|
On March 26 2012 10:25 crocodile wrote:
Thank you guys for spoiling GSL for me. Now let me explain something to you. If DRG goes mass mutas in a game, its viable. End of story. Do you honestly think DRG would go for a strategy if there was even a shred of doubt that it's viable? If it didn't work in practice, or if he thought it wouldn't work AT ALL, he wouldn't do it in gsl. People don't use GSL code S games to prove a point.
Don't come to TL if you don't want to be spoiled after a tournament.
You keep going on "it's viable" "it's viable" but look
On March 26 2012 09:58 darkscream wrote:
They have their uses, especially if you know you have some tangible advantage
On March 26 2012 09:58 Tachion wrote:
It's not a matter of viability. Everyone knows mutas are viable
Honestly what are you responding to? You're not putting much thought or effort into this crocodile.
|
Instead of racing to muta's on two base, why not delay it them for a bit using ling/bane while getting 6 geysers? 6 geysers in my experience is enough to fund mutas and double evo chamber with banes.
|
Seem legit. Blizzard has nerf them.
|
I quit making mutalisks in every matchup. Especially ZvT. They just aren't effective at all. Every terran masses marines, which crush mutas. The greatest strength of mutas is being able to harass, and zerg can't harass because they are constantly on the defensive against aggressive terran play.
|
On March 26 2012 10:53 sgtjimmy wrote:
Instead of racing to muta's on two base, why not delay it them for a bit using ling/bane while getting 6 geysers? 6 geysers in my experience is enough to fund mutas and double evo chamber with banes.
You won't be able to get a third with hellions on the map. That's why in high level play, reactor hellion is so fucking good. By the time you could get your third up, you have to fully saturate your 2 base, and so you might as well lair if your third is going to have to be taken so late. So reactor hellion expand forces zerg to play 'honest' by forcing them to only drone up 2 base, not 3, and only take their third after fully saturating 2 base (because it's not worth making 30 lings just to stave 6 hellions just so you can take your third quicker).
It's not a matter of "why not just get later muta on 3 base", it's a matter of "these fucking hellions keep killing my motherfucking drone every time I try to take my third, fuck this, I'm forced to just drone up 2 base, and I might as well tech up to lair while I'm sitting here".
So if you can get around the hellions, go for it bro. I've never been able to get my third before 60 supply, at least, not without just completely sacc'ing my economy and basically going for a baneling bust and fucking over my economy just the same, but without the intention of baneling busting. That's why builds like reaper expand or 2 rax kind of suck - oh for real no hellions? Boom, third taken, get speed, any kind of 2 base attack is held with proper scouting and banes.
On the other hand, stimmed marines with medivacs are hard to deal with without baneling speed, and drops and banshees are hell without mutas, although it's definitely possible (but hard if you had to deal reactor hellion). Not saying you can't deal with it on hatch tech. This point is actually kind of irrelevant, since it is possible to deal with. It just means T can put on pressure, if you fend it off, oh well, he denied a bit of droning, easily took his third, and had no problem dedicating a timing, and knowing he won't get punished if it's held off and take his third easily.
On a side note, I have seen some zergs go for 2 base roach, using roaches to secure third. I don't know why, but when they do this, they never go mutas, and instead go for infestors, and then super fast hive. I don't know if that just means you can't go mutas doing that, or you can but those particular players preferred infestor play, but that's just an interesting metagame shift I've noticed, and I'm not sure if it's going to be the future of ZvT, or the flavor of the month.
|
On March 16 2012 09:24 Jermstuddog wrote:
This is one of the reasons I got so annoyed with the muta nerf in ZvP.
Mutalisks are a dying unit in SC2
They have already become useless in ZvT, they have failed finding use in ZvZ, and now, they are basically worthless in ZvP.
I made the suggestion before the nerf, and plenty were quick to laugh at the absurdity of my statement, but I am happy to restate the same exact thing.
Mutas were never known for their unrivaled power, otherwise we would see them dominating all match-ups. Rather, the very reason they were so hated by Protoss is the reason why they are bad units in general.
Mutas don't deliver.
While Mutalisks can be good momentarily, in high-level SC2, they do not offer a way to seal a game... More often, by choosing to go muta, the Zerg player is commiting himself to a very weak midgame army and hoping to win through an unchecked mass expansion followup or a bad base trade for his opponent.
