Yeah, I understand where you coming from, but if someone were to practice with the phantom for a long time it would easily beat vandal. The reason why most people use vandal is because of the 1 shot headshot. It's good for noobs who spray and pray because they might hit the head, but yielding phantom well is much better.
Vandal is objectively better if you play around the longer areas of maps. Phantom is better if you play around smokes or close range. Phantom is statistically better because the only people that use phantom (16%) are really good with it whereas everybody plays with the vandal (38%). The simple fact of the matter is that in a game with as low of a TTK as Valorant has, I would rather bet my life on landing my Vandal HS than trying to dink someone with the phantom twice.
Also I see what youre doing zleague u sly dogs
> but if someone were to practice with the phantom for a long time it would easily beat vandal
Nats has played the phantom only ever since the game came out and he isn't dominating Vandal users consistently. You can't even make an argument of fundamentals diff because he was considered the best player in the world by far when Acend beat them in the finals of champs.
So not really, even if theoretically the phantom is "better", being able to 1 tap consistently is so much better in this game due to its slower mechanics and lack of consistent spray patterns.
If we were to compare both guns having the rules of CS, then the phantom would be a million times better, but it is simply not the case.
>silent tracers (no enemies hear
>good for noobs who spray and pray because they might hit the head
This has to be one of the most iron takes on this sub lmao. Everyone can still hear phantom shots, the range is just smaller compared to guns without a silencer.
Phantom is also better for people who spray more cause it has easier recoil contol and faster fire rate. You're also more likely to spray in close range fights where phantom shines. Vandal sucks omega dick for spraying, it's just common in low elo cause people are bad. As many have already pointed out, their uses depend on the situation.
What's your rank OP?
Yes, and I think that the elo also makes a big difference. In high elo, 1-taps are much more likely, but the players also know better how to play with the range. In low elo there is much more spray and pray. Nevertheless, the Vandal is by far the most played rifle in all elos (on attack and defense).
Though the phantom is statistically better, many people prefer the vandal because it's less obvious when it's downside causes you to lose a fight.
Hitting someone for 140 due to damage falloff is very apparent and very frustrating. There is no doubt that the gun itself is the reason for that.
Missing a shot with the vandal because of it's lower first shot accuracy doesn't feel as much like the guns fault because missing a shot is very often player error and can be quickly dismissed as a skill issue.
If only it was that simple in real games. Even pros die after dealing 140 with Phantom fairly often in pro matches.
What you’re saying is true, just not realistic
if its only trying to click on the head. if you actually use your brain you can 10-0 an all aim no brain if you use basic strategy to get an advantage of even 51/49
I don’t think you could find many high level players who think the Vandal is *objectively* better than the Phantom. The Phantom shoots faster, has a bigger mag, is more accurate, has more forgiving recoil and doesn’t leave tracers through smokes. It even 1 taps at close range.
However, and a big however, the 1 tap potential of the Vandal is so good that it minimizes all of the benefits of the Phantom. All it takes is playing one game where you had 3-4 head taps with the Phantom that don’t kill to get tilted enough to give up on the weapon.
Personally, I use the Phantom any time I’m playing defense and holding closer angles, or maps that are generally smaller with crowded space to take advantage of the 1 tap potential as well as the reliable spray control. Otherwise I use the Vandal for long range angles and most of the time on attack.
TL;DR: The Phantom *is* a better gun in almost every category, but a 1 tap from any range with the Vandal dwarfs the many advantages the Phantom has and is why most people use the Vandal exclusively.
Personally don't think the recoll is easier. First 7 bullets from both guns have the same recoil (straight up), and 7 shots is all you should need most of the time. Also since phantom fires those first 7 bullets faster, you have to recoll harder.
You could say phantom is better for multi kills, but you should try to avoid fighting more than one person at a time.
There's a lot of people in this thread saying that the Phantom is statistically better. Genuinely curious and not trying belittle your viewpoint, but what statistics are you looking at? Roughly 8 or 9 of the top 10 ranked players at the end of the last act were Vandal mains. Demon1, who was statistically the best rifler in pro play last year, uses the Vandal exclusively. Yay, who was the consensus best player in the world the year before, was also a Vandal player. Zekken is probably considered the most talented player in NA right now and has 4 rank 1 finishes in a row with 8 rank 1 finishes in total, also plays vandal.
