|
On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent.
8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army.
Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful).
I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg
won't die to a push later or lose a base trade.
Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on.
If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game.
|
On November 01 2011 09:24 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 08:58 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:45 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 08:34 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 07:07 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 07:05 Blasterion wrote:On November 01 2011 07:03 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 07:00 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 06:55 A.J. wrote:
I don't really think blizz considers mutas op, but rather that they want to add some more diversity to the game. I think they just want to give players more options. You want to go marine tank? go right ahead. Or maybe you prefer pure mech. I'm excited to see the new strats players will come up with. This is a good point. Terran is very bio heavy right now and the Thor doesn't help matters. I prefer BW style Mech play and would like to see more of it. That's what I associate with Terran. All these Marines and marauders running around every game doesn't feel Terran. And i like the idea about a Viking splash upgrade, I think having Viking/Muta wars would be awesome. I'd like to see that. Bionic play vs Zerg, or even Marine/Tank, feels super "terran" like to me :o. Maybe it's just coming from a BW background. To be honest, Bio Mech was kinda the default way to play tvz wasn't it? Marine/Medic, eventually start adding tanks, then a science vessel. Move out with marine/medic/3tank/1 sci EE HAN TIMING! You could actually make the argument that Ravens are better against mutas science vessels was. Sure irradiate would be imba against 30 mutas. But improved seeker missile + PDD actually shuts down mutas completely especially in conjuction with turrents and/or thors. It's just that terrans chose to spend their gas on tanks and ghosts atm. Once ghost EMP area gets nerfed they may go into a viking / raven composition instead. PDD makes vikings dominate corruptors and mutas are completely shut down from harassing the tanks. I have also been chased out of harassing a main by a seeker missile (forced to run away until it expires) only to face 20 marines when I get back. Leaving a raven at the base when moving out late game could be really strong I think even for pro gamers. I have faced som GM and master terrans that go ravens on EU and I really am at a loss for what to do. I think the Neural range nerf + seeker missile speed buff really enables this unit to be super strong late game. I can only imagine a korean terran adding maybe 3 ravens late game to supplement the allready strong ghost/tank/marine/viking force. I really don't see broodlords working at that time. I mean it's gonna be ridiculously hard to micro that properly in some fights but PDD makes such sick defensive lines. I think if the raven was as fast as the science vessel was in sc1, every terran would use it every game against all races. Btw not to mention how insanely long PDD stays up. You can basically add PDDs close to your main turrets when a raven gets full energy cause it will stay there for like 3 minutes. I've used plenty of ravens prebuff. Seeker missile is good, but Raven simply isn't comparable to the Science Vessel for reasons already mentioned. Energy cost of the spell of irridiate is lower than seeker missile and is available nearly as soon as the vessel pops (67 energy after upgrade) compared to a Raven having 75 energy after popping. Sci vessels could thus be able to throw out multiple irridiates without question, up to a whopping 3 compared to a single seeker missile. Irridiate was also always guaranteed to hit. If Science Vessels were around, they'd def still be massed, considering they could irridiate infestors as well. If unburrowed, a seeker missile will never kill more than 1 full HP infestor! Being able to swoop in with 5 science vessels and irridiate infestors would be huge, although then you have to take into account the potential for fungal. I'm still convinced Sci Vessels are insanely better. I really agree that irradiate is better than seeker missile no doubt. But PDD is very useful and quite clearly better than defensive matrix (atleast for sc2). I think the Science vessel was another unit that would slowly pick away at your army by reducint eh defilers and lurkers etc while the Raven is more used to scare away unit from certain positions. That's why I think the raven could be used to great effect in high level sc2. If you can get into one of those "zerg needs to attack me NOW or he dies" situations and you have ravens there. They will really really be useful. Cause if you have 3-4 of them you can make like 3 pdds and a few seeker missiles at any incoming mutas or corruptors (or indeed broodlords). Sure the problem might be with fungals but good micro and spreads can deter those. You also think very carefully as a zerg about running into an army even if its unsieged when they have the potential to seeker missile your banes if they clump up. But as I said. I see no reason what so ever to not add 2 ravens to your vikings late game agains a broodlord player. You can PDD when the battle begins and remove some very important corruptor shots. It doesnt require much micro and they then sit there doing a good job for the army. The big weak point though of seeker missile is obviously the friendly fire which is why I only really see use for it vs mutas and corruptors or broodlords (stuff that is not close to your army, or in the case of mutas it does so much damage that it can be worth risking friendly fire). Atleast in high level games. I think people are afraid of getting their full energy ravens neuraled and getting PDD or seeker missiles against themselves. But with the nerfed naural range they shouldn't be afraid of that if they are close toa tank line or have ghosts in their army. I see the raven as something that is part of the viking flock and will keep away from the front of the army until you know he is sending everything in. Then you can throw them forward and try to get good missiles if the situation presents itself. Again adding ravens will make micro even harder for terran (which is not exactly easy as it is even now) but this is why I think high level players could handle it. I'm fully aware of raven potential^^. I've made Raven/BC my go-to lategame combo since the release of SC2. Mass corrupters/queens/hydras? PDD + Seeker missile annihilate them. Corrupters fly in to try to shoot you, drop a PDD and seeker missile, corrupters instantly flee, and get off 6 yamatos for free kills, taking no losses yourself. If he tries to engage, drop another few PDD's and seekers. If he goes hydras it's even worse, kill all nearby creep, BC's shit on Hydras normally, but now you have seekers which they can't dodge and PDD. It's hilarious. Only thing they can try was NP, and the range just nerfed, and BC's kill each other REALLY slowly without yamato since their high armor value. Also, I recently lost a CW ace match vs NrGLuckyFool where he went 2 base 2 port Raven and used seeker missiles to make a huge comeback, as he denied my creep spread, when my banelings went to engage offcreep they couldn't avoid the seeker missile speed and they all got smashed. I had him down to 1 base (killed his nat and the OC, didn't float it away) to my 3 base at one point, although his counter attack took out my third. Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 09:18 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. Sure, I'm fine with everything you say. I think the bigger difficulty with mutas comes before the 3-base point, however, when speedling/muta can exploit Protoss immobility. Assuming you weren't already going for some sort of timing all-in, this leaves your options as 'try to take a third, tech towards storm', which is pretty passive and can be exploited. This is also a little map dependent, too, as some maps are easier to secure that third on. You certainly can poke at Z to secure the third, but you run the risk of just losing mineral lines while the Z makes spines and lings to defend until mutas return.. I've seen some players handle this situation beautifully, so again, it's not something I'd call 'imbalance' over. Still, Blizzard is adding anti-muta units (hi, Tempest) - though it's of questionable value. Tech to blink/archons, not storm :o.