Mutalisks should have been buffed, not nerfed. They are quickly losing viability in general, essentially leaving Zerg with the fewest viable units in any matchup. zerglings and roaches are now making up at least 90% of every Zerg army in all matchups and this trend has no signs of slowing down.
Thanks Blizzard for boxing me in to ling/roach in all MUs, that's what makes for interesting games.
It wasn't too long ago that artosis when asked what the best unit in the game was responded with either the ghost or the mutalisk. Mutalisks are incredibly strong in SC2 and they work practically in all matchups. Maybe in the current metagame they arent being used much but that doesn't mean they are useless. DRG arguably the best player in the world uses mutas frequently just not the same way they were being used a year ago. Mutalisks are containment and harassment options. You dont just blindly build them in all matchups (which would still get you to atleast diamond league), you use them situationally, when your opponent stretches himself too thin, or you need to keep them contained for a few min while you get up broodlords or something.
People use to just mass them automatically off two base right when they got lair and it took the metagame a while to phase that out. This is just the sign that the game is getting more advanced. In ZvT specifically terrans are going mass thor alot which would explain why you dont see mutas right away. Mutalisks do not need a buff! lol
|
i never liked mutalisks in ZvT. they are such a fragile unit and ppl are starting to counter them more and more easily. protoss players can counter them just fine with just blink stalkers and without the need for phoenixes, but blizz just had to answer the call of the whiners and buff phoenixes to hard counter them even more.
i liked destinys infestor style and always used that rather then mutas, but even infestors are not what they use to be because they got hit with the nerf bat to many times.
i honestly dont know what to say about it with me going on a complete rant, but i will 100% agree that mutas are slowly being phased out of all match ups except for ZvZ, but even in ZvZ they are easily countered with infestor hydra.
|
On March 16 2012 08:51 FairForever wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2012 08:26 jrkirby wrote:
If people split their banelings, they might be more effective. Not even in the GSL (as far as I've seen) has anyone ever split their banelings to avoid splash from tanks and collosus. I think if they did that, they could do the same damage with less banelings, and use the extra gas to get mutas. If people individually fired banelings with tanks, then you'd need less tanks, and could use extra gas to get more medivacs. Possible, but highly unrealistic seeing as it is so difficult to split banelings while micro'ing ten other things, similar to how you would never individually target separate lings or banelings with each tank.
i think he means flank with banelings in each army.
most zergs pro tend to clump up banelings when engaging and makes it easier for tanks to take a huge chunk of banelings away.
|
i cant even believe about mutas are going out. People use them all the time but if your arnt confident in your ability to out multitask your opponent then you don't use them. Violet went mutas in almost every game vs foreigners but went infestor ling vs ganzi and other korean terrans in the tourney that i cant remember :D.....
Mutas are still good but now that terrans now how to defend mediocre harass its the same as reactor hellions. Terrans figured out how to defend standard muta harass and you need to do more than a move to make them useful.
But in the ladder its just that its an old style people are used to, if your gonna play it you need to outmultitask your opponent nowadays imo
|
^ I don't think you have to have 'better' multitask to use mutas. Terran has to multitask the most in ZvT imo, even if the zerg is using mutas. You don't have to harass with your mutas to make them effective. Now I know I'm pretty bad, and I 'don't use mutas correctly' according to some high masters/GMs I've practiced with, but just fielding them forces Terran to build lots of turrets, stay in his base, and kill off his reinforcements and snip tanks. Basically in a ZvT, as long as you keep your mutas alive and don't run them over marines, whenever he pushes, you will own the push because they add so much dps and snipe tanks so quickly anytime he pushes before really being maxed out with lots of upgrades. But if you lose them, then his push is impossible to deal with. It forces T to stay in his base, and if you lose too many, it means he can push and be effective.
Maybe mutas aren't the metagame trend, but zerg were still staying within reasonable win rates against terran before they 'fell out'. They hardly aren't at the point where they aren't viable, I just think that Zerg is experimenting with a lot of stuff - using roaches to secure their third vs hellions before lair, roach/bane all-ins on 2 base as a possibility to counter fast third by T, having a roach warren on 2 base to possibly go 2 base roach/bane all-in OR fast third before lair and using the roach warren/anti-muta way to possibly all-in if they see a chance too and fall back to fast third play if they don't feel confident it will work, and super fast hive style.