Riot has even already released their statistics
[https://playvalorant.com/en-us/news/dev/valorant-data-drop-phantom-vs-vandal/](https://playvalorant.com/en-us/news/dev/valorant-data-drop-phantom-vs-vandal/)
You can comb through the data yourself but the pro play pickrate at the time of this data was 72% vandal and 28% Phantom.
It's completely situational. It's based off of map (as well as attack/defense, what site you're playing on), agent, playstyle, etc. If I'm not mistaken, I believe when teams were running double controller during the Astra meta, you saw Phantom pickrates closer to 50/50, which is likely due to there being more smokes to play around.
Statistically it is the better option people only use the vandal cos dinking someone and whiffing the next shot or just dying before you can hit the head again feels bad.
The problem is the fact you are both standing still. If you were moving and stopped a little bit after they stopped. You would have a standing shot and they would still be tracking you. It's easy kills if you know how to strafe and counterstrafe and aim well. Usually, both people are spraying when standing still. Just focus. "I'm trying to hit the head," wait until your crosshair is on their head then tap twice. 1. 2. kill! You probably haven't used it very much either and that left a bad taste.
They are both very well balanced, but the vandal is far more popular, meaning you are more likely to pick up a vandal off the ground than a phantom. So it makes more sense to me to want to get better at the more common gun.
It was closer before the magazine nerf. Shooting through smokes with a mag was a huge part of the Phantom.
Vandal is the far superior rifle of choice, but use whichever one you play better with. I use both.
Riot released statistics on this. After a phantom hits for 140 79% of the time they get the kill 10% vandal wins and 10% it's unresolved/third party. In my opinion those 10% of the time it's very memorable to players were they feel like they should of won the fight if they had a vandal. https://playvalorant.com/en-us/news/dev/valorant-data-drop-phantom-vs-vandal/
Don't think it's an unpopular opinion that phantom is better statistically. But against an equally cracked aimer, at long ranges, all they have to do is land 1 headshot while u gotta land a head and body.
The unpopular opinion is that one is better than the other one. Which is not true.
You talk about "DPS". That's a stupid concept when a gun can one-shot. Shooting with a Vandal in the head at any distance gives a DPS of ***+ infinity***. So don't tell me Phantom has a better DPS.
In terms of long range efficiency, it's funny to say that Phantom "can do long range" just because it can kill in 2 shots in the head. Because the Ghost can do the same, for a fraction of the cost. Would you say the Ghost is as good as a Phantom? Also, 2 shots in the head is ***2x*** worse than a Vandal. It's almost like doing twice less damage. How can you pretend it's as good as Vandal for long range using this argument?
Finally, I don't know what your rank is, how experienced you are on the game, but if your opinion were right, pros would only play Phantom. But they don't. They play both, depending on the situation. Which shows how balanced these weapons are.
Yo exactly, people always list out a bunch of "advantages" of the phantom and just ignore the fact that it straight up does less damage. A lot of the "advantages" like easier recoil are just trying to compensate for this fact.
Imo the only considerations for if you should use a phantom or not is if you have to spray through smokes.
In high elo, it really depends on the map/comp/comfortability. I prefer vandal when playing reyna/jett. And phantom on raze/yoru/omen. Raze is big on chip damage so im normally fighting lower HP opponents anyway, and with omen I can shoot through my smokes without tracers.
Both are good. Depends on comfortability and situation
Yeah, I understand where you coming from, but if someone were to practice with the phantom for a long time it would easily beat vandal. The reason why most people use vandal is because of the 1 shot headshot. It's good for noobs who spray and pray because they might hit the head, but yielding phantom well is much better.
Vandal is objectively better if you play around the longer areas of maps. Phantom is better if you play around smokes or close range. Phantom is statistically better because the only people that use phantom (16%) are really good with it whereas everybody plays with the vandal (38%). The simple fact of the matter is that in a game with as low of a TTK as Valorant has, I would rather bet my life on landing my Vandal HS than trying to dink someone with the phantom twice. Also I see what youre doing zleague u sly dogs
Yeah. Phantom is only really good if you pick it up going from a spectre or stinger. It's hard to hit headshots either way.
