|
The ZvZ meta game has recently been shifting more and more towards two base mutalisk play, and it's not hard to see why; you gain map control and can lock your opponent down on two/three bases while expanding aggressively yourself. There are a few ways to deal with this, the most common of course being Hydralisks and/or Infestors. However, both of these units are extremely immobile when compared to the Mutalisk; a unit that can easily run circles around Hydras and is fairly good at dodging fungal growths. However, in high-level play the roach/hydra/infestor composition is the overwhelming response to muta play, and I was curious as to why. Though my favorite and a very stable compostion, it would seem that corruptors would always be a much better response to mutas than roach/hydra/infestor, and here's why:
1) Corruptors own mutas pretty hard. I'm not exactly sure of the ratio, but I believe you need 1 corruptor for every 1.5 mutalisks, or a 2:3 ratio. That adds up to 300/200 spent on corruptors for every 300/300 spent on mutas, a price deficit that will add up incredibly quickly.
2) Unlike hydra/infestor, corruptors will give you complete map control, rendering their muta switch much less effective.
3) Corruptors are much more mobile than either hydralisks or infestors, thus making muta harass easier to deal with.
4) Corruptors can eventually be morphed into broodlords, and since you took away map control your opponent will have an even harder time dealing with them.
5) As long as you are on top of your scouting you will never have a worse ground army than your opponent (until you go into broodlords).
Yet, other than morphing into broods, we hardly ever see corruptors come into play in ZvZ, and I just want to know why.
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
I don't think corruptors will actually give you map control. Although they are more mobile than infestors or hydralisks, and they can fly, they're still substantially slower than mutalisks. You won't be able to easily move out on the map regardless. Also, unlike Hydralisks and Infestors, they can't be effective against ground units before Hive tech.
The Mutalisking player remains free to take a third base without worrying about a vicious Corruptor timing push from you, and still maintains the ability to counter-attack if you try to move out. Corruptors are just too one-dimensional to be effective at that stage of the game against mutalisks.
|
United States15275 Posts
Corruptors are a very poor gas investment in ZvZ. They can fend off muta harass and do very little else, making them the most expensive observers ever seen in a mirror matchup. They cannot give you map control because they cannot punish an enemy player for doing anything. You cannot have a better ground army than your opponent when you are going corruptors; you will not have the gas to get a viable infestor or hydra count.
|
As muta numbers increase, they get more and more effective due to the bounce damage.
Corrupters become an unviable counter, not to mention they have no use besides anti-muta, since they are only air-air.
|
corrupters are a nice addition in muta versus muta fights, even if you lost the muta count fight, corrupters won't be far away to ensure the opponent can't engage you. That was used before it was know how good infestors are against mutas. (was when fungal had the 8 seconds still). But if you don't have mutas, corrupters aren't a good idea, as the opponent will just ignore them and scoot around them. And hydras are more mobile then corrupters unless you don't spread creep, which you can do without hesitation against muta play. Especially with nydus hydras are everywhere, even before mutas.
Also if the opponent transitions away from mutas with corrupters you are a babystep away from broodlords with muta support. And hydras don't do to well against melee units that land right in them.
Anyway mutas are something that works in zvz, but really just as an tech forcing unit, while you already transition. This mass muta thing currently only works because of no creep spreading and because nydus play to add extra mobility is seen as a gas waste. Basically 14 mutas of the opponent is a wildcard to go 4 base.
|
The "metagame" is shifting away from 2 base muta. That statement may have been true 2 months ago, but then people started taking super early thirds and 2 base muta lost some of its steam. There are still games where people go 3 base muta, but that's a lot rarer than 3 base roach/hydra or roach/infestor (at least in the games I've played/seen) because the real strength of 2 base muta was to get some map control while the the non muta player pooled some gas to get a decent sized roach/hydra force to secure his base and push out on the map. With the fast third, he can just slam out a ton of roaches with some hydras then what are you really going to do?
As to adding corrupters versus mutalisks; it really depends. Most people don't go mass muta unless you're going muta as well (it's very precarious to try to switch from mutas to infestors or hydras versus mutas). Adding a spire and then building more gas heavy units to combat mutas when your army is ground based versus only a handful of mutas absolutely doesn't make sense unless you were trying to go fast BL's for some reason (which is probably never going to work). If he's going for a lot of mutas, you're going to need a lot of anti air capablity. It could be feasable to use corrupters in this scenario, but you have to think what the corrupters are going to do for you. They can fight the mutas, but then what? Are they going to help you versus his ling/bane or ultras? No. In the case that he's going heavy muta, often times it's better to favor infestors with a small number of hydras because both units are very good versus other zerg units, whereas corrupters are only good versus mutalisks, then are dead weight.
If you yourself are going for mutalisk versus mutalisk, it can make sense to pepper in some corrupters for muta/muta battles.
|
No.
