On March 26 2013 06:43 agahamsorr0w wrote: It doesnt work if there are more than one widow mines in vicinity. the other one will shoot at ur mutas.
I think he said the answer to that was to have 2 groups of mutas then to attack each widow mine with a separate group. Nice going with the paint, actually relatively explanatory, now for people to stop whining!
I think its easier and more efficient to just let some mutas die to widow mines and deal damage rather than taking the time to split mutas in separate groups. I've played a quite a bit of zvt vs bio widow mine with mass (30+) muta.
I always imagined as Zerg you'd like to have your mutas on two hotkeys if you had that many, harass at two bases seems pretty good. I never play Z though so I wouldn't know what's actually going on. ^^
mutas escalate in strenght exponentially with high numbers so having 40 mutas in 1 control group is not only better but less risky than having 40 mutas in 2 hotkeys. You just risk taking aoe damage but with the rapid regen i guess its almost irrelevant taking shots from thors. The only problem is widow mines, which one shot mutas and deal splash.
You can easily snipe a command center guarded by 6-10 turrets if the terran is out of position with 40 muta.
No they don't. The reason why you want 1pack of mutas is very simple: The opponent doesn't know where you attack with them, so he spreads himself thin to be somewhat able to drive away mutas no matter where you attack. The countermove to this is to concentrate as many mutalisks as possible at single weakspots and do as much damage as possible before reinforcements arrive. If you split up your 20mutas, you will have (10mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret)*2, so two battles you lose. Unlike if you keep them together, when you will have 20mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret which you will win and be able to pick off more stuff for a few seconds.
You seem to be agreeing with each other, mutas grow exponentially in strength because 40 mutas is more then twice as good as 20 mutas, because of the things you described. Mutas really profit from the shock and awe effect.
`
yeah basically the purpose of mutas is to harrass and deal damage/divide attention. We can take roaches as example. 40 roaches are just as scary as 20 roaches. Their strenght doesnt grow exponentially but actually diminish per unit once you reach a specific ammount of roaches (we are talking about zvt).
On March 26 2013 06:43 agahamsorr0w wrote: It doesnt work if there are more than one widow mines in vicinity. the other one will shoot at ur mutas.
I think he said the answer to that was to have 2 groups of mutas then to attack each widow mine with a separate group. Nice going with the paint, actually relatively explanatory, now for people to stop whining!
I think its easier and more efficient to just let some mutas die to widow mines and deal damage rather than taking the time to split mutas in separate groups. I've played a quite a bit of zvt vs bio widow mine with mass (30+) muta.
I always imagined as Zerg you'd like to have your mutas on two hotkeys if you had that many, harass at two bases seems pretty good. I never play Z though so I wouldn't know what's actually going on. ^^
mutas escalate in strenght exponentially with high numbers so having 40 mutas in 1 control group is not only better but less risky than having 40 mutas in 2 hotkeys. You just risk taking aoe damage but with the rapid regen i guess its almost irrelevant taking shots from thors. The only problem is widow mines, which one shot mutas and deal splash.
You can easily snipe a command center guarded by 6-10 turrets if the terran is out of position with 40 muta.
No they don't. The reason why you want 1pack of mutas is very simple: The opponent doesn't know where you attack with them, so he spreads himself thin to be somewhat able to drive away mutas no matter where you attack. The countermove to this is to concentrate as many mutalisks as possible at single weakspots and do as much damage as possible before reinforcements arrive. If you split up your 20mutas, you will have (10mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret)*2, so two battles you lose. Unlike if you keep them together, when you will have 20mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret which you will win and be able to pick off more stuff for a few seconds.
You seem to be agreeing with each other, mutas grow exponentially in strength because 40 mutas is more then twice as good as 20 mutas, because of the things you described. Mutas really profit from the shock and awe effect.
What I described was not an exponential growth in strength. All you do is attack where your opponent is not. That doesn't make 40mutalisks over 2times stronger than 20mutalisks. Even more, due to their low damage, low range nature mutalisks rather grow logarithmic in strength, compared to standard ranged singlefire units in Starcraft.
On March 26 2013 06:43 agahamsorr0w wrote: It doesnt work if there are more than one widow mines in vicinity. the other one will shoot at ur mutas.
I think he said the answer to that was to have 2 groups of mutas then to attack each widow mine with a separate group. Nice going with the paint, actually relatively explanatory, now for people to stop whining!
