stalker air damage increase

Its not about the small swarming units because the protoss already have units for that like the phenoix (the main swarming destroyer) and archon but seem to lack that small hole to take down heavier unit of the air with a quick defensive (why do you think stalkers have a bonus versus armored).

Stalkers seem like a protoss swarm unit now because unless you have a bunch there not as effective versus other units protoss aren"t about swarming units.

Think of trying to protect against battle cruisers, broodlords, carriers ect.

Think of all the other units that have have a huge damage increase battle cruiser, hydras, practicly everything.

Stalkers got a 40 sheild cut and a 6 damage per hit reduction (yes they are the replacement of the dragoon because of their attack immortals are the new unit) why because of a upgrade in the form of blink zealots got charge but are basicly the same.

Disruptors do more dps then they do.

Ya terran may not have the best ground to air unit but they have the vikeing which is cheap, fast and does 40 damage versus armored units.

Lastly to see the other side of this argument each race is being made to use every single unit in battle not just 1 such as the stalkers so as long as this small antiheavy air is covored effectively by something other then the warp ray (possibly maybe the only unit that needs to do this but really it can"t do it by itself) then they are fine but I would hope that the stalker gets a slight change so its not seen as a swarming and hit and run unit.

The protoss are really the hardest to do this with because unlike the zerg, heavy protoss units promote the feeling of simply relying on a couple of units and thats not how blizz wants us to play in sc2.

Raiseing the stalkers gta damage may promote a imbalance in how units are used and make the stalker overpowered but then again for their cost they seem a bit weak in my opinion especially for a protoss unit but that will be judged in the upcomeing beta.

 

Again, you're thinking exclusively about direct combat in terms of Stalkers being a 'swarmed' unit. On top of that, I believe you're actually meaning to say 'massed', and about Protoss not being about massing units, I think you're forgetting about massed Zealots, Dragoons, Cannons, Carriers, and even Scouts, Archons, etc. Being Protoss doesn't inhibit massing. Even if they do mass, they're still focused on being a smaller army of more powerful units, because any other team massing will easily be able to outnumber them.

Think of trying to protect against Battlecruisers, Brood Lords and Carriers? I think Void Rays, Void Rays and Void Rays.

As for the Zealot, it actually has been nerfed, and Charge doesn't allow Zealots to do half as much as what Blink allows Stalkers to do. Seriously, if Dragoons could jump cliffs, rivers and chasms in StarCraft1, I can't see how you could expect them to retain their same stats.

LOL! I can't believe you brought up Disruptors, especially when you slammed me for mentioning them before. Firstly, they only about DPS them against Light Biological targets, against which the Stalkers do not have their bonus whilst Disruptors do, and secondly, why does being a spellcaster prohibit having a decent attack? If anything has an attack, it should be worth it. There's no point in having something with a slow attack of one damage or anything. So given that, the Nullifier is obviously going to have a decent attack. Given that, they're going to provide extra support against any early Air rushes, and given that, the Stalker doesn't need to deal as much damage as, say, the Hydralisk, to which you've been directly comparing it, as it has that extra support in which the player can bridge the gap to Archons or High Templar.

I'll also point out here that a particularly nasty tactic that Karune's told us has been used a fair bit in StarCraft2 so far, is getting two Disruptors into your opponents economy, having each one Force Field over the other, and just pick off enemy workers without having them able to retaliate.

I can hardly tell what you're saying about the Stalker in your last few points. If anything, all I can see is how you're complaining that using all units is encouraged for other races, but Stalkers are going to be massed, so they need to be stronger?

Diversity is encourages for Protoss, too, you know. And all that increasing Stalker damage would do is reduce diversity. There are supposed to be things that they find hard to counter, such as Mutalisks, possibly capital ships like the Battlecruiser, Carrier and Brood Lord, and Ground units such as the Marauder and Zerglings. That is where you need other units to counter them. You need Disruptors, High Templar and Archons for Mutalisks, Void Rays and Phoenixes for capital ships, Zealots for Marauders, Zealots or Colossi for Zerglings, and the list goes on. They're not the be all and end all for Protoss, nor should they be.

 

I was showing support from both claims in my last post.

Mabye im seeing the 250 health of the warp ray as weak in some way but I don"t know.

Ya to sheild but that isen"t really that big of a nerf and counting that they get charge so its really they got balanced more so then a nurf.