There's also recently been some maps, like Entombed and Antiga, where mutas aren't as good because of lack of airspace, and the thirds being closer meaning it's easier to defend drops with just a ground army, and T is going to take a fast third for free anyways so you might as well take it as a chance to go super fast hive.
I'm not sold on mutas being dead. That said, it's very interesting to see where zerg goes - if this infestor play/ roach for fast third/fast 3 base hive style is going to be better, or if it will be flavor of the month.
|
On March 26 2012 11:30 Belial88 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 10:53 sgtjimmy wrote:
Instead of racing to muta's on two base, why not delay it them for a bit using ling/bane while getting 6 geysers? 6 geysers in my experience is enough to fund mutas and double evo chamber with banes. You won't be able to get a third with hellions on the map. That's why in high level play, reactor hellion is so fucking good. By the time you could get your third up, you have to fully saturate your 2 base, and so you might as well lair if your third is going to have to be taken so late. So reactor hellion expand forces zerg to play 'honest' by forcing them to only drone up 2 base, not 3, and only take their third after fully saturating 2 base (because it's not worth making 30 lings just to stave 6 hellions just so you can take your third quicker). It's not a matter of "why not just get later muta on 3 base", it's a matter of "these fucking hellions keep killing my motherfucking drone every time I try to take my third, fuck this, I'm forced to just drone up 2 base, and I might as well tech up to lair while I'm sitting here". So if you can get around the hellions, go for it bro. I've never been able to get my third before 60 supply, at least, not without just completely sacc'ing my economy and basically going for a baneling bust and fucking over my economy just the same, but without the intention of baneling busting. That's why builds like reaper expand or 2 rax kind of suck - oh for real no hellions? Boom, third taken, get speed, any kind of 2 base attack is held with proper scouting and banes. On the other hand, stimmed marines with medivacs are hard to deal with without baneling speed, and drops and banshees are hell without mutas, although it's definitely possible (but hard if you had to deal reactor hellion). Not saying you can't deal with it on hatch tech. This point is actually kind of irrelevant, since it is possible to deal with. It just means T can put on pressure, if you fend it off, oh well, he denied a bit of droning, easily took his third, and had no problem dedicating a timing, and knowing he won't get punished if it's held off and take his third easily. On a side note, I have seen some zergs go for 2 base roach, using roaches to secure third. I don't know why, but when they do this, they never go mutas, and instead go for infestors, and then super fast hive. I don't know if that just means you can't go mutas doing that, or you can but those particular players preferred infestor play, but that's just an interesting metagame shift I've noticed, and I'm not sure if it's going to be the future of ZvT, or the flavor of the month.
Belial, normally you have an awesome view on the game, but here I completely disagree with you. Defensive roach openers are fantastically good about keeping a certain degree of map control so that you can take a third base at a more desirable time.
I am still flip flopping back and forth between mutas and infestors, and honestly I like mutas! Infestors are so "i sit on my ass and get 200/200 with mass lings and spines and broods," which is not the style of zerg that I think is going to stick around.
|
It's all about scouting, after all. And synergy. For me, their main purpose is to disrupt. Mining, reinforcements, support units.
Indeed, I agree with all the previous comments: you can't fight T (or stalker heavy P, which is almost all the time...) straight up with mutas; against zerg is better (see below). But I find mutas useful for the following:
- general: attack from behind. I found myself in advantage not flying mutas over 3/2 marines (instant gg), but sniping overlords, tanks, maybe some dropships, even chasing zealots. They *disrupt* attacks, attack preparations/continuations etc.
- vT (1): prevent early pushes. A handful of mutas (around 8) makes the terran to either go all-in (rarely), relocate SCVs, or go back in base and start pumping turrets. This gives some room to complete a 2/2, expand, or have infestors. You gain those 2-4 minutes to defend the push.
- vT(2): already said - defend drops. Although so many times I found 4 spines/1 spore defending mineral line way more efective than mutas.