I think its easier and more efficient to just let some mutas die to widow mines and deal damage rather than taking the time to split mutas in separate groups. I've played a quite a bit of zvt vs bio widow mine with mass (30+) muta.
I always imagined as Zerg you'd like to have your mutas on two hotkeys if you had that many, harass at two bases seems pretty good. I never play Z though so I wouldn't know what's actually going on. ^^
mutas escalate in strenght exponentially with high numbers so having 40 mutas in 1 control group is not only better but less risky than having 40 mutas in 2 hotkeys. You just risk taking aoe damage but with the rapid regen i guess its almost irrelevant taking shots from thors. The only problem is widow mines, which one shot mutas and deal splash.
You can easily snipe a command center guarded by 6-10 turrets if the terran is out of position with 40 muta.
No they don't. The reason why you want 1pack of mutas is very simple: The opponent doesn't know where you attack with them, so he spreads himself thin to be somewhat able to drive away mutas no matter where you attack. The countermove to this is to concentrate as many mutalisks as possible at single weakspots and do as much damage as possible before reinforcements arrive. If you split up your 20mutas, you will have (10mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret)*2, so two battles you lose. Unlike if you keep them together, when you will have 20mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret which you will win and be able to pick off more stuff for a few seconds.
You seem to be agreeing with each other, mutas grow exponentially in strength because 40 mutas is more then twice as good as 20 mutas, because of the things you described. Mutas really profit from the shock and awe effect.
What I described was not an exponential growth in strength. All you do is attack where your opponent is not. That doesn't make 40mutalisks over 2times stronger than 20mutalisks. Even more, due to their low damage, low range nature mutalisks rather grow logarithmic in strength, compared to standard ranged singlefire units in Starcraft.
Given that this is a real time strategy, the place you attack is always low on defense when going mutas and terran needs time to move his army to defend so depending on your muta count, you can either kill 6 turrets and a couple of addons or kill 6 turrets and a command centre. See where im going at?
Some observations if you don't want to watch the video: 1. Shift clicking back after targeting down the widow mines sometimes screws up and gets your bunched up flock shot up.
2. The range of widow mines is very big. It is very easy to screw this up.
3. Staggered Mines are better for anti ling decoys.
4!!!!
The most important part of this micro is getting all of the mutalisk shots in before disengaging. Timing is utterly crucial when clicking to move away. A single straggler and your whole flock will suffer damage.
On March 26 2013 06:43 agahamsorr0w wrote: It doesnt work if there are more than one widow mines in vicinity. the other one will shoot at ur mutas.
I think he said the answer to that was to have 2 groups of mutas then to attack each widow mine with a separate group. Nice going with the paint, actually relatively explanatory, now for people to stop whining!
I think its easier and more efficient to just let some mutas die to widow mines and deal damage rather than taking the time to split mutas in separate groups. I've played a quite a bit of zvt vs bio widow mine with mass (30+) muta.
I always imagined as Zerg you'd like to have your mutas on two hotkeys if you had that many, harass at two bases seems pretty good. I never play Z though so I wouldn't know what's actually going on. ^^
mutas escalate in strenght exponentially with high numbers so having 40 mutas in 1 control group is not only better but less risky than having 40 mutas in 2 hotkeys. You just risk taking aoe damage but with the rapid regen i guess its almost irrelevant taking shots from thors. The only problem is widow mines, which one shot mutas and deal splash.
You can easily snipe a command center guarded by 6-10 turrets if the terran is out of position with 40 muta.
No they don't. The reason why you want 1pack of mutas is very simple: The opponent doesn't know where you attack with them, so he spreads himself thin to be somewhat able to drive away mutas no matter where you attack. The countermove to this is to concentrate as many mutalisks as possible at single weakspots and do as much damage as possible before reinforcements arrive. If you split up your 20mutas, you will have (10mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret)*2, so two battles you lose. Unlike if you keep them together, when you will have 20mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret which you will win and be able to pick off more stuff for a few seconds.
You seem to be agreeing with each other, mutas grow exponentially in strength because 40 mutas is more then twice as good as 20 mutas, because of the things you described. Mutas really profit from the shock and awe effect.
What I described was not an exponential growth in strength. All you do is attack where your opponent is not. That doesn't make 40mutalisks over 2times stronger than 20mutalisks. Even more, due to their low damage, low range nature mutalisks rather grow logarithmic in strength, compared to standard ranged singlefire units in Starcraft.
