelligent," I present to you this data[1].

Of the Store Championships held this year which had at least 24 players[2] and were entered into List Juggler:

- 175 had at least one TIE Phantom

- 44 made the Top 8 cut

- 34 made the Top 4 cut

- 21 made the final table

- 7 won

[1] Yes I checked the dates.

[2] I chose this cutoff because it requires at least 4 rounds of Swiss a top 4 cut, which should give us decent signal.

While this data proves that Phantoms are represented at a high level of play, I would be curious to see the same stats for Poe, of Soonrir, or Brobots, etc. Only roughly 25% of Phantoms make top tables. I wonder what the rates on other common meta ships are?

Very few ships have multiple viable pilots, honestly.

At the risk of being considered "uncivil," "immature," or "unintelligent," I present to you this data[1].

Of the Store Championships held this year which had at least 24 players[2] and were entered into List Juggler:

- 175 had at least one TIE Phantom

- 44 made the Top 8 cut

- 34 made the Top 4 cut

- 21 made the final table

- 7 won

[1] Yes I checked the dates.

[2] I chose this cutoff because it requires at least 4 rounds of Swiss a top 4 cut, which should give us decent signal.

While this data proves that Phantoms are represented at a high level of play, I would be curious to see the same stats for Poe, of Soonrir, or Brobots, etc. Only roughly 25% of Phantoms make top tables. I wonder what the rates on other common meta ships are?

Even lower, actually, because most Phantom players are die-hard fans, not just "People on da internet said poe iz gud"

Not even a quarter Poes get to the top.

Phantom is great in TLT meta and will be grand in Ordnance meta as well, although it weill require SJ, not FCS installation

Very few ships have multiple viable pilots, honestly.

Yep, and what a coincidence almost all of them are top-PS ones? xD

Top PS or bottom from day 1. The game has never been particularly kind to mid-PS pilots. Crack Shot has created a new category called "bottom that can still take an EPT" though.

Well, to be fair, you have no input on player skill which, you know, matters. So for all we know, only very good players might be taking them and winning. The only statement you can make from that is that "Phantoms are present in tournaments" and that "They have chances to make it to the final table". So, you know, they can be really good.

Um... yes? That was literally the point of my post, as a response to the original post:

Now it's kind of the white elephant of the empire's forces, it's impress traits weighed down by its high cost and extreme fragility making it something of a novelty that is never seen in the top rounds of serious competitive play.

(Emphasis mine)

There was discussion about the Phantom appearing at Worlds Top 16 and other reports of it appearing in the cut for Store Champs, and the counterargument (from Princezilla) was that he had been to four tournaments and didn't see Phantoms do well there. So I provided data on the Store Championship scene as a whole using available resources.

Gentlemen.....gentlemen.....

Whisper shall not be nerfed,denerfed.unerfed,renerfed or nernerfed.

She is just fine sitting just like she is.

4 Phantoms hits hard. Really hard.

I've flown it a few times. Eh. You're prone to losing one early and it all hinges on getting good die rolls on attack, which means 1-2 below average hit focus blank blank rolls and you haven't done anything.

5x Autothruster Alpha is where it's at (especially when your opponents joust it and miss their action opportunities ). It is better defensively and better offensively.

While this data proves that Phantoms are represented at a high level of play, I would be curious to see the same stats for Poe, of Soonrir, or Brobots, etc. Only roughly 25% of Phantoms make top tables. I wonder what the rates on other common meta ships are?

Showing total number of lists / top 8 / top 4 / top 2 / winner:

Poe: 373 / 58 / 40 / 18 / 9

Soontir: 248 / 44 / 35 / 14 / 8

At least one Aggressor: 177 / 44 / 35 / 20 / 10

...making it something of a novelty that is never seen in the top rounds of serious competitive play.

^{[citation needed]}

You mean like these?

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=1402

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=1388

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=1386

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=1385

Oh wait, those have Phantoms on the top tables. What about these?

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=1384

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=1382

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=1378

Whoops! Dang, those have Phantoms on the top tables too! Man, maybe page 2 of the most recent events will have more events without Phantoms competing at the top...

I've been nothing but civil throughout this whole thread dispite having half the members of the forums jump down my throat rather then actually engage in intelligent debate, I don't need your condescending lectures and I didn't pull these observations out of my ass. I'm a regular tournament goer and placed first and second in my last two store Championships, this was not a "I can't use this ship so it sucks" post I made this after watching a supposedly feared ship repeatedly fail to place at all in multiple large events and often dying in extremely embarrassing ways to very new players, in the last tournament a veteran player's Whisper went down on turn two to a guy who had been playing all of a month.

Citations were requested and were provided. I was snarky, sure, but I just did some basic research (not anecdotal evidence) that shows that they're still doing alright. Time playing the game doesn't infer skill of playing the game. There are tons of people who have played chess their whole life, but few of them are grand-masters.

The only thing that needs changing is the Cloak/Decloak mechanic. It was poorly designed to begin with and the nerf has only pushed it further into the realm of weird.

e.g.