Corruptors lack map control, don't do anything to deny bases. They don't solve any problem. They are just super expensive spores, and there's a reason why people don't go macro game pure roach vs muta play. It's because you need AA, and mutas are really the best 'counter' to mutas.
If you are behind in a muta vs muta game, just spore it up, and use your mutas super defensively until you can get about 20ish mutas out. Once both players have 20+ mutas, you can't really go attack eachother because it's too risky to lose them all by fighting the opponent's smaller muta army + spores. Once you get about 20 mutas out, you need to get infestors asap, so you can quickly end the muta vs muta stage of the game and move it toward ultra/infestor vs ultra/infestor. If you don't have muta when going muta style, you lose, because mass roach will own you. You need the mutas to deal with roaches. Corruptors dont' do anything to roaches.
If you are talking about like roach/corruptor vs muta play, it's too gas heavy. It's better put into infestors, if anything. And corruptors actually aren't that great against mutas - sure, 1v1 they are, but once the mutas get about 15+, corruptors get owned by them. Kind of like phoenixes I suppose? It's just way too cost inefficient to use corruptors to counter mutas, you are just better off getting mutas, turtling behind spores with them, and getting infestors asap with the mutas holding his mutas off so you don't die while teching (which you 99% of the time will, that's what so brutal about muta vs muta).
And broodlords aren't good against zerglings or banelings or mutas, which is what a muta player is going anyways.
|
Maybe the Corruptors have more use than killing muta, you can kill overlords and if they stop going muta you potentially have a chance to kill a lot more overlords.
|
No, they don't.
Once mutas get to about 15+, corruptors don't work anymore. Mutas are also pretty quick, if you wander anywhere out of your base for a second, the mutas will tear everything apart. The worst of it, is that the mutas will deny your third.
Feel free to try it, I used to add corruptors to my muta balls, and then I realized it's just horrible. If they stop going mutas, like go into roach/infestor, they are just way ahead of you.
You are talking in a vacuum. You aren't regarding the fact that mutas are more cost effective, faster, that the muta player will gain map control and have a much higher econ, and that at a certain point mutas own corruptors. You are just going to be too far behind if you go corruptors, you have no ability to get a third (or fourth, if you both go fast third).
|
Well, the muta player will probably have one of two responses to seeing corruptors.
1. He continues making more and more mutas, making a ZvT or ZvP esque ~20 muta deathball where corruptors don't do nearly enough damage because of the bounce.
2. He switches back to roach-hydra-infestor mix. Because of the corruptors, you won't have enough gas, because you have no idea if he's continuing to build mutas.
The broodlord idea is kind of silly IMO, there aren't many ZvZs (as far as what I've seen) that last until the Hive stages, and unless you tech straight to Hive (lol...) you won't need the corruptors for another ten, fifteen minutes.
|
BAD IDEA 
Because as your opponnent makes more mutas, you have to make more corrupters. however, like everyone said, they dont actually give map control, and you cant deny' their bases, so they will have a gas lead over you.
Finnally, corrupters dont actually add to an army, so if he has around 30 mutas, and have 20 corruptesr, then he starts to make a ground army, you have 40 supply that does nothing
|
i think the problem with this is most Zerg dont fully commit to muta. Muta user often find themselves vulnerable against some certain roaches timing. Therefore most people just use 6 initial muta as a map control tool to expand and deny overlord. In a very rare situation you could find muta vs muta and mostly you could always fall back on infestors play. Corruptor is simply a waste of gas. In all match up the only thing they are good at is to kill massive air units, unless you see colossi/mothership/carriers, NEVER get corruptors.
|
The whole idea of 'corruptors don't work anymore' is the same as say phoenixes 'not working anymore vs mutas'. It's true in both cases, but only because the numbers are increasingly likely to get disproportionate. The bouncing damage doesn't increase in large numbers, it just makes sure that there are things for the bounces to hit, but it's still only 7+1+0.5(0.5 = minimum damage) per hit. With upgrades, the mutalisk attacks will become worse against carapace-upgraded corruptors, seeing as the attack upgrade only adds +1/3 and +1/9 to the first and second bounces. Corruptors can give you air control if you kill enough utalisks, it would be ideal to have gotten probably less corruptors initially and added some infestors to fungal and then kill the seriously weakened stack of mutalisks (and possibly increase corruptor) numbers. You could then fly about picking off (many many) overlords.
It's extremely likely though, that this is not going to be worth it at all. I'd really like to see people try it, but corruptors are actually absolute crap for their cost anyway, they're not even actually good for dealing with colossi (but that's another argument, so don't argue with me about it here >.>), so trying to put them into a larger scale use in any match up seems like a very bad choice to me with the way they currently are.
The reason they would be bad is far from some nonsense about bounce getting better in really large numbers, as you only need enough targets to bounce Glaive Wurms against two units at a time. If there are plenty (and similar amounts) of each unit type, most of the mutalisks will be dead by the time there are only few target corruptors for them to hit.
|
If you find yourself with a Spire against another player going Mutalisks, mass mutas and drop spores and Queens, and target down stray mutalisks while fighting over those defensive structures and units. You don't need a counter unit, you need to do what he's doing BETTER. You won't hit a transitional period with Infestors without sacing muta count and Corruptors aren't good enough to give up all that Air to Ground damage. Just get better at controlling Mutalisks and save your ovies.