You're going to have both once you get the templar archives, so I figured that was explicit :o
Archons aren't as sick as they were in BW, they act like thors with 3 range. I find 2 ht with storm are far better defense when left with a few cannons, freeing up your army itself to move out. Archons are great in the unit composition, though. Can you clarify a little more why you'd prefer them over storm tech?
|
On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Show nested quote +Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game.
I agree with you on some points, but I think that even a standard 3-base Protoss on a big enough map will face difficulties against Mutas.
On Tal'darim, its nearly impossible to move out as Protoss when dealing with Mass (25+) Mutalisks. The number will only grow and Zerg will continue to take the whole map. Blink stalkers begin to really suck once the Muta numbers get up the high. Storm can be quite useful and can devastate the Muta ball if the Zerg is not careful.... but I can only see it being used defensively. Moving out with your HT's doesn't achieve much, Muta-ling is perfect for Base trades and picking off stray units. Engaging Protoss deathballs with Muta-ling is very uncommon. Leaving some HT's behind to storm harassing Mutas can be effective, but all it takes is a slightly slow reaction and all your HT's are gone. Not to mention, the Zerg won't let his Mutas sit for the entire duration of the storm.
I still strongly believe that Mass Muta late game is overpowered vs WoL Protoss. Hence the introduction of a unit like the Tempest.
|
On November 01 2011 09:40 QTIP. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game. I agree with you on some points, but I think that even a standard 3-base Protoss on a big enough map will face difficulties against Mutas. On Tal'darim, its nearly impossible to move out as Protoss when dealing with Mass (25+) Mutalisks. The number will only grow and Zerg will continue to take the whole map. Blink stalkers begin to really suck once the Muta numbers get up the high. Storm can be quite useful and can devastate the Muta ball if the Zerg is not careful.... but I can only see it being used defensively. Moving out with your HT's doesn't achieve much, Muta-ling is perfect for Base trades and picking off stray units. Engaging Protoss deathballs with Muta-ling is very uncommon. Leaving some HT's behind to storm harassing Mutas can be effective, but all it takes is a slightly slow reaction and all your HT's are gone. Not to mention, the Zerg won't let his Mutas sit for the entire duration of the storm. I still strongly believe that Mass Muta late game is overpowered vs WoL Protoss. Hence the introduction of a unit like the Tempest.
I don't think mass muta in particular is overpowered late game. 200/200 Protoss balls vs 200/200 battles muta balls, Protoss should always win that. It's the macro and tech advantage that the mutas' harass/contain build up that is hard to overcome.
|
On November 01 2011 09:44 K3Nyy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 09:40 QTIP. wrote:On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game. I agree with you on some points, but I think that even a standard 3-base Protoss on a big enough map will face difficulties against Mutas. On Tal'darim, its nearly impossible to move out as Protoss when dealing with Mass (25+) Mutalisks. The number will only grow and Zerg will continue to take the whole map. Blink stalkers begin to really suck once the Muta numbers get up the high. Storm can be quite useful and can devastate the Muta ball if the Zerg is not careful.... but I can only see it being used defensively. Moving out with your HT's doesn't achieve much, Muta-ling is perfect for Base trades and picking off stray units. Engaging Protoss deathballs with Muta-ling is very uncommon. Leaving some HT's behind to storm harassing Mutas can be effective, but all it takes is a slightly slow reaction and all your HT's are gone. Not to mention, the Zerg won't let his Mutas sit for the entire duration of the storm. I still strongly believe that Mass Muta late game is overpowered vs WoL Protoss. Hence the introduction of a unit like the Tempest. I don't think mass muta in particular is overpowered late game. 200/200 Protoss balls vs 200/200 battles muta balls, Protoss should always win that. It's the macro and tech advantage that the mutas' harass/contain build up that is hard to overcome.
I agree.
By the time P gets to that situation, with such a gas heavy army, they can afford to leave 2-3 hts at a base and cannon it up - even a few storm impacts leaves the muta ball significantly more fragile. The P main army will have archons/stalkers/hts and mutas absolutely shatter trying to engage that (not even taking guardian shield into consideration). That's a lot of supply that doesn't get all that much done.
The bigger problem is that Z will likely have amassed an economy during the earlier phases of the game that means there's infestor/BL on the horizon, and enough money to remake it.
|
I think mutas currently exploit protoss' armies immobility very well, though I wouldn't call it overpowered. However, were dustin browder to come to me and say "dainbramage, we've decided mutas are overpowered in ZvP. How would YOU fix it?" I would say to give phoenixes 5 or 6 range so that they can effectively kite mutas. The tempest I think is silly. If blizzard decided that thors were ineffective against mutas, why did they give us a flying one?
|
On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Show nested quote +Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game.