Mabye you could get rid of the stalker cliff jump but still have them blink and make it a bit stronger like 20 more shield and 3 more damage versus armored but that is just thown out there and is something leaning on the cring side.

Disruptors really aren"t the best example i agree.

I was agreeing with you on my last points esspecially with the one on useing all of your units

Im not makeing any more assumptions on unit stats till I see the beta.

 

Well if you're saying the Void Ray is underpowered now, too, then I honestly don't know what to say.

As for Charge, again, it can't do half of what Blink has the potential to do. Comparing the two is like comparing a minor damage upgrade to the independent upgrades for Battlecruisers.

There is absolutely no reason to even think of ever suggesting to remove the Stalker's ability to Blink up cliffs, even if you acknowledge that it's 'on the cringe side' yourself. That is the entire point of the unit. Removing it's ability to Blink up cliffs, just to make it stronger or 'cost worthy', is like removing the Dark Templar's permanent Cloak, the Siege Tank's Siege Mode, the Reaper's ability to jump, the Carrier's ability to build Interceptors or the ability for Zerglings to spawn in twos, just for the sake of giving them a couple more damage and a bit more health.

 

Come on I m not playing almighty, at least Im not the one who thinks he is in position to define what is the best or what's not; if at all you are that person, because you always pretend "you possibly can't think that...."

Well truth is, some people do think that kind of thing.
And about being almighty, here's what:
"you possibly cannot think that there is something wrong in the Protoss vs Mass air like Muta"

 

@Bthammer
i was comparing zealots against Maruders, sorry if i wasn't clear

I still think Stalkers should an additional 2 damage against armored units. Frankly i'm not sure how fast stalkers attack, if it's the same rate as Dragoons, they should deserve an additional 2 damage, 16 against armored units. Other than that, they're actually quite formidable already.' And plus, Ivhoang, Starcraft encourages the player to use a combination of units, not just one. Also, Stalkers were used well in BR1, especially with the Zealot support. It was unfortunate that the colossus was too underpowered..

I agree with ItaHexzor, Blink is an exceptionally useful ability. It encourages the player with options that are not available to other units. For instance, stalkers can gain a slight upperhand by Blinking onto a hill to get a few extra hits and to save itself from destruction. Furthermore, the stalkers have increased movement speed and an instant damage ability which allows it to 'dance' more effectively. This essentially makes the Stalker much more potent in kiting and dishing that additional shot or two which is crucial in competitive play.

 

ok but how are you going to battle against Mass mutas? Archons are slow and have low range (and now they deal 25 instead of 30), and with Mutas being quite fast (they can hit and run), only stalkers do seem to have enough range. Disruptors cannot be used too much, and storm has a reduced AoE.

Protoss do need something against mass air (against Muta for example), and what used to be Phoenix's role with Overload is no more.

 

@ Ivhoang. Asking of an opinion in relation to everything the Stalker can do, instead of seemingly exclusively about direct comparisons and one-on-one encounters, is not high and mighty. This, on the other hand, is...

Expressing an opinion is completely different to attempting to dictate the actions of others, especially when you're in no situation to do so.

As for everything else you've said, you're simply twisting facts. For example...

You said Archons are slow, when they roughly move at the same speed as a Stalker, so unless you're going to pull out the card of saying they can respond faster because of Blink, which would be completely hypocritical, this fact is irrelevant.

You said Archons have low range, when their attack is actually perfect for countering low-ranged flyers, such as the Mutalisk, as it's only one less than that of a Mutalisks, which is nearly impossible to micro, and deal splash, which instantly counters stacked Mutalisks, which is still possible, albeit harder, in StarCraft2.

You said that Archons now only deal twenty-five damage, when they now have an extra ten bonus damage to Biological targets, equating to a total damage output of thirty-five damage, splash, against Mutalisks, which is five damage more than it dealt in StarCraft1.

You said that Mutalisks are able to hit-and-run, which is completely irrelevant seeing as they can do that against all threats.

Again, you said that only Stalkers seem to have enough range, when Mutalisks can not effectively out-range Archons and when they are actually out-ranged by Disruptors and Photon Cannons. On top of that, the initial proposition for the damage increase was to the Stalker's bonus against Armoured units, which the Mutalisk is not.