I am sick of being "forced" to take either VI or LW, for Echo and Whisper and no one uses the generics.

Variety please, FFG?

I guess you never heard of 6 Sigma have you

Either way I like the idea of old cloak being restricted to say a pilot skill 5 or a modification which wouldn't help whisper at all because Whisper want's ACD over all other modifications.

Still I am more focusing on the scum cloaking device and many people says it is crap compared to well phantom cloak and they are right if you try to use it in the same way as a phantom.

For scum it is best used as a bonus maneuver to get in quick or get out quick. You use it for the movement not the defense. The only Scum ship that it would work as a defensive measure is the Scumhwk and that is when you want the SPA mod and use it only as a panic button when an enemy closes in at range 1. Every other ship you want to use it as a quick close into range 1 then attack.

Well, to be fair, you have no input on player skill which, you know, matters. So for all we know, only very good players might be taking them and winning. The only statement you can make from that is that "Phantoms are present in tournaments" and that "They have chances to make it to the final table". So, you know, they can be really good.

Um... yes? That was literally the point of my post, as a response to the original post:

You are quoting me out of context. I replied to someone who took the data you provided and sarcastically implied that this might have to do something with player skill. I just clarified what statements you can make based on that data.

Making the cloak action a reposition action was wrong from the very beginning even though "fluff" wise it's really cool conceptually.

Before it was all spoiled This forum really liked the idea of it being something like this:

4/3/2/2. Cloak token- can't fire. Can't be TL'd. Remove all TL's. Can't be targeted outside of range 1. Counts as obstructed.

It was cool tech and not a better interceptor that way. When it was revealed it was a maneuver based action we knew it was a better interceptor and monsterous.

But it is what it is. I'm hoping we see some SPA interaction and pilot abilities that are more powerful than Adv. cloak or, at least, a second option so that EPTs aren't gaurenteed either. In fact, phantom only EPTs might be a great place to provide options.

And allowing Adv. sensors double cloak with SPA... That was fun and not nearly as powerful as Adv. cloaking device and made generic phantoms viable. I understand the logic behind that ruling but disliked it because it made it Adv. cloak really the only option.

There are and that IS good, but what if I wanted to play a Phantom, with something other than VI/a poor implementation of cloaking?

Well that's oddly specific.

That's like saying you want to play a TIE Punisher with no ordnance.

A poor implementation of cloaking is how the Phantom is meant to be played.

You are quoting me out of context. I replied to someone who took the data you provided and sarcastically implied that this might have to do something with player skill. I just clarified what statements you can make based on that data.

Whoops. I somehow ignored my quote was embedded in WickedGrey's quote.

I mean, who listens to that guy anyway?

As a newer player, I think the mechanic is fine the way it is. The ship, in my opinion, is a touch over priced now. The fragility, plus the lower pilot skill the ship has standard is a bit of a hit, and having VI is almost a requirement. Now mind you, this is from someone still learning, and my opinion is subject to change based on how my skills in the game progress.

By the ever present Force, no.

Double Phantoms at 86pts is still a thing, and still powerful (not busted like it was), and they do not need to be cheaper. In fact I'd say that since they are competitive at 86pts for 2, against lists that are 98-100 points, it shows they are under costed. Two phantoms at 86 can do the work of a full 98-100 point list. What does that tell you? They are about 5pts too cheap (or the combination of all the crap they take like ACD and FCS and VI are too cheap when put on a Tie Phantom).

The only way I can hit that mark is with VI. Hence my statement. VI is a requirement for this ship to be useful. An interceptor at a little over half the cost of the most expensive Phantom has the same PS, thus is just as difficult to target, and then can get the bonus off of VI to make it go first. If VI is required to make the ship usable than there is a problem in the cost. Do I know a way to make it better without breaking it....No. It is something I see as a problem with the design.

Maybe a Title card that allows the ship to attack as if it were 2 PS higher would be good, but then maybe have the caveat that it is not compatible with VI. Just a thought.

As a newer player, I think the mechanic is fine the way it is. The ship, in my opinion, is a touch over priced now. The fragility, plus the lower pilot skill the ship has standard is a bit of a hit, and having VI is almost a requirement. Now mind you, this is from someone still learning, and my opinion is subject to change based on how my skills in the game progress.

By the ever present Force, no.

Double Phantoms at 86pts is still a thing, and still powerful (not busted like it was), and they do not need to be cheaper. In fact I'd say that since they are competitive at 86pts for 2, against lists that are 98-100 points, it shows they are under costed. Two phantoms at 86 can do the work of a full 98-100 point list. What does that tell you? They are about 5pts too cheap (or the combination of all the crap they take like ACD and FCS and VI are too cheap when put on a Tie Phantom).

The only way I can hit that mark is with VI. Hence my statement. VI is a requirement for this ship to be useful. An interceptor at a little over half the cost of the most expensive Phantom has the same PS, thus is just as difficult to target, and then can get the bonus off of VI to make it go first. If VI is required to make the ship usable than there is a problem in the cost. Do I know a way to make it better without breaking it....No. It is something I see as a problem with the design.