But you don't usually want storm. You want archons. Teching to storm (200/200), getting templar that aren't going to be morphed into archons lowers your archon numbers.... you get storm later on. Initially, no.
On November 01 2011 09:39 Dfgj wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 09:24 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:45 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 08:34 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 07:07 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 07:05 Blasterion wrote:On November 01 2011 07:03 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 07:00 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 06:55 A.J. wrote:
I don't really think blizz considers mutas op, but rather that they want to add some more diversity to the game. I think they just want to give players more options. You want to go marine tank? go right ahead. Or maybe you prefer pure mech. I'm excited to see the new strats players will come up with. This is a good point. Terran is very bio heavy right now and the Thor doesn't help matters. I prefer BW style Mech play and would like to see more of it. That's what I associate with Terran. All these Marines and marauders running around every game doesn't feel Terran. And i like the idea about a Viking splash upgrade, I think having Viking/Muta wars would be awesome. I'd like to see that. Bionic play vs Zerg, or even Marine/Tank, feels super "terran" like to me :o. Maybe it's just coming from a BW background. To be honest, Bio Mech was kinda the default way to play tvz wasn't it? Marine/Medic, eventually start adding tanks, then a science vessel. Move out with marine/medic/3tank/1 sci EE HAN TIMING! You could actually make the argument that Ravens are better against mutas science vessels was. Sure irradiate would be imba against 30 mutas. But improved seeker missile + PDD actually shuts down mutas completely especially in conjuction with turrents and/or thors. It's just that terrans chose to spend their gas on tanks and ghosts atm. Once ghost EMP area gets nerfed they may go into a viking / raven composition instead. PDD makes vikings dominate corruptors and mutas are completely shut down from harassing the tanks. I have also been chased out of harassing a main by a seeker missile (forced to run away until it expires) only to face 20 marines when I get back. Leaving a raven at the base when moving out late game could be really strong I think even for pro gamers. I have faced som GM and master terrans that go ravens on EU and I really am at a loss for what to do. I think the Neural range nerf + seeker missile speed buff really enables this unit to be super strong late game. I can only imagine a korean terran adding maybe 3 ravens late game to supplement the allready strong ghost/tank/marine/viking force. I really don't see broodlords working at that time. I mean it's gonna be ridiculously hard to micro that properly in some fights but PDD makes such sick defensive lines. I think if the raven was as fast as the science vessel was in sc1, every terran would use it every game against all races. Btw not to mention how insanely long PDD stays up. You can basically add PDDs close to your main turrets when a raven gets full energy cause it will stay there for like 3 minutes. I've used plenty of ravens prebuff. Seeker missile is good, but Raven simply isn't comparable to the Science Vessel for reasons already mentioned. Energy cost of the spell of irridiate is lower than seeker missile and is available nearly as soon as the vessel pops (67 energy after upgrade) compared to a Raven having 75 energy after popping. Sci vessels could thus be able to throw out multiple irridiates without question, up to a whopping 3 compared to a single seeker missile. Irridiate was also always guaranteed to hit. If Science Vessels were around, they'd def still be massed, considering they could irridiate infestors as well. If unburrowed, a seeker missile will never kill more than 1 full HP infestor! Being able to swoop in with 5 science vessels and irridiate infestors would be huge, although then you have to take into account the potential for fungal. I'm still convinced Sci Vessels are insanely better. I really agree that irradiate is better than seeker missile no doubt. But PDD is very useful and quite clearly better than defensive matrix (atleast for sc2). I think the Science vessel was another unit that would slowly pick away at your army by reducint eh defilers and lurkers etc while the Raven is more used to scare away unit from certain positions. That's why I think the raven could be used to great effect in high level sc2. If you can get into one of those "zerg needs to attack me NOW or he dies" situations and you have ravens there. They will really really be useful. Cause if you have 3-4 of them you can make like 3 pdds and a few seeker missiles at any incoming mutas or corruptors (or indeed broodlords). Sure the problem might be with fungals but good micro and spreads can deter those. You also think very carefully as a zerg about running into an army even if its unsieged when they have the potential to seeker missile your banes if they clump up. But as I said. I see no reason what so ever to not add 2 ravens to your vikings late game agains a broodlord player. You can PDD when the battle begins and remove some very important corruptor shots. It doesnt require much micro and they then sit there doing a good job for the army. The big weak point though of seeker missile is obviously the friendly fire which is why I only really see use for it vs mutas and corruptors or broodlords (stuff that is not close to your army, or in the case of mutas it does so much damage that it can be worth risking friendly fire). Atleast in high level games. I think people are afraid of getting their full energy ravens neuraled and getting PDD or seeker missiles against themselves. But with the nerfed naural range they shouldn't be afraid of that if they are close toa tank line or have ghosts in their army. I see the raven as something that is part of the viking flock and will keep away from the front of the army until you know he is sending everything in. Then you can throw them forward and try to get good missiles if the situation presents itself. Again adding ravens will make micro even harder for terran (which is not exactly easy as it is even now) but this is why I think high level players could handle it. I'm fully aware of raven potential^^. I've made Raven/BC my go-to lategame combo since the release of SC2. Mass corrupters/queens/hydras? PDD + Seeker missile annihilate them. Corrupters fly in to try to shoot you, drop a PDD and seeker missile, corrupters instantly flee, and get off 6 yamatos for free kills, taking no losses yourself. If he tries to engage, drop another few PDD's and seekers. If he goes hydras it's even worse, kill all nearby creep, BC's shit on Hydras normally, but now you have seekers which they can't dodge and PDD. It's hilarious. Only thing they can try was NP, and the range just nerfed, and BC's kill each other REALLY slowly without yamato since their high armor value. Also, I recently lost a CW ace match vs NrGLuckyFool where he went 2 base 2 port Raven and used seeker missiles to make a huge comeback, as he denied my creep spread, when my banelings went to engage offcreep they couldn't avoid the seeker missile speed and they all got smashed. I had him down to 1 base (killed his nat and the OC, didn't float it away) to my 3 base at one point, although his counter attack took out my third. On November 01 2011 09:18 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. Sure, I'm fine with everything you say. I think the bigger difficulty with mutas comes before the 3-base point, however, when speedling/muta can exploit Protoss immobility. Assuming you weren't already going for some sort of timing all-in, this leaves your options as 'try to take a third, tech towards storm', which is pretty passive and can be exploited. This is also a little map dependent, too, as some maps are easier to secure that third on. You certainly can poke at Z to secure the third, but you run the risk of just losing mineral lines while the Z makes spines and lings to defend until mutas return.. I've seen some players handle this situation beautifully, so again, it's not something I'd call 'imbalance' over. Still, Blizzard is adding anti-muta units (hi, Tempest) - though it's of questionable value. Tech to blink/archons, not storm :o. You're going to have both once you get the templar archives, so I figured that was explicit :o Archons aren't as sick as they were in BW, they act like thors with 3 range. I find 2 ht with storm are far better defense when left with a few cannons, freeing up your army itself to move out. Archons are great in the unit composition, though. Can you clarify a little more why you'd prefer them over storm tech?