It's like Roach vs Roach -- fight on spines, it makes a gigantic difference.
|
Corruptors vs mutas is like corruptors vs phoenixes, only there's no possibility of colossi to shoot at with them
What CapnAmerica said is right - faster attack upgrades, better targeting and so on will win you a muta war. If you're mirror-matching and mirror-teching (feel free to use that one, guys) it's not about trying to get a cheeky hard counter.
|
Corruptors only have 1 utility. Hydra/infestor supporting your roach army has multiple utilities. Similarly, corruptors are a response. You're not gonna (relatively) blindly build 15 corruptors and then just show up in his base to kill overlords.... I mean he needs to have committed to spire tech and you have to have also committed, however, in response to his strategy. If you want to play a futile, incredibly fragile composition that isn't actually going to be a good way to spend your gas, sure, go for it. However, hydras and infestors have more options associated with their utilization.
When you're thinking of how a unit can be used, don't think of how it can be countered. Think of how it may be used in conjunction with extant units to further everything's utility. :D
|
What happens after you fend off his mutalisks? nothing. You just wasted your minerals on corruptors. They can't attack ground. Whereas going hydralisk infestor transition to roach is much more better than corruptors because they are safe against any attacks during the containtment. e.g. roach muta push, ling runby, and roach hydra, given that your opponent transitions to any of those. Now, if you have corruptors, what would you use against that army when you invested so much on corruptors? (corruptors + spire, That's a lot of gas!!)
Cheers
|
i like the idea of going corruptors so i gave it a try, and I end up with the same conclusion as most of the people here. if someone just goes mutas for map control and switches to a ground based army you just cant keep up, and it is VERY hard to keep them from expanding everywhere. His mutas can protect his distant expansions, while your corruptors dont do much.
|
Corruptors vs Mutalisks is like Corruptors vs Phoenix.... except that eventually Mutalisks just overwhelm them completely.
Corruptors are too slow and lack the burst damage to really protect expansions from worker snipes.
|
Lol. People are so stubborn in their ways. I bet most of the people who replied here have no actual experience with it.
Imo, Curroptors are actually brilliant vs mutas...
I faced this guy some time ago, I scouted around and it appeared that we were both going for a spire so I was ready to get some huge muta battles rolling...
Then when his lair was done he made an overseer to scout my base which really confused me cause I thought he was going mutas too.
He scouts my spire being done and then for a little while nothing happens but when I'm ready to go out with my mutas he shows up with a bunch of curroptors.
My mutas became completely useless and when I finally tried to fight him I just lost every muta. From that point on he just went around killing every overlord I had. Only to do a roach timing afterwards..
I got absolutely smashed, I think it's a sick good metagame kinda strategy.
I don't like to go spire but if I did I would go curroptor every game if I scouted spire. It was not even close.
|
When I see him teching to spire I will tech to infestor. Granted infestors don't have much mobility, but if he keeeps harassing all his mutas will die to fungal.
|
On January 21 2012 23:15 Cereb wrote:
Lol. People are so stubborn in their ways. I bet most of the people who replied here have no actual experience with it.
Imo, Curroptors are actually brilliant vs mutas...
I faced this guy some time ago, I scouted around and it appeared that we were both going for a spire so I was ready to get some huge muta battles rolling...
Then when his lair was done he made an overseer to scout my base which really confused me cause I thought he was going mutas too.
He scouts my spire being done and then for a little while nothing happens but when I'm ready to go out with my mutas he shows up with a bunch of curroptors.
My mutas became completely useless and when I finally tried to fight him I just lost every muta. From that point on he just went around killing every overlord I had. Only to do a roach timing afterwards..
I got absolutely smashed, I think it's a sick good metagame kinda strategy.
I don't like to go spire but if I did I would go curroptor every game if I scouted spire. It was not even close.
The boldfaced text is your issue, you don't engage with the Mutalisks against corropturs, hell, when you go mutas you should never plan to directly engage, regardless of the matchup. As for how your opponent killed your overlords... don't spread your overlords blindly in ZvZ.
Here's my take on why corroptors are just bad:
1) Corruptors are a 'defencive' counter to mutalisks in that they don't kill mutas especially quickly, they just don't die fast. In a pure mutalisk vs. pure corruptor battle, sure the corruptors win. But what if the corruptoring player wants to integrate a few mutalisks to try and deny bases? A smart mutalisking player will simply focus the mutas then run, rendering you unable to do any damage.