Maybe a Title card that allows the ship to fire as if it were 2 PS higher would be good, but then maybe have the caveat that it is not compatible with VI. Just a thought.

VI is a requirement for every ship pilot skill 5-7 because the middling pilot skill is stuck between a rock and a hard place. It is too low to out shoot anyone in a faceoff and too low to be a blocker. Not only does it get the worst of both worlds it also increases the point value which means you end up taking less ships thus giving your opponent more MOV per kill.

And if you are one of those players who hinges their entire strategy on 2-4 green dice, then I salute you - but that is not for me and frankly, I think that that is poor design of game mechanics.

Good thing there are dozens of other ships for you to play.

There are and that IS good, but what if I wanted to play a Phantom, with something other than VI/a poor implementation of cloaking?

...

What if I want to play a turret with proper traverse mechanics?

As a newer player, I think the mechanic is fine the way it is. The ship, in my opinion, is a touch over priced now. The fragility, plus the lower pilot skill the ship has standard is a bit of a hit, and having VI is almost a requirement. Now mind you, this is from someone still learning, and my opinion is subject to change based on how my skills in the game progress.

By the ever present Force, no.

Double Phantoms at 86pts is still a thing, and still powerful (not busted like it was), and they do not need to be cheaper. In fact I'd say that since they are competitive at 86pts for 2, against lists that are 98-100 points, it shows they are under costed. Two phantoms at 86 can do the work of a full 98-100 point list. What does that tell you? They are about 5pts too cheap (or the combination of all the crap they take like ACD and FCS and VI are too cheap when put on a Tie Phantom).

The only way I can hit that mark is with VI. Hence my statement. VI is a requirement for this ship to be useful. An interceptor at a little over half the cost of the most expensive Phantom has the same PS, thus is just as difficult to target, and then can get the bonus off of VI to make it go first. If VI is required to make the ship usable than there is a problem in the cost. Do I know a way to make it better without breaking it....No. It is something I see as a problem with the design.

Maybe a Title card that allows the ship to fire as if it were 2 PS higher would be good, but then maybe have the caveat that it is not compatible with VI. Just a thought.

VI is a requirement for every ship pilot skill 5-7 because the middling pilot skill is stuck between a rock and a hard place. It is too low to out shoot anyone in a faceoff and too low to be a blocker. Not only does it get the worst of both worlds it also increases the point value which means you end up taking less ships thus giving your opponent more MOV per kill.

But it is nearly twice the cost of many of the other middle of the road ships, for the same(or less) PS. Sure it has a higher attack than almost every other ship, the only other one that has 4 attack also has 4 times the hull/shields and 4 attack dice for a mere 3 points more for the cheapest and lowest PS one or 8 points for the most expensive one.

Don't get me wrong, I do agree it is a good ship, the points are just off a bit, and not by much.

Maybe there needs to be a PS cap, something along the lines of a no ship may have a PS, after upgrades, of higher than a PS of 9.

And if you are one of those players who hinges their entire strategy on 2-4 green dice, then I salute you - but that is not for me and frankly, I think that that is poor design of game mechanics.

Good thing there are dozens of other ships for you to play.

There are and that IS good, but what if I wanted to play a Phantom, with something other than VI/a poor implementation of cloaking?

...

What if I want to play a turret with proper traverse mechanics?

That could be fun, make people pick an arc during movement. Front, left, right, or aft, and then pray your prey enters the correct arc that turn. Instead of always being able to magically target another fighter every turn just because you have a turret.

And if you are one of those players who hinges their entire strategy on 2-4 green dice, then I salute you - but that is not for me and frankly, I think that that is poor design of game mechanics.

Good thing there are dozens of other ships for you to play.

There are and that IS good, but what if I wanted to play a Phantom, with something other than VI/a poor implementation of cloaking?

...

What if I want to play a turret with proper traverse mechanics?

That could be fun, make people pick an arc during movement. Front, left, right, or aft, and then pray your prey enters the correct arc that turn. Instead of always being able to magically target another fighter every turn just because you have a turret.

And if you are one of those players who hinges their entire strategy on 2-4 green dice, then I salute you - but that is not for me and frankly, I think that that is poor design of game mechanics.

Good thing there are dozens of other ships for you to play.

There are and that IS good, but what if I wanted to play a Phantom, with something other than VI/a poor implementation of cloaking?

...

What if I want to play a turret with proper traverse mechanics?

That could be fun, make people pick an arc during movement. Front, left, right, or aft, and then pray your prey enters the correct arc that turn. Instead of always being able to magically target another fighter every turn just because you have a turret.

It's clunky and not very fun. Plenty of people have tried to house-rule this exact idea.

I was not aware of that, oh well.

And if you are one of those players who hinges their entire strategy on 2-4 green dice, then I salute you - but that is not for me and frankly, I think that that is poor design of game mechanics.

Good thing there are dozens of other ships for you to play.

There are and that IS good, but what if I wanted to play a Phantom, with something other than VI/a poor implementation of cloaking?

...

What if I want to play a turret with proper traverse mechanics?

That != sense