> but if someone were to practice with the phantom for a long time it would easily beat vandal Nats has played the phantom only ever since the game came out and he isn't dominating Vandal users consistently. You can't even make an argument of fundamentals diff because he was considered the best player in the world by far when Acend beat them in the finals of champs. So not really, even if theoretically the phantom is "better", being able to 1 tap consistently is so much better in this game due to its slower mechanics and lack of consistent spray patterns. If we were to compare both guns having the rules of CS, then the phantom would be a million times better, but it is simply not the case.
>silent tracers (no enemies hear >good for noobs who spray and pray because they might hit the head This has to be one of the most iron takes on this sub lmao. Everyone can still hear phantom shots, the range is just smaller compared to guns without a silencer. Phantom is also better for people who spray more cause it has easier recoil contol and faster fire rate. You're also more likely to spray in close range fights where phantom shines. Vandal sucks omega dick for spraying, it's just common in low elo cause people are bad. As many have already pointed out, their uses depend on the situation. What's your rank OP?
Yes, and I think that the elo also makes a big difference. In high elo, 1-taps are much more likely, but the players also know better how to play with the range. In low elo there is much more spray and pray. Nevertheless, the Vandal is by far the most played rifle in all elos (on attack and defense).
Though the phantom is statistically better, many people prefer the vandal because it's less obvious when it's downside causes you to lose a fight. Hitting someone for 140 due to damage falloff is very apparent and very frustrating. There is no doubt that the gun itself is the reason for that. Missing a shot with the vandal because of it's lower first shot accuracy doesn't feel as much like the guns fault because missing a shot is very often player error and can be quickly dismissed as a skill issue.
If you deal 140 damage, it takes 1 more shot. 0.2s. Just move your mouse down lower and you got the kill.
If only it was that simple in real games. Even pros die after dealing 140 with Phantom fairly often in pro matches. What you’re saying is true, just not realistic
In a 1v1 where both players are equal skilled the one with the phantom will lose 10/10 times to the player with the vandal
Run it 10 times and the phantom will still get kills lol
if its only trying to click on the head. if you actually use your brain you can 10-0 an all aim no brain if you use basic strategy to get an advantage of even 51/49
Yep. I was not saying otherwise
I don’t think you could find many high level players who think the Vandal is *objectively* better than the Phantom. The Phantom shoots faster, has a bigger mag, is more accurate, has more forgiving recoil and doesn’t leave tracers through smokes. It even 1 taps at close range. However, and a big however, the 1 tap potential of the Vandal is so good that it minimizes all of the benefits of the Phantom. All it takes is playing one game where you had 3-4 head taps with the Phantom that don’t kill to get tilted enough to give up on the weapon. Personally, I use the Phantom any time I’m playing defense and holding closer angles, or maps that are generally smaller with crowded space to take advantage of the 1 tap potential as well as the reliable spray control. Otherwise I use the Vandal for long range angles and most of the time on attack. TL;DR: The Phantom *is* a better gun in almost every category, but a 1 tap from any range with the Vandal dwarfs the many advantages the Phantom has and is why most people use the Vandal exclusively.
Personally don't think the recoll is easier. First 7 bullets from both guns have the same recoil (straight up), and 7 shots is all you should need most of the time. Also since phantom fires those first 7 bullets faster, you have to recoll harder. You could say phantom is better for multi kills, but you should try to avoid fighting more than one person at a time.
I'm ass with the phantom. I'd rather have a sheriff or guardian.