2) Corruptors render no counter-attacking options. As many people above me have said, you just can't deny the mutalisking player anything if you severely invest in an only AA unit. This gives a mutalisk player exactly what he/she wants: safety. You never go mutalisks to kill your opponent, and if you do then you're doing it wrong. You go mutalisks to assert map control and have a fast core army that can cover multiple bases and force certain investments out of your opponent.
3) Corruptors are slow, they just can't keep up with mutalisks. The mutalisking player gets to pick his/her battles. Even if the corruptor player is flying around killing overlords, what's stopping you from just going into their drone line? Even if they can defend in a direct engagement, who said you have to directly engage? What becomes worse about this is that you have no way to force a fight, such as fungle growthing the mutas in place or building enough missle turrets to be safe and sending your marine/tank army to the zerg's third.
|
On January 21 2012 23:56 Grndr101 wrote:
When I see him teching to spire I will tech to infestor. Granted infestors don't have much mobility, but if he keeeps harassing all his mutas will die to fungal.
high league player can spread their muta and sent one or two to kill your infestors.
that being said, one mistake and most muta dead is quite the world's most horrible feeling, which is why I don't go muta often lol
I think most people have said it already.
Gas heavy for a unit that don't really "counter" muta that well because they are too slow to deal with muta harass and also they are quite useless other than hunting overlords.
|
lol, make spores, and dont commit to a head on fight with your mutas soon as they pop? multiple posters JUST said, corruptors become obsolete once you have 15+ mutas. as in, don't suicide the first 6 or 8 you build into corruptors. lol spores dood... spores. oh yeah, and counter attacks. brainificate.
thinkify.
|
1) Corruptors own mutas pretty hard. I'm not exactly sure of the ratio, but I believe you need 1 corruptor for every 1.5 mutalisks, or a 2:3 ratio. That adds up to 300/200 spent on corruptors for every 300/300 spent on mutas, a price deficit that will add up incredibly quickly.
2) Unlike hydra/infestor, corruptors will give you complete map control, rendering their muta switch much less effective.
3) Corruptors are much more mobile than either hydralisks or infestors, thus making muta harass easier to deal with.
4) Corruptors can eventually be morphed into broodlords, and since you took away map control your opponent will have an even harder time dealing with them.
5) As long as you are on top of your scouting you will never have a worse ground army than your opponent (until you go into broodlords).
1. Not really, Mutalisks are better than Corruptors because a Mutalisk can harass more. A mutalisk has more mobillity.
2. You don't need map control as long as you have three base roach/hydra/festor. You can just do a push and you have a 95% chance of winning. Corruptors don't give you map control, either. They are fairly slow so you cant move out with them.
3. Yes, but hydra/infestor is better than the corruptor in a straight up engagement.
4. Ok, I guess so.
5. Yes you will, mass ling baneling will destroy you. Once you kill all of his mutalisks, then what? You have a huge amount of corruptors just sitting there as the speed lings and speed banes wreck your mass roach army and start to eat away at your bases.
|
Show me one replay of a Muta player losing to a player who built Corruptors, and I will find at least 5 reasons that loss had nothing at all to do with the other player building Corruptors.
Basically what most people said in the thread are true. Corruptors neither prevent the opponent from taking extra bases, nor give you the ability to take expansions and keep up with him. The moment you try to take a 3rd and defend it, the Mutas will be able to harass again and there's nothing you can do to stop them without overbuilding Corruptors (you have to split them and still have enough) and/or static defense at every base - which sets you even further behind.
|
Only time I've used corruptors are when I know muta battles are coming and I'm behind, they can tank a lot of shots and can win you fights where you are behind 4-5 in the mutalisk count. I've had one opponent BM me (WTF CORRUPTOR U BAD) - he lost that fight, and I won the game =D
|
i think hydras and corrupters serve pretty much the same purpose, with hydra being more effective than corrupters.
UNLESS for some reason your opponent is makinga lot of banelings as they expect hydras, and a roach/ corrupter composition may work.
|
Corruptors are stupid expensive. If you're able to get up enough to take down the muta flock, you NEED to be close to Brood Lord tech. If you have a gaggle of Corruptors just sitting around you will get rolled over by roaches. You can't think in a vacuum. Corruptors may be able to beat mutas (haven't actually seen it tried), but it's the next step that will get you killed if you aren't perfect.
|
Beating mutalisks is pretty easy. Take a fast third, DON'T MAKE HYDRAS (too many players make this mistake), and just pump a lot of queens, roaches and infestors while getting +1 attack followed by carapace upgrades (roaches with carpace dominate ling muta). Then get overlord speed, make a creep highway, and just attack and win. 10 queens with tons of transfuse, 30 something upgraded roaches and 5 or more infestors will beat anything. If they go for roach, they'll lose because of your queens, infestors and upgrade advantage, and if they go ling speedbane muta you're basically hardcountering there composition so they're guaranteed to lose.
|
1) Corruptors own mutas pretty hard. I'm not exactly sure of the ratio, but I believe you need 1 corruptor for every 1.5 mutalisks, or a 2:3 ratio. That adds up to 300/200 spent on corruptors for every 300/300 spent on mutas, a price deficit that will add up incredibly quickly.