I disagree, archons are disgusting, and are such a ridiculous hard counter to muta I feel. It's really hard to use magic boxing because it makes you so much worse vs stalkers (just like magic boxing thors makes you so much worse vs marines). I find archons just INSANELY good. I used to be a mutalisk user in ZvP but had to stop when people started using archons (and this was BEFORE the massive change + range buff). When I heard the buff, all I did was cringe...
|
On November 01 2011 10:27 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game. But you don't usually want storm. You want archons. Teching to storm (200/200), getting templar that aren't going to be morphed into archons lowers your archon numbers.... you get storm later on. Initially, no.
Hm interesting, I never went Archon first. I had always thought get blink asap while teching to storm. Do you have any other tips?
|
On November 01 2011 10:31 K3Nyy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 10:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game. But you don't usually want storm. You want archons. Teching to storm (200/200), getting templar that aren't going to be morphed into archons lowers your archon numbers.... you get storm later on. Initially, no. Hm interesting, I never went Archon first. I had always thought get blink asap while teching to storm. Do you have any other tips?
You still want blink asap, it's just storm is a pretty shitty muta counter until things get huge. In small numbers, when you have limited storms and they have limited (say 15) mutas, it's pretty terrible. You get archons initially and then you go for storm later. I'm not sure about other tips, I mean, give me a context maybe haha.
To clarify btw, I'm talking about early on. Don't take my advice to mean get like 7 archons or something before getting storm. Get at least two, then depending on the situation, consider it. That's 600 gas right there, so it's not like 2 is a small thing or investment. If you didn't get the archons, you'd be sitting on 3 high templar and storm tech, which can easily get picked off by mutas in the right scenario, or if a storm is missed, it's useless.
The same exact principle applied in BW  .
|
On November 01 2011 10:33 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 10:31 K3Nyy wrote:On November 01 2011 10:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game. But you don't usually want storm. You want archons. Teching to storm (200/200), getting templar that aren't going to be morphed into archons lowers your archon numbers.... you get storm later on. Initially, no. Hm interesting, I never went Archon first. I had always thought get blink asap while teching to storm. Do you have any other tips? You still want blink asap, it's just storm is a pretty shitty muta counter until things get huge. In small numbers, when you have limited storms and they have limited (say 15) mutas, it's pretty terrible. You get archons initially and then you go for storm later. I'm not sure about other tips, I mean, give me a context maybe haha.
Ahh I see, that's a good point actually. Thank you.
So my biggest problem vs mutas is always securing a 3rd. They usually just starting being very aggressive with lings/mutas to force the cancel. Can't really split my army or else the the portion that I split usually dies. Usually the 3rd comes so late that they'll just outmacro me or transition into something else to kill me. If I get it at the normal timing around 11mins, I am usually fine, since I'll have the income for extra cannons and I'll just wall my 3rd entrance.
Edit: Yup Archons were so good vs Mutas in BW. x_x;; I really miss that but SC2's archons obviously aren't as good.
|
On November 01 2011 10:27 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game. But you don't usually want storm. You want archons. Teching to storm (200/200), getting templar that aren't going to be morphed into archons lowers your archon numbers.... you get storm later on. Initially, no. Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 09:39 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 09:24 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:45 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 08:34 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 07:07 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 07:05 Blasterion wrote:On November 01 2011 07:03 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 07:00 mlspmatt wrote:
[quote]
This is a good point. Terran is very bio heavy right now and the Thor doesn't help matters. I prefer BW style Mech play and would like to see more of it. That's what I associate with Terran.
All these Marines and marauders running around every game doesn't feel Terran.