With 40 mutas wouldn't it be sensible to split into two forces if you had the multitasking? 20 mutas is pretty scary and I'm sure would do damage. Just guessing here, like I said, I'm not a Zerg player.
On March 26 2013 06:43 agahamsorr0w wrote: It doesnt work if there are more than one widow mines in vicinity. the other one will shoot at ur mutas.
I think he said the answer to that was to have 2 groups of mutas then to attack each widow mine with a separate group. Nice going with the paint, actually relatively explanatory, now for people to stop whining!
I think its easier and more efficient to just let some mutas die to widow mines and deal damage rather than taking the time to split mutas in separate groups. I've played a quite a bit of zvt vs bio widow mine with mass (30+) muta.
I always imagined as Zerg you'd like to have your mutas on two hotkeys if you had that many, harass at two bases seems pretty good. I never play Z though so I wouldn't know what's actually going on. ^^
mutas escalate in strenght exponentially with high numbers so having 40 mutas in 1 control group is not only better but less risky than having 40 mutas in 2 hotkeys. You just risk taking aoe damage but with the rapid regen i guess its almost irrelevant taking shots from thors. The only problem is widow mines, which one shot mutas and deal splash.
You can easily snipe a command center guarded by 6-10 turrets if the terran is out of position with 40 muta.
No they don't. The reason why you want 1pack of mutas is very simple: The opponent doesn't know where you attack with them, so he spreads himself thin to be somewhat able to drive away mutas no matter where you attack. The countermove to this is to concentrate as many mutalisks as possible at single weakspots and do as much damage as possible before reinforcements arrive. If you split up your 20mutas, you will have (10mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret)*2, so two battles you lose. Unlike if you keep them together, when you will have 20mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret which you will win and be able to pick off more stuff for a few seconds.
You seem to be agreeing with each other, mutas grow exponentially in strength because 40 mutas is more then twice as good as 20 mutas, because of the things you described. Mutas really profit from the shock and awe effect.
What I described was not an exponential growth in strength. All you do is attack where your opponent is not. That doesn't make 40mutalisks over 2times stronger than 20mutalisks. Even more, due to their low damage, low range nature mutalisks rather grow logarithmic in strength, compared to standard ranged singlefire units in Starcraft.
With 40 mutas wouldn't it be sensible to split into two forces if you had the multitasking? 20 mutas is pretty scary and I'm sure would do damage. Just guessing here, like I said, I'm not a Zerg player.
Difference between things dieng instantly and it taking some time for things to die is huge. Don't leave the enemy time to repair, or send troops.
Not to mention how hard it is so micro two muta groups at a time. Twice as likely to get caught off guard by widow or marines.
On March 26 2013 06:43 agahamsorr0w wrote: It doesnt work if there are more than one widow mines in vicinity. the other one will shoot at ur mutas.
I think he said the answer to that was to have 2 groups of mutas then to attack each widow mine with a separate group. Nice going with the paint, actually relatively explanatory, now for people to stop whining!
I think its easier and more efficient to just let some mutas die to widow mines and deal damage rather than taking the time to split mutas in separate groups. I've played a quite a bit of zvt vs bio widow mine with mass (30+) muta.
I always imagined as Zerg you'd like to have your mutas on two hotkeys if you had that many, harass at two bases seems pretty good. I never play Z though so I wouldn't know what's actually going on. ^^
mutas escalate in strenght exponentially with high numbers so having 40 mutas in 1 control group is not only better but less risky than having 40 mutas in 2 hotkeys. You just risk taking aoe damage but with the rapid regen i guess its almost irrelevant taking shots from thors. The only problem is widow mines, which one shot mutas and deal splash.
You can easily snipe a command center guarded by 6-10 turrets if the terran is out of position with 40 muta.
No they don't. The reason why you want 1pack of mutas is very simple: The opponent doesn't know where you attack with them, so he spreads himself thin to be somewhat able to drive away mutas no matter where you attack. The countermove to this is to concentrate as many mutalisks as possible at single weakspots and do as much damage as possible before reinforcements arrive. If you split up your 20mutas, you will have (10mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret)*2, so two battles you lose. Unlike if you keep them together, when you will have 20mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret which you will win and be able to pick off more stuff for a few seconds.