2) Unlike hydra/infestor, corruptors will give you complete map control, rendering their muta switch much less effective.
3) Corruptors are much more mobile than either hydralisks or infestors, thus making muta harass easier to deal with.
4) Corruptors can eventually be morphed into broodlords, and since you took away map control your opponent will have an even harder time dealing with them.
5) As long as you are on top of your scouting you will never have a worse ground army than your opponent (until you go into broodlords).
How can 5 be true? there is no way to turn the corruptors into ground units?
say your opponent got 21 mutas (42 suply) and you get 14 corruptors (28 suply)
Then they clash and you are left with the useless corruptors and he can replace his mutas instandly for ground units
You could then kill off your own corruptors but is that realy a reasonable way to go?
Annyway: also wondered why zergs didnt use corruptor more against muta and this the only reason i could think of
Can agree with post above btw, armour is a realy good counter against mutas as it removes all the splash
|
1) Corruptors own mutas pretty hard. I'm not exactly sure of the ratio, but I believe you need 1 corruptor for every 1.5 mutalisks, or a 2:3 ratio. That adds up to 300/200 spent on corruptors for every 300/300 spent on mutas, a price deficit that will add up incredibly quickly.
2) Unlike hydra/infestor, corruptors will give you complete map control, rendering their muta switch much less effective.
3) Corruptors are much more mobile than either hydralisks or infestors, thus making muta harass easier to deal with.
4) Corruptors can eventually be morphed into broodlords, and since you took away map control your opponent will have an even harder time dealing with them.
5) As long as you are on top of your scouting you will never have a worse ground army than your opponent (until you go into broodlords).
Yet, other than morphing into broods, we hardly ever see corruptors come into play in ZvZ, and I just want to know why.
Hydras and infestors are a more cost efficient way of dealing with mutas, and are more usefull in a zerg army composition
corrupters cant shoot ground units so its not much of map control, the most you can do is kill overlords
and unless you are rushing for hive tech and then Greater spire, and even if you are, you will have a flock of corrupters sitting there waiting to be used until you can even morph them into brrods
|
lately I've been play solely the muta style and it's great! It's only weakness is that you need great micro in battles and being able to macro while harrasing. In terms of counter builds the roach/ling/baneling seems to be hard to deal with and also a well timed (not scouted) roach all-in. The corruptor counter could work in the late game when you are transitioning into broodlords, in any other case, not.
|
Corrupters become useless very quickly after dealing with mutalisks. If youre behind in muta count and are trying to catch up mixing in 3-4 corrupters can help tank some damage in big air battles but otherwise it is a wasted investment into an army that cant deal with an opponents transition into heavy roach numbers. Over-committing corrupters is a good way to lose ZvZs if your opponent catches wind of it.
|
Corrupters are not a good choice unless you decide to get a spire as well after his and don't want to commit to air, just want a deterrence. Even then, it's meh. Corrupters are simply too slow, and while they DO beat mutalisks, that's only if the mutalisks fight. Corrupter damage output is VERY low, so corrupters getting shots off on mutalisks is pretty negligible. And since corrupters ONLY job is to defend mutas and possibly clear ovies depending on his muta count (recall, corrupters can't retreat from mutas, so usually they need to stay in base as there's no reason to commit to them), it's a fairly hefty investment since they're already more expensive than mutas.
|
Norway10161 Posts
I renamed your thread. Please follow the strategy forum guidelines when making threads.
|
I have explained this before in a muta zvz thread, but it got shot down terribly. I have experimented it quite a bit and also experience the receiving end of this build. It's up to you guys to believe and try it out for yourselves since i don't have any replays.
1. You do not produce corruptors together with mutas.
Corruptors thrash mutas in low numbers because of their 'tanklebilty' not dps. You get a half-assed composition, they will just focus-fire the mutas and retreat. Have an overseer to scout they are indeed going spire, and commit to corruptors fully.
2. Strength of this build is raw firepower. Mobility has almost no relevance.
What do you do when you have a more cost efficient anti-air? You invest more into your ground army (banelings). Simple logic tells you that if you attack now, you will win the ground battle and force their mutas to defend. Lose this timing window and it's game over. If you manage to kill off some mutas and gain enough air dominance, start adding mutas and play like a normal spire vs ground tech game.
Mobility to buy time to build a huge muta flock is not a valid argument. The player with corruptors is the aggressor.
A better argument would be mutas have the ability to snipe enemy's larger quantity of banelings so your own banelings can own. So in the end it pretty much comes down to micro, similar to how bw zergs utilise mutas to snipe off HTs.
|
You can't do anything with corrupters after the muta's are dead,but if you went roach hydra and make all that gas they spent useless, spore your base up real good and go roll his spine forest the game is over
You need less gas to counter muta then it takes to make mutas if you go hydra spore,and you make the muta's useless its gg
|
On January 24 2012 03:05 babysimba wrote:
I have explained this before in a muta zvz thread, but it got shot down terribly. I have experimented it quite a bit and also experience the receiving end of this build. It's up to you guys to believe and try it out for yourselves since i don't have any replays.