And i like the idea about a Viking splash upgrade, I think having Viking/Muta wars would be awesome. I'd like to see that. Bionic play vs Zerg, or even Marine/Tank, feels super "terran" like to me :o. Maybe it's just coming from a BW background. To be honest, Bio Mech was kinda the default way to play tvz wasn't it? Marine/Medic, eventually start adding tanks, then a science vessel. Move out with marine/medic/3tank/1 sci EE HAN TIMING! You could actually make the argument that Ravens are better against mutas science vessels was. Sure irradiate would be imba against 30 mutas. But improved seeker missile + PDD actually shuts down mutas completely especially in conjuction with turrents and/or thors. It's just that terrans chose to spend their gas on tanks and ghosts atm. Once ghost EMP area gets nerfed they may go into a viking / raven composition instead. PDD makes vikings dominate corruptors and mutas are completely shut down from harassing the tanks. I have also been chased out of harassing a main by a seeker missile (forced to run away until it expires) only to face 20 marines when I get back. Leaving a raven at the base when moving out late game could be really strong I think even for pro gamers. I have faced som GM and master terrans that go ravens on EU and I really am at a loss for what to do. I think the Neural range nerf + seeker missile speed buff really enables this unit to be super strong late game. I can only imagine a korean terran adding maybe 3 ravens late game to supplement the allready strong ghost/tank/marine/viking force. I really don't see broodlords working at that time. I mean it's gonna be ridiculously hard to micro that properly in some fights but PDD makes such sick defensive lines. I think if the raven was as fast as the science vessel was in sc1, every terran would use it every game against all races. Btw not to mention how insanely long PDD stays up. You can basically add PDDs close to your main turrets when a raven gets full energy cause it will stay there for like 3 minutes. I've used plenty of ravens prebuff. Seeker missile is good, but Raven simply isn't comparable to the Science Vessel for reasons already mentioned. Energy cost of the spell of irridiate is lower than seeker missile and is available nearly as soon as the vessel pops (67 energy after upgrade) compared to a Raven having 75 energy after popping. Sci vessels could thus be able to throw out multiple irridiates without question, up to a whopping 3 compared to a single seeker missile. Irridiate was also always guaranteed to hit. If Science Vessels were around, they'd def still be massed, considering they could irridiate infestors as well. If unburrowed, a seeker missile will never kill more than 1 full HP infestor! Being able to swoop in with 5 science vessels and irridiate infestors would be huge, although then you have to take into account the potential for fungal. I'm still convinced Sci Vessels are insanely better. I really agree that irradiate is better than seeker missile no doubt. But PDD is very useful and quite clearly better than defensive matrix (atleast for sc2). I think the Science vessel was another unit that would slowly pick away at your army by reducint eh defilers and lurkers etc while the Raven is more used to scare away unit from certain positions. That's why I think the raven could be used to great effect in high level sc2. If you can get into one of those "zerg needs to attack me NOW or he dies" situations and you have ravens there. They will really really be useful. Cause if you have 3-4 of them you can make like 3 pdds and a few seeker missiles at any incoming mutas or corruptors (or indeed broodlords). Sure the problem might be with fungals but good micro and spreads can deter those. You also think very carefully as a zerg about running into an army even if its unsieged when they have the potential to seeker missile your banes if they clump up. But as I said. I see no reason what so ever to not add 2 ravens to your vikings late game agains a broodlord player. You can PDD when the battle begins and remove some very important corruptor shots. It doesnt require much micro and they then sit there doing a good job for the army. The big weak point though of seeker missile is obviously the friendly fire which is why I only really see use for it vs mutas and corruptors or broodlords (stuff that is not close to your army, or in the case of mutas it does so much damage that it can be worth risking friendly fire). Atleast in high level games. I think people are afraid of getting their full energy ravens neuraled and getting PDD or seeker missiles against themselves. But with the nerfed naural range they shouldn't be afraid of that if they are close toa tank line or have ghosts in their army. I see the raven as something that is part of the viking flock and will keep away from the front of the army until you know he is sending everything in. Then you can throw them forward and try to get good missiles if the situation presents itself. Again adding ravens will make micro even harder for terran (which is not exactly easy as it is even now) but this is why I think high level players could handle it. I'm fully aware of raven potential^^. I've made Raven/BC my go-to lategame combo since the release of SC2. Mass corrupters/queens/hydras? PDD + Seeker missile annihilate them. Corrupters fly in to try to shoot you, drop a PDD and seeker missile, corrupters instantly flee, and get off 6 yamatos for free kills, taking no losses yourself. If he tries to engage, drop another few PDD's and seekers. If he goes hydras it's even worse, kill all nearby creep, BC's shit on Hydras normally, but now you have seekers which they can't dodge and PDD. It's hilarious. Only thing they can try was NP, and the range just nerfed, and BC's kill each other REALLY slowly without yamato since their high armor value. Also, I recently lost a CW ace match vs NrGLuckyFool where he went 2 base 2 port Raven and used seeker missiles to make a huge comeback, as he denied my creep spread, when my banelings went to engage offcreep they couldn't avoid the seeker missile speed and they all got smashed. I had him down to 1 base (killed his nat and the OC, didn't float it away) to my 3 base at one point, although his counter attack took out my third. On November 01 2011 09:18 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. Sure, I'm fine with everything you say. I think the bigger difficulty with mutas comes before the 3-base point, however, when speedling/muta can exploit Protoss immobility. Assuming you weren't already going for some sort of timing all-in, this leaves your options as 'try to take a third, tech towards storm', which is pretty passive and can be exploited. This is also a little map dependent, too, as some maps are easier to secure that third on. You certainly can poke at Z to secure the third, but you run the risk of just losing mineral lines while the Z makes spines and lings to defend until mutas return.. I've seen some players handle this situation beautifully, so again, it's not something I'd call 'imbalance' over. Still, Blizzard is adding anti-muta units (hi, Tempest) - though it's of questionable value. Tech to blink/archons, not storm :o. You're going to have both once you get the templar archives, so I figured that was explicit :o Archons aren't as sick as they were in BW, they act like thors with 3 range. I find 2 ht with storm are far better defense when left with a few cannons, freeing up your army itself to move out. Archons are great in the unit composition, though. Can you clarify a little more why you'd prefer them over storm tech? I disagree, archons are disgusting, and are such a ridiculous hard counter to muta I feel. It's really hard to use magic boxing because it makes you so much worse vs stalkers (just like magic boxing thors makes you so much worse vs marines). I find archons just INSANELY good. I used to be a mutalisk user in ZvP but had to stop when people started using archons (and this was BEFORE the massive change + range buff). When I heard the buff, all I did was cringe...