- vZ: overlord sniping. Think they fulfill the corsair role more than combat/harass role, where 2 queens 1-2 spores completely fend off (unless expos or no infestor support). They can fight also hydras, with their insane DPS - because of speed.
- vP: here is where mutas really shine. Since protoss cannons are not so dangerous as turrets, mutas can stay longer and kill probes. An observed ratio against 3 cannons/3 turrets is 4-5 SCVs vs 9-10 probes. Needless to say, double disruption.
The usage leave no room for mistakes, however. As soon as you find yourselves flying over a stimpack, blink, or get a fungal, you lose over 60%, or all. This is why I am using flocks around 8-10 but not more (unless mutas all-in, as against 2-port banshees).
|
Mutas are pretty good in PvZ from a Toss standpoint. Stalkers are alright versus mutas, but mutas can easily avoid stalkers, even with blink if you play carefully. Then when the muta flock reahes a critical point, stalkers just won't do- they just don't do that much damage against them. I personally do a early HT fairly heavy canon build versus Z though, so mutas aren't as good against me. 
DRG's muta usage against Heart and MKP (keep in mind, these are Code S+ terrans) did seem fairly ineffective though. I don't think he got much of the usual harass done, and there was a couple moments when he flew over a ball of marines are took pretty severe losses. I think in most ZvT mutas would remain a fairly viable option, though you would have to add another dimension over flying from base to base picking off workers and vulnerable buildings. Perhaps things like backstabs, delaying/ killing marines by setting up baneling mines on retreat paths would help.
Day9 made some really good points in the postgame analysis for game 2 of DRG vs Heart. Drops force the double-ling ground army back, the muta flock is isolated, and then Terran can push. Or something like that, I forgot.
|
I always felt like zerg's shouldnt be using a harassment unit as the muscle of their army - terran dont tend to mass banshees or reapers, similarly protoss dont mass dt's or pheonix (atleast not as a standard unit composition).
I dont play zerg but do tend to realise mutalisks capacity to deal damage feels very low in small numbers by comparison - but i still cant help but feel like the frailty of them would suggest that its a unit that shouldnt be massed.
|
I still think mutas are better overall then infenstors. I just feel it takes more skill to use though for results that are almost the same.
Its harder to find places to harrass and be cost efficient with ling bling muta, but it can be done and its a harder composition to play against.
|
On March 26 2012 16:05 radiantshadow92 wrote:
I still think mutas are better overall then infenstors. I just feel it takes more skill to use though for results that are almost the same.
Its harder to find places to harrass and be cost efficient with ling bling muta, but it can be done and its a harder composition to play against.
Yeah that's how I feel for the most part as well. I think mutalisks are better at least to get 12 or so just to deny drops and some light harassment. With infestors I just see korean terrans dropping the hell out of the zerg and doing quiet a bit of damage even if they put spines there. I do think it is good to be able to do both styles though. I do agree with mutalisk play is less forgiving if you mess up and lose a ton of mutalisks it can cost you the game.
I will always prefer mutalisks but knowing both styles I think is almost a must now in today's zvt ^^.
|
i never liked mutalisks in ZvT. they are such a fragile unit and ppl are starting to counter them more and more easily. protoss players can counter them just fine with just blink stalkers and without the need for phoenixes, but blizz just had to answer the call of the whiners and buff phoenixes to hard counter them even more.
i liked destinys infestor style and always used that rather then mutas, but even infestors are not what they use to be because they got hit with the nerf bat to many times.
Infestors didn't really get 'nerfed'.
The FG nerf was pretty ineffectual - all t1 units of T, P (stalkers, zealots, sentries, marines, marauders) still die in the same number of FG. If anything, all it did was make clipping more of an issue - in that you have to time your FG a bit better. The critical differences were like, 13 FG to kill a colossi instead of 12, or 8 for a VR instead of 7, but NP was the use on those units, not FG.
Against Terran, really, ghosts and vikings take one more FG. I'm not sure if blizzard didn't care about this, or this was a minor lategame buff to T, that they kind of needed vs bl/infestor. Either way, this means that infestors were not nerfed for the early game. You don't see mass ghosts or vikings until very late into the game, and even then, FG and NP were not the biggest tools zerg used against vikings and ghosts.