1. You do not produce corruptors together with mutas.
Corruptors thrash mutas in low numbers because of their 'tanklebilty' not dps. You get a half-assed composition, they will just focus-fire the mutas and retreat. Have an overseer to scout they are indeed going spire, and commit to corruptors fully.
2. Strength of this build is raw firepower. Mobility has almost no relevance.
What do you do when you have a more cost efficient anti-air? You invest more into your ground army (banelings). Simple logic tells you that if you attack now, you will win the ground battle and force their mutas to defend. Lose this timing window and it's game over. If you manage to kill off some mutas and gain enough air dominance, start adding mutas and play like a normal spire vs ground tech game.
Mobility to buy time to build a huge muta flock is not a valid argument. The player with corruptors is the aggressor.
A better argument would be mutas have the ability to snipe enemy's larger quantity of banelings so your own banelings can own. So in the end it pretty much comes down to micro, similar to how bw zergs utilise mutas to snipe off HTs.
You're completely wrong. Mobility is everything, and I've played with and vs corrupters many times, and they're simply not good. It's the entire fact you can't retreat vs mutas. And you won't have a larger ground army either when each corrupter is costing 50 more minerals. Mutas can deny a third, corrupters cannot. Mutas can avoid the corrupters and still deny the third. As you say, corrupters are good for tankability, not DPS, so even on the offchance some mutas do fly past some corrupters, like one muta dies max, oh well. If you were going to try anti muta - you might as well have gone for infestor/hydra.
|
Corruptors are a bad response.
Get the HSC4 replay pack off liquipedia and go to groupstage 2 -> group a -> dimaga vs darkforce -> meta
That is how you counter mutalisks.
The counter to muta is just attacking, they are a weak battle unit that gets destroyed by micro.
Queen / Hydra / Infestor hard counter the mutalisk, throw in a few more units to deal with enemy ground army and they will collapse to a push.
Zerg have the most effective anti-mutalisk spell with fungal growth with the other spell for the same caster being rapid spam of free anti-air infested terrans(!), it's always a bit eye-brow raising to see substantial numbers of mutas in z v z.
I really don't like this corruptor talk because it does not exploit the weakness of the enemy strategy.
It is an attempt to beat the enemy unit, not the enemy strategy. I feel that is fundamentally wrong.
|
On January 24 2012 04:38 greenknight999 wrote:
Corruptors are a bad response.
Get the HSC4 replay pack off liquipedia and go to groupstage 2 -> group a -> dimaga vs darkforce -> meta
That is how you counter mutalisks.
The counter to muta is just attacking, they are a weak battle unit that gets destroyed by micro.
Queen / Hydra / Infestor hard counter the mutalisk, throw in a few more units to deal with enemy ground army and they will collapse to a push.
Zerg have the most effective anti-mutalisk spell with fungal growth with the other spell for the same caster being rapid spam of free anti-air infested terrans(!), it's always a bit eye-brow raising to see substantial numbers of mutas in z v z.
I really don't like this corruptor talk because it does not exploit the weakness of the enemy strategy.
It is an attempt to beat the enemy unit, not the enemy strategy. I feel that is fundamentally wrong.
That's not a counter, that was just an allin by dimaga that luckily worked.
|
Why use Corruptors when you can use Queens and spend 0 gas, so that it can go to your infestors + tech?
Not to mention spread creep faster to your potential third base so that you can eventually use spore/spine/queen defense there as well?
Not to mention the fact that Queens can be added to a push you can make mid/end game.
Not to mention the fact that Corruptors become useless if the other player stops making mutalisks immediately and switches to roach/hydra.
Not to mention......................
close the thread. thanks.
|
On January 24 2012 07:08 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2012 04:38 greenknight999 wrote:
Corruptors are a bad response.
Get the HSC4 replay pack off liquipedia and go to groupstage 2 -> group a -> dimaga vs darkforce -> meta
That is how you counter mutalisks.
The counter to muta is just attacking, they are a weak battle unit that gets destroyed by micro.
Queen / Hydra / Infestor hard counter the mutalisk, throw in a few more units to deal with enemy ground army and they will collapse to a push.
Zerg have the most effective anti-mutalisk spell with fungal growth with the other spell for the same caster being rapid spam of free anti-air infested terrans(!), it's always a bit eye-brow raising to see substantial numbers of mutas in z v z.
I really don't like this corruptor talk because it does not exploit the weakness of the enemy strategy.
It is an attempt to beat the enemy unit, not the enemy strategy. I feel that is fundamentally wrong. That's not a counter, that was just an allin by dimaga that luckily worked.
That is literally the counter to mutalisks.
|
I've been using corruptors against muta since when the game still had Jungle Basin in the map pool.