Aha, in that situation I agree.
The reason I preferred storm first is because I'd want to be able to leave smaller amounts of units in my base, and 2 hts + cannons beats an archon with similar in that situation, letting me bring comparatively more forces to hold a third or wherever else. That could just be me being overly worried about splitting up the core of my army to support archons at multiple locations, and I can see how what you're saying is true.
Too often I've had an archon or two just boxed and blasted away defending a base, but by then I should have had storm, and archons may be better for that early timing when you want to secure a third and have limited gas. Reasonable.
|
On November 01 2011 10:56 Dfgj wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 10:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game. But you don't usually want storm. You want archons. Teching to storm (200/200), getting templar that aren't going to be morphed into archons lowers your archon numbers.... you get storm later on. Initially, no. On November 01 2011 09:39 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 09:24 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:45 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 08:34 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 07:07 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 07:05 Blasterion wrote:On November 01 2011 07:03 FabledIntegral wrote:
[quote]
Bionic play vs Zerg, or even Marine/Tank, feels super "terran" like to me :o. Maybe it's just coming from a BW background. To be honest, Bio Mech was kinda the default way to play tvz wasn't it? Marine/Medic, eventually start adding tanks, then a science vessel. Move out with marine/medic/3tank/1 sci EE HAN TIMING! You could actually make the argument that Ravens are better against mutas science vessels was. Sure irradiate would be imba against 30 mutas. But improved seeker missile + PDD actually shuts down mutas completely especially in conjuction with turrents and/or thors. It's just that terrans chose to spend their gas on tanks and ghosts atm. Once ghost EMP area gets nerfed they may go into a viking / raven composition instead. PDD makes vikings dominate corruptors and mutas are completely shut down from harassing the tanks. I have also been chased out of harassing a main by a seeker missile (forced to run away until it expires) only to face 20 marines when I get back. Leaving a raven at the base when moving out late game could be really strong I think even for pro gamers. I have faced som GM and master terrans that go ravens on EU and I really am at a loss for what to do. I think the Neural range nerf + seeker missile speed buff really enables this unit to be super strong late game. I can only imagine a korean terran adding maybe 3 ravens late game to supplement the allready strong ghost/tank/marine/viking force. I really don't see broodlords working at that time. I mean it's gonna be ridiculously hard to micro that properly in some fights but PDD makes such sick defensive lines. I think if the raven was as fast as the science vessel was in sc1, every terran would use it every game against all races. Btw not to mention how insanely long PDD stays up. You can basically add PDDs close to your main turrets when a raven gets full energy cause it will stay there for like 3 minutes. I've used plenty of ravens prebuff. Seeker missile is good, but Raven simply isn't comparable to the Science Vessel for reasons already mentioned. Energy cost of the spell of irridiate is lower than seeker missile and is available nearly as soon as the vessel pops (67 energy after upgrade) compared to a Raven having 75 energy after popping. Sci vessels could thus be able to throw out multiple irridiates without question, up to a whopping 3 compared to a single seeker missile. Irridiate was also always guaranteed to hit. If Science Vessels were around, they'd def still be massed, considering they could irridiate infestors as well. If unburrowed, a seeker missile will never kill more than 1 full HP infestor! Being able to swoop in with 5 science vessels and irridiate infestors would be huge, although then you have to take into account the potential for fungal. I'm still convinced Sci Vessels are insanely better. I really agree that irradiate is better than seeker missile no doubt. But PDD is very useful and quite clearly better than defensive matrix (atleast for sc2). I think the Science vessel was another unit that would slowly pick away at your army by reducint eh defilers and lurkers etc while the Raven is more used to scare away unit from certain positions. That's why I think the raven could be used to great effect in high level sc2. If you can get into one of those "zerg needs to attack me NOW or he dies" situations and you have ravens there. They will really really be useful. Cause if you have 3-4 of them you can make like 3 pdds and a few seeker missiles at any incoming mutas or corruptors (or indeed broodlords). Sure the problem might be with fungals but good micro and spreads can deter those. You also think very carefully as a zerg about running into an army even if its unsieged when they have the potential to seeker missile your banes if they clump up. But as I said. I see no reason what so ever to not add 2 ravens to your vikings late game agains a broodlord player. You can PDD when the battle begins and remove some very important corruptor shots. It doesnt require much micro and they then sit there doing a good job for the army. The big weak point though of seeker missile is obviously the friendly fire which is why I only really see use for it vs mutas and corruptors or broodlords (stuff that is not close to your army, or in the case of mutas it does so much damage that it can be worth risking friendly fire). Atleast in high level games. I think people are afraid of getting their full energy ravens neuraled and getting PDD or seeker missiles against themselves. But with the nerfed naural range they shouldn't be afraid of that if they are close toa tank line or have ghosts in their army. I see the raven as something that is part of the viking flock and will keep away from the front of the army until you know he is sending everything in. Then you can throw them forward and try to get good missiles if the situation presents itself. Again adding ravens will make micro even harder for terran (which is not exactly easy as it is even now) but this is why I think high level players could handle it. I'm fully aware of raven potential^^. I've made Raven/BC my go-to lategame combo since the release of SC2. Mass corrupters/queens/hydras? PDD + Seeker missile annihilate them. Corrupters fly in to try to shoot you, drop a PDD and seeker missile, corrupters instantly flee, and get off 6 yamatos for free kills, taking no losses yourself. If he tries to engage, drop another few PDD's and seekers. If he goes hydras it's even worse, kill all nearby creep, BC's shit on Hydras normally, but now you have seekers which they can't dodge and PDD. It's hilarious. Only thing they can try was NP, and the range just nerfed, and BC's kill each other REALLY slowly