You said Disruptors cannot be used too much, but provided no reasons as to why, and it's already been stated that every attack should be useful in StarCraft2, and seeing as Disruptors will most likely be an ever present force on the battlefield for the Protoss against Zerg especially, this point is moot.

You said that Psionic Storm now deals reduced damage, when Blizzard themselves has specifically stated in Batch 46, and as I have stated previously that, alongside Archons, Psionic Storm is still the best counters to massed Air, such as Mutalisks.

You said that Protoss do need something against mass Air now that Phoenixes don't have Overload, when Phoenixes are still designed to counter massed Air, and when there are, as it's been said by me, others, and Blizzard several times, that Archons and Psionic Storm are perfect counters for massed Mutalisks.

So, in summation, everything you said in that last post was either a lie, a twisted fact, plain ignorant, or irrelevant. Call that 'high and mighty' if you like, but until you're able to disprove it, it still stands.

And just to reiterate, the original proposal was for the Stalker's attack bonus against Armoured units to be increased, so a need to counter massed Mutalisks cannot possible have been a reason for wanting such a thing, nor could it have been a problem in the first place.

 

speculating on one to one encounters is the best we can do, because again, this is mere speculation.
And if you want to speculate, you can say nearly anything, from "Stalkers are too strong" to "Stalkers need a buff".

This would explain why you need to write so much.
Can you explain how speculating on events that are not fixed yet and are subject to constant changes are lying?

(I m expecting a lot of passionate writing )

 

Speculating on one-on-one encounters and direct comparisons is not the best way to go for units that rely on ambushes, mobility and surprise attacks. Doing so is like balancing a Thor's Anti-Air attack based on its Anti-Ground attack. It's irrelevant, because you're not even looking at the right factors.

Yes, you can speculate that they're too strong or too weak, but to do so in a respectable way is to back up your beliefs with facts, which you seem to be allergic or just far to stubborn to do.

If you're complaining that I'm posing a view so strongly on variable statistics, you're a complete hypocrite, as you're complaining strongly about variable statistics. Seriously, you're complaining about how the Stalker is too weak. The only difference between our views is that I back up my views with facts. Just because you hold a particular belief doesn't automatically mean it's a fact. Backing up your belief, however, can mean it's a fact.

As for lying, I wasn't saying that speculating on such events is lying, I was saying that you saying Archons are slow is lying, that Archons have too short a range is lying, that Archons now deal less damage to Mutalisks is lying, that Mutalisks being able to hit-and-run being relevant is lying, that increasing Stalkers' bonus damage to Armoured units is lying, that Stalkers are the only unit with enough range is lying, that Disruptors not being able to be used too much is lying, that Psionic Storms are no longer viable to do reduced damage is lying, and that Protoss need something against massed Air is lying.

That's what you were lying about, and you could have seen all that by actually reading my last post. Funny, I swear I've said that to you before, too.

Passionate enough for you?

 

yes I think this is quite a passionate answer: I am guessing you cannot remain pragmatic, so I'll just dismiss your aggressive attitude. Again, you said you were not trying to get down any road, yet you are going for the hostile way (which has been explored before). But calm down a sec, for I am not attacking you or anything, or saying you are wrong or lying.... so why all that anger?

By speculating you are making assumptions by choosing some hypotheses. I am making other hypotheses, so obviously we are not led to the same conclusions.

Until the game is released (because obviously the beta will bring about some further balancing), you can argue that you are right indefinitely but it would not change a thing. I did not say I was right either, I am just making assumptions like you are.

Still, it'd be interesting like to see how Protoss players will react against mass light air.

 

On dealing with light air, I really wish Blizzard would bring Overload back. It can chase mutalisks more effectively than archons (which aren't cliff jumpers; the mutas could retreat over high ground, heal, and come back).

 

Yeah well Phoenix Overload is one of the possibilities, or maybe give it something that does splash at least (be it ability or regular attack).

Otherwise, my zergs are just gonna pwn Toss very hard with mass mutas ^^

 

And again, Ivhoang, you're using my apparent anger as an excuse for you to not take a part in the conversation at all.

On top of that, a hypothesis means nothing if it isn't tested. Obviously in this case you can't test it physically, but you can still back your point up with observational or statistical facts, which, I'm sure I don't have to tell you, that you simply haven't been doing.