Remember that map was muta heaven in zvz. Anyway, I'm sad to say that pure corruptors is a poor choice...
They are actually significantly slower than mutas...to the point that mutas can actively evade them.
There have been many games where I was unable to catch the muta flock until it ran completely out of control and there's nothing you can do.
These days against muta, I have to get infestors
or 2 base hydra push
or mutas myself with added corruptors for the extra HP.
|
this is a temp solution. Corrupters do beat muta in low numbers but once muta hit critical mass they start to win again. that in addition to the fact that the corrupters lack of speed and inability to hit the ground makes the unit sorta worthless.
maybe something lke a roach corrupter timing well the muta count is hovering around 15 or less but this assumes you had all the information you needed way before hand.
Possibly viable but requires a lot going in your favor
|
I think a lot of the people here are missing the point. Given that corrupters trade more efficiently, you need fewer and with less investment to counter mutas. That leaves you with more resources for a stronger ground force. It is do-able but requires a lot of micro.
The question should be whether it is efficient enough that your ground army wont get stomped by the opponent zerg's ground units + mutas focusing down your ground units; ending up with corrupters for you, and ground army for your opponent. The corruption debuff can also be clutch in this scenario. Now you have a stronger ground army, add the extra damage from the corruption debuff, and you're looking at a pretty good chance to killing your opponent's army.
Is that still enough? Opponent zerg will reinforce with ground units only (seeing corruptor) and you will have a dwindled army in opponent base - unless you pull out and come back with an even bigger ground army.
You have to threaten the opponent base and force mutas to engage you, otherwise he will send mutas to your mineral line while engaging with ground army. And If he tries to base-trade with just mutas, you will come ahead due to stronger ground forces and corruption debuff (to kill opponent ground forces) and take out buildings faster than mutas can.
So, I think it is do-able, but requires a lot of micro (which can hurt your macro and end up losing the game). If you want to counter with a-move, then go for hydras against mutas. Infestors come close second, A move and cast aoe. With corruptors, you a-move and single cast.
|
On January 24 2012 09:53 Yonnua wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2012 07:08 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 24 2012 04:38 greenknight999 wrote:
Corruptors are a bad response.
Get the HSC4 replay pack off liquipedia and go to groupstage 2 -> group a -> dimaga vs darkforce -> meta
That is how you counter mutalisks.
The counter to muta is just attacking, they are a weak battle unit that gets destroyed by micro.
Queen / Hydra / Infestor hard counter the mutalisk, throw in a few more units to deal with enemy ground army and they will collapse to a push.
Zerg have the most effective anti-mutalisk spell with fungal growth with the other spell for the same caster being rapid spam of free anti-air infested terrans(!), it's always a bit eye-brow raising to see substantial numbers of mutas in z v z.
I really don't like this corruptor talk because it does not exploit the weakness of the enemy strategy.
It is an attempt to beat the enemy unit, not the enemy strategy. I feel that is fundamentally wrong. That's not a counter, that was just an allin by dimaga that luckily worked. That is literally the counter to mutalisks.
No, it isn't.
If it was, Dimaga wouldn't have tried to take a third earlier. He would have just done it. It was a desperation attack that worked.
|
On January 24 2012 11:15 plogamer wrote:
I think a lot of the people here are missing the point. Given that corrupters trade more efficiently, you need fewer and with less investment to counter mutas. That leaves you with more resources for a stronger ground force. It is do-able but requires a lot of micro.
The first problem is that the corruptors are not actually that effective at defending against mutas because they're too slow. The enemy can run circles around you and slowly pick apart the edges of your base.
The question should be whether it is efficient enough that your ground army wont get stomped by the opponent zerg's ground units + mutas focusing down your ground units; ending up with corrupters for you, and ground army for your opponent. The corruption debuff can also be clutch in this scenario. Now you have a stronger ground army, add the extra damage from the corruption debuff, and you're looking at a pretty good chance to killing your opponent's army.
Is that still enough? Opponent zerg will reinforce with ground units only (seeing corruptor) and you will have a dwindled army in opponent base - unless you pull out and come back with an even bigger ground army.
Most muta play involves having a lot of spines at their bases, meaning your army advantage will be nullified. Perhaps you can try and circumvent this with nydus or something, but generally I don't think it's going to work out as you would hope.
You have to threaten the opponent base and force mutas to engage you, otherwise he will send mutas to your mineral line while engaging with ground army. And If he tries to base-trade with just mutas, you will come ahead due to stronger ground forces and corruption debuff (to kill opponent ground forces) and take out buildings faster than mutas can.
If this is your goal, then you might as well get hydras instead, since they're going to be more effective than corruptors in most situations.
Basically, corruptors probably don't have enough advantages over the alternatives (hydralisk, infestor) to warrant their use.
|
On January 24 2012 11:57 Slithe wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 24 2012 11:15 plogamer wrote:
I think a lot of the people here are missing the point. Given that corrupters trade more efficiently, you need fewer and with less investment to counter mutas. That leaves you with more resources for a stronger ground force. It is do-able but requires a lot of micro. The first problem is that the corruptors are not actually that effective at defending against mutas because they're too slow. The enemy can run circles around you and slowly pick apart the edges of your base.