without yamato since their high armor value. Also, I recently lost a CW ace match vs NrGLuckyFool where he went 2 base 2 port Raven and used seeker missiles to make a huge comeback, as he denied my creep spread, when my banelings went to engage offcreep they couldn't avoid the seeker missile speed and they all got smashed. I had him down to 1 base (killed his nat and the OC, didn't float it away) to my 3 base at one point, although his counter attack took out my third. On November 01 2011 09:18 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. Sure, I'm fine with everything you say. I think the bigger difficulty with mutas comes before the 3-base point, however, when speedling/muta can exploit Protoss immobility. Assuming you weren't already going for some sort of timing all-in, this leaves your options as 'try to take a third, tech towards storm', which is pretty passive and can be exploited. This is also a little map dependent, too, as some maps are easier to secure that third on. You certainly can poke at Z to secure the third, but you run the risk of just losing mineral lines while the Z makes spines and lings to defend until mutas return.. I've seen some players handle this situation beautifully, so again, it's not something I'd call 'imbalance' over. Still, Blizzard is adding anti-muta units (hi, Tempest) - though it's of questionable value. Tech to blink/archons, not storm :o. You're going to have both once you get the templar archives, so I figured that was explicit :o Archons aren't as sick as they were in BW, they act like thors with 3 range. I find 2 ht with storm are far better defense when left with a few cannons, freeing up your army itself to move out. Archons are great in the unit composition, though. Can you clarify a little more why you'd prefer them over storm tech? I disagree, archons are disgusting, and are such a ridiculous hard counter to muta I feel. It's really hard to use magic boxing because it makes you so much worse vs stalkers (just like magic boxing thors makes you so much worse vs marines). I find archons just INSANELY good. I used to be a mutalisk user in ZvP but had to stop when people started using archons (and this was BEFORE the massive change + range buff). When I heard the buff, all I did was cringe... Aha, in that situation I agree. The reason I preferred storm first is because I'd want to be able to leave smaller amounts of units in my base, and 2 hts + cannons beats an archon with similar in that situation, letting me bring comparatively more forces to hold a third or wherever else. That could just be me being overly worried about splitting up the core of my army to support archons at multiple locations, and I can see how what you're saying is true. Too often I've had an archon or two just boxed and blasted away defending a base, but by then I should have had storm, and archons may be better for that early timing when you want to secure a third and have limited gas. Reasonable.
Honestly, I disagree. I think that if he has 10 mutas and sees two high templar with two cannons in the mineral line, he's going to go in and try to snipe those two HT. You're going to take 20dmg per muta MAX if you get perfect storms and they don't touch the probes. However, 10 mutas see 1 archon and two cannons... they're probably turning back. Yeah, they'll win, but it's a pretty good deterrent and will def buy time to warp in stalkers if needed.
EDIT: and I might be mixing up who I'm meaning to specifically reply to. What I mean I disagree on is the notion of keeping 2 HT per mineral line when you try to take your third, if that's what you're saying . Maybe you're right though, who knows.
|
On November 01 2011 11:11 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 10:56 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 10:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game. But you don't usually want storm. You want archons. Teching to storm (200/200), getting templar that aren't going to be morphed into archons lowers your archon numbers.... you get storm later on. Initially, no. On November 01 2011 09:39 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 09:24 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:45 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 08:34 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 07:07 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 07:05 Blasterion wrote:
[quote]
To be honest, Bio Mech was kinda the default way to play tvz wasn't it? Marine/Medic, eventually start adding tanks, then a science vessel. Move out with marine/medic/3tank/1 sci EE HAN TIMING! You could actually make the argument that Ravens are better against mutas science vessels was. Sure irradiate would be imba against 30 mutas. But improved seeker missile + PDD actually shuts down mutas completely especially in conjuction with turrents and/or thors. It's just that terrans chose to spend their gas on tanks and ghosts atm. Once ghost EMP area gets nerfed they may go into a viking / raven composition instead. PDD makes vikings dominate corruptors and mutas are completely shut down from harassing the tanks. I have also been chased out of harassing a main by a seeker missile (forced to run away until it expires) only to face 20 marines when I get back. Leaving a raven at the base when moving out late game could be really strong I think even for pro gamers. I have faced som GM and master terrans that go ravens on EU and I really am at a loss for what to do. I think the Neural range nerf + seeker missile speed buff really enables this unit to be super strong late game. I can only imagine a korean terran adding maybe 3 ravens late game to supplement the allready strong ghost/tank/marine/viking force. I really don't see broodlords working at that time. I mean it's gonna be ridiculously hard to micro that properly in some fights but PDD makes such sick defensive lines. I think if the raven was as fast as the science vessel was in sc1, every terran would use it every game against all races. Btw not to mention how insanely long PDD stays up. You can basically add PDDs close to your main turrets when a raven gets full energy cause it will stay there for like 3 minutes. I've used plenty of ravens prebuff. Seeker missile is good, but Raven simply isn't comparable to the Science Vessel for reasons already mentioned. Energy cost of the spell of irridiate is lower than seeker missile and is available nearly as soon as the vessel pops (67 energy after upgrade) compared to a Raven having 75 energy after popping. Sci vessels could thus be able to throw out multiple irridiates without question, up to a whopping 3 compared to a single seeker missile. Irridiate was also always guaranteed to hit. If Science Vessels were around, they'd def still be massed, considering they could irridiate infestors as well. If unburrowed, a seeker missile will never kill more than 1 full HP infestor! Being able to swoop in with 5 science vessels and irridiate infestors would be huge, although then you have to take into account the potential for fungal. I'm still convinced Sci Vessels are insanely better. I really agree that irradiate