As for being angry, again, I'm not. I do lose my considerate touch when people try to be such douchebags, though. I wouldn't call that anger. I'd call it not being bothered to put in the effort if you're not going to read it anyway. Besides, you seem to pay more attention when you're being insulted. Too bad you always use that as a scapegoat to avoid what's being discussed though. That said, I'd prefer it when you chose to take no part in the conversation more than when you simply don't read what's being written, so it's a fair trade.

Again, too, as I've said before, unless emotion starts causing someone to think irrationally, it doesn't effect what's being said. You still have to everything I've said, though, as, as you'll see when you get around to reading it, it's not irrational in the slightest.

I would like to see how you go about testing your hypothesis though. I'm looking forwards to the part where you prove that increasing the Stalker's damage bonus against Armoured units helps when attacking Mutalisks.

Oh, and as for how Protoss should react to massed Light Air? Archons and Psionic Storm, as well as Phoenixes. That's straight from Blizzard's mouth, from a question I'm fairly sure either you or Bth would have asked yourselves, in Batch 46.

So until you're willing to actually talk about what's being discussed, I hope you enjoy the time you spend *****footing around the issues, having a go at my angry for leading me to produce supposedly irrational, but still evidently uncounterable arguments.

@ Kimera. If memory serves, Blizzard said that Overload was too exploitable. For example, players would Overload a few, forcing the enemy to retreat, then, when they came back, Overload another few, and so on and so forth. Basically, from what I heard, they basically because uncounterable, and while I would prefer to see it as opposed to Anti-Gravity, Protoss definitely have the facilities to deal with massed Mutalisks and the like. They've told us themselves, in Batch 46, Archons, Psionic Storm and Phoenixes, without Overload, are still great counters to massed Air units.

Honestly, don't listen to Ivhoang. As you can see from my last post, he just hasn't got any of the facts, and, without meaning to talk about him behind his back when straight to his face, his 'hypothesis' has absolutely no ground to stand on.

As for Mutalisks striking, retreating and healing, that would take a very long time, even with something like Transfusion, as there would simply be way to many Mutalisks to heal, and Energy only regenerates at a set rate. On top of that, their attacks would simply become predictable, and building Archons and High Templar would be an easy counter for them.

 

As a forum moderator, I think you should know that your reaction is quite inappropriate by trying to show "at all cost that you are "right". I don't even know if someone will read all your posts because of their lengths. Maybe you haven't thought about how unqualified you are for judging other people's discussions? But I'll leave that to your "judgment".

What I know however, is that there are people disagreeing with you about "how Protoss can deal with Mass light air". The main problem being that Phoenix does not have any capability against mass light air (no overload) is a problem that needs to be addressed, on way or the other. Storm does have a lower AoE. Batch 46, which you like to mention, can be outdated, I'm well afraid, so many things may have changed.

 

Yes, because Blizzard would have altered Protoss so that they aren't capable of countering Mutalisks. Yep, you've definitely got me there. I'm speechless. Now that all that's been settled with your extremely logical assumption, you may continue not responding to what is being said. Or do I have to insult you again?

And you'll see that Neon's also spoken about your behaviour in this thread, so... Good luck with that. After all, you are entitled to your own opinion.

Oh, and as for each of our judgements, you'll find that mine's actually backed up with facts, and a few pages of it at that. Care to join me? Even just one fact will do. After all, you've got to start somewhere, right?

 

You are speechless, yet you write much more than you can think. Care to think about it? Thanks but no thanks!
Here's one fact : nothing is a fact until the game is out. And until then, everybody can do his own assumptions.

That you have a problem with that, fine. Oh and thanks for the wishes, but I suggest you might keep them for yourself.

Protoss do have a problem against mass light air regardless. I hope you don't mind.

 

OK, dude, all childishness aside, I'll give you a clean break. After all, sinking to your low is only fun for so long.

So, all prior discussion aside, tell me why you think Protoss has a problem against massed Light Air.

 

Most entertaining as you say, buddy!
Countless replies have been made on this account. I suggest you have a read on them. You will see that some people do not think the same as you, yet do not need to write as much.

 

Yes, well also I've replied to all your posts so far, and seeing as that resulted in a massive *****fest, this conversation is going nowhere if we're going to keep behaving as we are. It's best to start over, so that we can discuss it without either of us being such tards.

So yes, you have said why you think so before, but this is a chance to discuss it properly. Why do you think that Protoss has a problem against massed Light Air?