EPTBut they've lost their purpose because if you have any decent number of stalks in your army your enemy is NEVER running away from you since they just ROFLstomped you....
Are stalkers really useful? - Page 4
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Mirror0423
United States175 Posts
But they've lost their purpose because if you have any decent number of stalks in your army your enemy is NEVER running away from you since they just ROFLstomped you.... | ||
|
Lobber
Canada414 Posts
| ||
|
GoldenH
1115 Posts
| ||
|
GoldenH
1115 Posts
On November 18 2010 14:30 Lobber wrote: The obvious solution is to zealot sentry every match up... It actually works surprisingly well until you know... it actually doesn't... Metalopolis >_< | ||
|
Darkstar_X
United States197 Posts
Nazgul pushed out with 12 blink stalkers (1650/750) Idra defended with 10 speedlings and 4 hydra without range (750/350) Idra wins the fight even with Nazgul's great blink micro only losing the 10 lings Nazgul lost 1500/600 to Idra losing 250/0 even though his army was over twice as expensive. Are people seriously saying hydra are worse than stalker or stalkers are a decent unit? | ||
|
mprs
Canada2933 Posts
before i read your post,i was gonna be like, dumb argument. I read your post, and my thoughts remain. Yes, they are useful. Play a 100 games without building a single stalker. Let us know how many you win. | ||
|
GoldenH
1115 Posts
Stalker has 2x health and half the DPS, and is armored for 25 minerals more... you can't really say one is good and the other is bad, they are mirrors of each other. | ||
|
Mirror0423
United States175 Posts
On November 18 2010 14:41 mprs wrote: well, they are useful for shooting ground and air units. before i read your post,i was gonna be like, dumb argument. I read your post, and my thoughts remain. Yes, they are useful. Play a 100 games without building a single stalker. Let us know how many you win. I've played nearly 100 games using 5 or less stalkers (PvTs and PvZs) and won most of them. | ||
|
AndAgain
United States2621 Posts
On November 18 2010 14:45 TossNub wrote: I've played nearly 100 games using 5 or less stalkers (PvTs and PvZs) and won most of them. What rank are you? I wouldn't mind seeing some replays of your macro games against zerg. | ||
|
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
| ||
|
Mirror0423
United States175 Posts
On November 18 2010 14:49 AndAgain wrote: What rank are you? I wouldn't mind seeing some replays of your macro games against zerg. 1050 diamond, though I'm matched up against 1700~1900 diamonds mostly, so i'm guessing that's my MMR | ||
|
SteveNick
United States304 Posts
On November 18 2010 14:42 GoldenH wrote: hydra are really bad... They are pretty much only usable in the same circumstances as Stalker, only you can't get them early game and they can't blink. Better for base defense though and nydus/drops. Stalker has 2x health and half the DPS, and is armored for 25 minerals more... you can't really say one is good and the other is bad, they are mirrors of each other. This would be a fair argument if Zerg only had hydralisk and no roaches, but that's not the case. Protoss has to rely on the Stalker for that role, while Zerg can use hydralisk OR roach depending on situation. | ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
| ||
|
Rkie
United States1278 Posts
On November 18 2010 15:03 SteveNick wrote: This would be a fair argument if Zerg only had hydralisk and no roaches, but that's not the case. Protoss has to rely on the Stalker for that role, while Zerg can use hydralisk OR roach depending on situation. But can't the Protoss go Immortal/Stalker depending on the situation? | ||
|
claricorp
Canada142 Posts
A small number of tosses ive been playing have been really playing hardcore reactive style gameplay with more expanding which can be pretty frightening to deal with midgame. (something like 5 or so gateway with robos and stargates or high templar) most of these few players are getting a few stalkers early game but mostly zealots and sentries into the late game. I find ALOT that if a toss goes high templar + zealot they will never go stargate and instead opt for a scary chargelot+high templar(sometimes archons too 0_o) and use small teams of blink stalkers to run around and kick down all my expansions. This is mainly against my heavy roach/speedling builds ive been favoring against toss lately | ||
|
GoldenH
1115 Posts
On November 18 2010 15:09 Rkie wrote: Personally, I believe that the stalker has filled the role of the dragoon very well. It may have less range, but it is much more mobile, not even counting blink. I agree that the DPS is a bit lower, but I would still take the stalker over the dragoon any day. I'd rather have a dragoon, a unit with the range to snipe bunkers, and an instant turning speed so you could stutter step that eats marines alive instead of for equal cost. It'd probably do alright against roaches too, since the only reason that the stalker is poor against roach is their turning speed/attack animation. On November 18 2010 15:09 Rkie wrote: But can't the Protoss go Immortal/Stalker depending on the situation? Why would you, the Immortals the tank, and what does the damage. The best parts of the roach/hydra. The stalker has the worst parts, low health, low damage. But hey, it shoots air. Roach hydra > zealot stalker clearly. But it wouldn't hurt the game to give the hydra a bit more health. It's too weak against air units. | ||
|
Chamenas
96 Posts
| ||
|
Chamenas
96 Posts
On November 18 2010 14:36 Darkstar_X wrote: To put how bad the stalker is into game context, I'll use Idra vs Nazgul from MLG Dallas: Nazgul pushed out with 12 blink stalkers (1650/750) Idra defended with 10 speedlings and 4 hydra without range (750/350) Idra wins the fight even with Nazgul's great blink micro only losing the 10 lings Nazgul lost 1500/600 to Idra losing 250/0 even though his army was over twice as expensive. Are people seriously saying hydra are worse than stalker or stalkers are a decent unit? If Idra has that combination, then Nazgul probably shouldn't have gone in with 12 stalkers. Some mix of Chargelots or Sentries + Stalkers or all three would have been far better. Even if SC2 is more about macro than it is about unit compositions, a poor unit composition is still going to do very poorly. | ||
|
Arisen
United States2382 Posts
They have very nice mobility with blink, and while, yes, zerg units can be faster, when successfully micro'd, a retreat is very possible if you have a decent number of stalkers left. The high range combined with thier formidable speed make for a fabulous unit in the early game. Obviously in the late game, they lose some of their power with units like immortals, etc out, but a tremendous unit all around IMO. Also, with blink, great response to muta play. | ||
|
jmack
Canada285 Posts
On November 18 2010 14:23 AndAgain wrote: I think the reason PvZ is imbalanced right now (IMO), is because protoss has no choice but to make quite a few stalkers to fend off roaches, and just in case mutas show up. On the other hand, you don't need a lot of stalkers against terran because zealot/sentry is good against MM early game. Later, robo units are good against MMM. So the strength of a protoss army in general is inversely correlated by how many stalkers it has. This isn't exactly true. Something I've been doing in my PvZ is surprisingly relevant to this thread actually. I try to exploits zergs terrible A.A. Not sure how effective the first part is, but a single or double gas steal after a 10 gate opening. Building nothing but zealots, while my core and stargate comes up, Chrono boost out two voidrays and begin an attack on the main. Queens get melted. There's a few responses but they're easily controlled. Kill any building evo chamber or hydra den. Handle any ling/roach counter attack with third voidray and zealots. Even if you lose all your zealots, the voidray will mop up. Seems to be working great for me, and you'll notice there's no stalkers built at all. Just need to wall to ensure no lings get in. This thread is sure making me question my stalker counts though....hmmmm... But I don't see immortals being any more useful. ;_; | ||
| ||