So FG was never really nerfed, for the most part, and for the practical part.
NP was completely neutered, however, but it was never really used in ZvT (even against mech, IT spam is more useful).
Now, are infestors viable? I never really thought they were 'viable' in ZvT, even before the nerfs, unless the opponent wasn't sure how to capitalize on an opponent who teched hard, had no units in the midgame - ie didn't take a fast third, and didn't drop more, and didn't tech harder, or made double fact siege tank. But if you used them before the patch, you can use them just the same now.
Just bugs me when people say infestors nerfed -_-
NP was neutered, and so it's no longer viable to go infestor/ling in ZvP, and infestors no longer counter colossi, but that's it really. Just take care of your FG, and you should be fine.
Phoenix hardly counter mutas so easily, by the way. To get the range upgrade, and use it effectively as a response to mutas that you scout, you really need to secure 3 bases. If you can secure 3 bases with blink stalkers, I think most people would prefer to go HT then phoenixes to deal with the mutas. And toss no longer has a problem with mutas once they can get 3 bases up and running. It just gives toss more options.
Quit complaining so much, it just sounds like a thinly veiled balance whine. I was as upset as anyone else about the NP nerf, you can read about it on the Designated Balance Thread, I made a ton of posts about it - I never cared about the FG nerf, I actually like that it promotes skill more, but I complained about NP vs colossi. But these days, Zergs have better play. I believe that even if they brought back the old infestor, no top level zerg would use them because muta play in ZvP is just way, way better. That was back when zergs didn't take fast thirds in ZvP.
|
I feel like people like to use Infestor play more these days because as people said, it let you get a Fast Hive ( not unusual to see 14min ish Hive now ) and Hive tech is something Terran still have trouble to play against.
In the end, most Zerg would agree that you win ZvT when you get Broodlords out. Infestor play is just a quicker and safer way to get there.
When most Terran will be as rounded against that than they were against Muta play, both style will fall in line imo.
Edit :
The FG nerf was pretty ineffectual - all t1 units of T, P (stalkers, zealots, sentries, marines, marauders) still die in the same number of FG. If anything, all it did was make clipping more of an issue - in that you have to time your FG a bit better. The critical differences were like, 13 FG to kill a colossi instead of 12, or 8 for a VR instead of 7, but NP was the use on those units, not FG.
4 Fungal up from 3 to kill Viking is pretty huge tho.
|
It's the maps that killing off muta play. Just look at the mental abortion that is entombed valley.
1.) 3 compact bases that need as few turrets or cannons as possible to cover and are very easy to get up uncontested.
2.) No way to even get close to tech that can sit in the middle of the three bases, in a game where Terran and Protoss only need 3 bases to build an endgame army.
3.) Only two ramps and a choke between to get to the third or natural for counter attack paths.
On other maps such as antiga shipyards, if the opportunities for muta harass are available then the ability to get ling bane support into play with the mutas aren't. If you look at antiga shipyard, without complete sustained map control it is impossible to get creep past your third to a fourth. Creep can easily be denied as it has to expand out primarily from the corner of the map at your natural and lacking any cliff jumping units and having the slowest to tech to drops and air units means you can't contest any clearing of creep from around the skirts of your main or extending to a fourth in either directions. Add to that the non viability of nydus worms and the exaggerated snaking ground distances for lings and banelings from the main to any 4th and you can't let a double drop even start unloading because the mutas that die while trying to clean up those marines will cost more than the drop itself.
Speed is not a solution to multiple drops on these maps because creep spread can't cut down the travel time enough. You need to simply have units in position at all times to deal with drops and if you're going to do that then you don't need mutas to defend, and if harassment opportunities are terrible as well, why make mutas?
The same thing is happening that has always been happening thanks to Blizzards lack of understanding of their own game. Zerg needs counter attack paths and harassment opportunities and map makers aren't giving them any.
|
4 Fungal up from 3 to kill Viking is pretty huge tho.
But it's pretty late game when you are fungalling vikings instead of throwing IT's, using mutas, or corruptors, instead. There needs to be a fleet of vikings at that point, to which you aren't using solely infestors to stay alive. Compare that to ling/infestor back in the day vs toss, NP was the sole way to survive Toss getting colossi until you got broodlords basically.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