You seem to be agreeing with each other, mutas grow exponentially in strength because 40 mutas is more then twice as good as 20 mutas, because of the things you described. Mutas really profit from the shock and awe effect.
What I described was not an exponential growth in strength. All you do is attack where your opponent is not. That doesn't make 40mutalisks over 2times stronger than 20mutalisks. Even more, due to their low damage, low range nature mutalisks rather grow logarithmic in strength, compared to standard ranged singlefire units in Starcraft.
With 40 mutas wouldn't it be sensible to split into two forces if you had the multitasking? 20 mutas is pretty scary and I'm sure would do damage. Just guessing here, like I said, I'm not a Zerg player.
Difference between things dieng instantly and it taking some time for things to die is huge. Don't leave the enemy time to repair, or send troops.
Not to mention how hard it is so micro two muta groups at a time. Twice as likely to get caught off guard by widow or marines.
First point makes sense, second point I was going with the assumption the player could control 2 groups of mutas.
I don't understand any of this. What's the point of the move command and all that "it takes practise" etc? I just keep my mutas bunched and right click / a click the widow mines to kill them before they shoot?
Some observations if you don't want to watch the video: 1. Shift clicking back after targeting down the widow mines sometimes screws up and gets your bunched up flock shot up.
2. The range of widow mines is very big. It is very easy to screw this up.
3. Staggered Mines are better for anti ling decoys.
4!!!!
The most important part of this micro is getting all of the mutalisk shots in before disengaging. Timing is utterly crucial when clicking to move away. A single straggler and your whole flock will suffer damage.
Great work! Enjoyed seeing it! Don't know how to make the shift command work
You can also 'peel' your front lings off at a right angle if you have an ovie spotting the mine and it's in front of marines. If you're deselecting 2 lings to tank shots the fact that marines will kill the lings means that it won't count and you'll likely eat the shot (unless the mine gets 'confused' but you can't count on that). Boxing your front 2-4 lings works perfectly against this if you know where the mines are because you pull your decoy lings at 90 degrees as they enter range, getting them out of the way of your attacking lings and the marines for a nice fireworks display off to the side! I wonder if you could youtube that as well, it's pretty useful!
On March 26 2013 06:43 agahamsorr0w wrote: It doesnt work if there are more than one widow mines in vicinity. the other one will shoot at ur mutas.
I think he said the answer to that was to have 2 groups of mutas then to attack each widow mine with a separate group. Nice going with the paint, actually relatively explanatory, now for people to stop whining!
I think its easier and more efficient to just let some mutas die to widow mines and deal damage rather than taking the time to split mutas in separate groups. I've played a quite a bit of zvt vs bio widow mine with mass (30+) muta.
I always imagined as Zerg you'd like to have your mutas on two hotkeys if you had that many, harass at two bases seems pretty good. I never play Z though so I wouldn't know what's actually going on. ^^
mutas escalate in strenght exponentially with high numbers so having 40 mutas in 1 control group is not only better but less risky than having 40 mutas in 2 hotkeys. You just risk taking aoe damage but with the rapid regen i guess its almost irrelevant taking shots from thors. The only problem is widow mines, which one shot mutas and deal splash.
You can easily snipe a command center guarded by 6-10 turrets if the terran is out of position with 40 muta.
No they don't. The reason why you want 1pack of mutas is very simple: The opponent doesn't know where you attack with them, so he spreads himself thin to be somewhat able to drive away mutas no matter where you attack. The countermove to this is to concentrate as many mutalisks as possible at single weakspots and do as much damage as possible before reinforcements arrive. If you split up your 20mutas, you will have (10mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret)*2, so two battles you lose. Unlike if you keep them together, when you will have 20mutas fighting 10marines and 1turret which you will win and be able to pick off more stuff for a few seconds.
You seem to be agreeing with each other, mutas grow exponentially in strength because 40 mutas is more then twice as good as 20 mutas, because of the things you described. Mutas really profit from the shock and awe effect.
Can we cool it with the exponentially? Everything that more than doubles with double the numbers is not automatically an exponential increase. We are comparing the effects of split harassment with a united army with great capability of unleashing damaging barrages in both cases. Both you and your opponent are hard supply capped at 200; it does matter what you spent it on and what you can do with them. No blubbering out "exponentially" and assuming that straight up fights with clumps (deathball tactics) is the best use for your army.
EPT