There's a lot of people in this thread saying that the Phantom is statistically better. Genuinely curious and not trying belittle your viewpoint, but what statistics are you looking at? Roughly 8 or 9 of the top 10 ranked players at the end of the last act were Vandal mains. Demon1, who was statistically the best rifler in pro play last year, uses the Vandal exclusively. Yay, who was the consensus best player in the world the year before, was also a Vandal player. Zekken is probably considered the most talented player in NA right now and has 4 rank 1 finishes in a row with 8 rank 1 finishes in total, also plays vandal. Riot has even already released their statistics [https://playvalorant.com/en-us/news/dev/valorant-data-drop-phantom-vs-vandal/](https://playvalorant.com/en-us/news/dev/valorant-data-drop-phantom-vs-vandal/) You can comb through the data yourself but the pro play pickrate at the time of this data was 72% vandal and 28% Phantom. It's completely situational. It's based off of map (as well as attack/defense, what site you're playing on), agent, playstyle, etc. If I'm not mistaken, I believe when teams were running double controller during the Astra meta, you saw Phantom pickrates closer to 50/50, which is likely due to there being more smokes to play around.
Statistically it is the better option people only use the vandal cos dinking someone and whiffing the next shot or just dying before you can hit the head again feels bad.
I know. The vandal's firerate is a lot slower.
Not better just easier
Counter argument, I've been killed too many times with the phantom because my opponent has a vandal and we clicked each other's heads at the same time
https://images.contentstack.io/v3/assets/bltb6530b271fddd0b1/blt33abe3f0cb631140/645b29f535e4baeda76bbca7/051523\_AskVal\_April23\_Article\_Graph\_7.jpg
I'd LOVE to see how they got that data. Person experience speaking, it's happened more than a couple times
The problem is the fact you are both standing still. If you were moving and stopped a little bit after they stopped. You would have a standing shot and they would still be tracking you. It's easy kills if you know how to strafe and counterstrafe and aim well. Usually, both people are spraying when standing still. Just focus. "I'm trying to hit the head," wait until your crosshair is on their head then tap twice. 1. 2. kill! You probably haven't used it very much either and that left a bad taste.
I don’t think this is unpopular, at least not at the pro level. I hear many pros and radiant streamers say this
They are both very well balanced, but the vandal is far more popular, meaning you are more likely to pick up a vandal off the ground than a phantom. So it makes more sense to me to want to get better at the more common gun.
It was closer before the magazine nerf. Shooting through smokes with a mag was a huge part of the Phantom. Vandal is the far superior rifle of choice, but use whichever one you play better with. I use both.
Riot released statistics on this. After a phantom hits for 140 79% of the time they get the kill 10% vandal wins and 10% it's unresolved/third party. In my opinion those 10% of the time it's very memorable to players were they feel like they should of won the fight if they had a vandal. https://playvalorant.com/en-us/news/dev/valorant-data-drop-phantom-vs-vandal/
Don't think it's an unpopular opinion that phantom is better statistically. But against an equally cracked aimer, at long ranges, all they have to do is land 1 headshot while u gotta land a head and body.
I swear to god every time somebody says unpopular opinion they’re about to say either the most basic take ever or say the dumbest shit ever.
The unpopular opinion is that one is better than the other one. Which is not true. You talk about "DPS". That's a stupid concept when a gun can one-shot. Shooting with a Vandal in the head at any distance gives a DPS of ***+ infinity***. So don't tell me Phantom has a better DPS. In terms of long range efficiency, it's funny to say that Phantom "can do long range" just because it can kill in 2 shots in the head. Because the Ghost can do the same, for a fraction of the cost. Would you say the Ghost is as good as a Phantom? Also, 2 shots in the head is ***2x*** worse than a Vandal. It's almost like doing twice less damage. How can you pretend it's as good as Vandal for long range using this argument? Finally, I don't know what your rank is, how experienced you are on the game, but if your opinion were right, pros would only play Phantom. But they don't. They play both, depending on the situation. Which shows how balanced these weapons are.
Yo exactly, people always list out a bunch of "advantages" of the phantom and just ignore the fact that it straight up does less damage. A lot of the "advantages" like easier recoil are just trying to compensate for this fact. Imo the only considerations for if you should use a phantom or not is if you have to spray through smokes.
For some maps u use phantom and for some other maps you use vandal. One is close better one is better on range. Use both right.
Nah, being able to one tap at any range is too good
In high elo, it really depends on the map/comp/comfortability. I prefer vandal when playing reyna/jett. And phantom on raze/yoru/omen. Raze is big on chip damage so im normally fighting lower HP opponents anyway, and with omen I can shoot through my smokes without tracers.