The question should be whether it is efficient enough that your ground army wont get stomped by the opponent zerg's ground units + mutas focusing down your ground units; ending up with corrupters for you, and ground army for your opponent. The corruption debuff can also be clutch in this scenario. Now you have a stronger ground army, add the extra damage from the corruption debuff, and you're looking at a pretty good chance to killing your opponent's army.
Is that still enough? Opponent zerg will reinforce with ground units only (seeing corruptor) and you will have a dwindled army in opponent base - unless you pull out and come back with an even bigger ground army.
Most muta play involves having a lot of spines at their bases, meaning your army advantage will be nullified. Perhaps you can try and circumvent this with nydus or something, but generally I don't think it's going to work out as you would hope.
You have to threaten the opponent base and force mutas to engage you, otherwise he will send mutas to your mineral line while engaging with ground army. And If he tries to base-trade with just mutas, you will come ahead due to stronger ground forces and corruption debuff (to kill opponent ground forces) and take out buildings faster than mutas can.
If this is your goal, then you might as well get hydras instead, since they're going to be more effective than corruptors in most situations. Basically, corruptors probably don't have enough advantages over the alternatives (hydralisk, infestor) to warrant their use.
True say. I was doing my best to play the devil's advocate.
|
I've been testing out a build for ZvZ using corruptors. Check out the replays below.
Basically I open roaches to turtle up but this can also cause my opponent to go spines and a roach warren themselves which is good for me because I'm not going to be attacking him directly.
I proceed to tech and get spire and get about 5 corruptors and if they go muta i go more corruptors with the armor upgrade. I try and kill as many overlords as i can while teching and spining. I suppose you can use your minerals for lings but i prefer spines.
Often the reaction to the broodlords is to all in with their ground army so I sack my third and just spine my nat more and sometimes use infestors which I got earlier to build up energy.
I haven't often had problems vsing muta because they give up on that tech most of the time. I find you can micro the corruptors very easily against muta and just try and spread them out. The corruptors have a decent range for micro if you practice it in a unit tester online.
I admit this is not a stable build but it can throw people off.
If anyone watches the replays some constructive criticism about how to further the build and make it more stable would be most welcome.
Replays:
http://www.mediafire.com/?0l5dvrlhtl00040
http://www.mediafire.com/?29138pu17p0c05y
http://www.mediafire.com/?9h01cqcl59avude
http://www.mediafire.com/?vjry8v4cve1yti0
http://www.mediafire.com/?doqwbrn8qe28x13
http://www.mediafire.com/?y4crt6972koy889
|
On January 21 2012 23:15 Cereb wrote:
Lol. People are so stubborn in their ways. I bet most of the people who replied here have no actual experience with it.
Imo, Curroptors are actually brilliant vs mutas...
I faced this guy some time ago, I scouted around and it appeared that we were both going for a spire so I was ready to get some huge muta battles rolling...
Then when his lair was done he made an overseer to scout my base which really confused me cause I thought he was going mutas too.
He scouts my spire being done and then for a little while nothing happens but when I'm ready to go out with my mutas he shows up with a bunch of curroptors.
My mutas became completely useless and when I finally tried to fight him I just lost every muta. From that point on he just went around killing every overlord I had. Only to do a roach timing afterwards..
I got absolutely smashed, I think it's a sick good metagame kinda strategy.
I don't like to go spire but if I did I would go curroptor every game if I scouted spire. It was not even close.
The problem here is that you went mutas and he went corruptors, the problem was that you went mutas and he went corruptors and you simply engaged him in a fight that you could not win...
I mean isn't it commonly known that you can run away, in a ground fight if you rock up and your opponent has good army composition and it's 50% larger than you do you engage? no you run away...it's pretty simple
Corruptors can't attack ground, why not fly your mutas constantly over the spores. Your mutas are faster, take them home then how about run them to his base snipe some probes, take them home, repeat. He will either have to build his own anti-air at his base or keep his corrupters there.
Whilst his econemy is weakened from building inefficient corruptors you can tech to infestors and have a roach/hydra/infestor timing attack if he is pushing for hive (easily scouted just drop some changlings and what not) heck just fly your mutas over if you can. If you not going to attack smash out some probes, tech and get an expansion, do not fear his corruptors can't actually hurt your expansion yay
all you have to do is stop making mutas, transition to a ground army and utalise your better economy and the fact that his corrupters can't strengthen his own ground army, it's gg
|
Should we really be talking aboute Hive tech in ZvZ? Broodlords should be taken out of the list of reasons to get them, that would only be as a bonus if it is actuly good. Personally I dont think its good, mutas are faster so you still cant move out, and they can just swich to a ground army soo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