is better than seeker missile no doubt. But PDD is very useful and quite clearly better than defensive matrix (atleast for sc2). I think the Science vessel was another unit that would slowly pick away at your army by reducint eh defilers and lurkers etc while the Raven is more used to scare away unit from certain positions. That's why I think the raven could be used to great effect in high level sc2. If you can get into one of those "zerg needs to attack me NOW or he dies" situations and you have ravens there. They will really really be useful. Cause if you have 3-4 of them you can make like 3 pdds and a few seeker missiles at any incoming mutas or corruptors (or indeed broodlords). Sure the problem might be with fungals but good micro and spreads can deter those. You also think very carefully as a zerg about running into an army even if its unsieged when they have the potential to seeker missile your banes if they clump up. But as I said. I see no reason what so ever to not add 2 ravens to your vikings late game agains a broodlord player. You can PDD when the battle begins and remove some very important corruptor shots. It doesnt require much micro and they then sit there doing a good job for the army. The big weak point though of seeker missile is obviously the friendly fire which is why I only really see use for it vs mutas and corruptors or broodlords (stuff that is not close to your army, or in the case of mutas it does so much damage that it can be worth risking friendly fire). Atleast in high level games. I think people are afraid of getting their full energy ravens neuraled and getting PDD or seeker missiles against themselves. But with the nerfed naural range they shouldn't be afraid of that if they are close toa tank line or have ghosts in their army. I see the raven as something that is part of the viking flock and will keep away from the front of the army until you know he is sending everything in. Then you can throw them forward and try to get good missiles if the situation presents itself. Again adding ravens will make micro even harder for terran (which is not exactly easy as it is even now) but this is why I think high level players could handle it. I'm fully aware of raven potential^^. I've made Raven/BC my go-to lategame combo since the release of SC2. Mass corrupters/queens/hydras? PDD + Seeker missile annihilate them. Corrupters fly in to try to shoot you, drop a PDD and seeker missile, corrupters instantly flee, and get off 6 yamatos for free kills, taking no losses yourself. If he tries to engage, drop another few PDD's and seekers. If he goes hydras it's even worse, kill all nearby creep, BC's shit on Hydras normally, but now you have seekers which they can't dodge and PDD. It's hilarious. Only thing they can try was NP, and the range just nerfed, and BC's kill each other REALLY slowly without yamato since their high armor value. Also, I recently lost a CW ace match vs NrGLuckyFool where he went 2 base 2 port Raven and used seeker missiles to make a huge comeback, as he denied my creep spread, when my banelings went to engage offcreep they couldn't avoid the seeker missile speed and they all got smashed. I had him down to 1 base (killed his nat and the OC, didn't float it away) to my 3 base at one point, although his counter attack took out my third. On November 01 2011 09:18 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. Sure, I'm fine with everything you say. I think the bigger difficulty with mutas comes before the 3-base point, however, when speedling/muta can exploit Protoss immobility. Assuming you weren't already going for some sort of timing all-in, this leaves your options as 'try to take a third, tech towards storm', which is pretty passive and can be exploited. This is also a little map dependent, too, as some maps are easier to secure that third on. You certainly can poke at Z to secure the third, but you run the risk of just losing mineral lines while the Z makes spines and lings to defend until mutas return.. I've seen some players handle this situation beautifully, so again, it's not something I'd call 'imbalance' over. Still, Blizzard is adding anti-muta units (hi, Tempest) - though it's of questionable value. Tech to blink/archons, not storm :o. You're going to have both once you get the templar archives, so I figured that was explicit :o Archons aren't as sick as they were in BW, they act like thors with 3 range. I find 2 ht with storm are far better defense when left with a few cannons, freeing up your army itself to move out. Archons are great in the unit composition, though. Can you clarify a little more why you'd prefer them over storm tech? I disagree, archons are disgusting, and are such a ridiculous hard counter to muta I feel. It's really hard to use magic boxing because it makes you so much worse vs stalkers (just like magic boxing thors makes you so much worse vs marines). I find archons just INSANELY good. I used to be a mutalisk user in ZvP but had to stop when people started using archons (and this was BEFORE the massive change + range buff). When I heard the buff, all I did was cringe... Aha, in that situation I agree. The reason I preferred storm first is because I'd want to be able to leave smaller amounts of units in my base, and 2 hts + cannons beats an archon with similar in that situation, letting me bring comparatively more forces to hold a third or wherever else. That could just be me being overly worried about splitting up the core of my army to support archons at multiple locations, and I can see how what you're saying is true. Too often I've had an archon or two just boxed and blasted away defending a base, but by then I should have had storm, and archons may be better for that early timing when you want to secure a third and have limited gas. Reasonable. Honestly, I disagree. I think that if he has 10 mutas and sees two high templar with two cannons in the mineral line, he's going to go in and try to snipe those two HT. You're going to take 20dmg per muta MAX if you get perfect storms and they don't touch the probes. However, 10 mutas see 1 archon and two cannons... they're probably turning back. Yeah, they'll win, but it's a pretty good deterrent and will def buy time to warp in stalkers if needed. EDIT: and I might be mixing up who I'm meaning to specifically reply to. What I mean I disagree on is the notion of keeping 2 HT per mineral line when you try to take your third, if that's what you're saying . Maybe you're right though, who knows.
It may be added that if you spot spire early, You could go for a dark shrine to both limit expansions / force spines/spores and get that archon defense up. You can add templar archives closer to the 3 base timing imo.
Also in general about muta builds. I think they worked better when protosses didn't care to properly wall off their bases vs ling counters. Now that they do, there is basically no way to get lings into a base unless you outmultitask your opponent and he doesn't notice it or all his gateways are on cooldown.
I also think that the fact that you can get 1-1 (and keep getting those upgrades) before zerg gets his first muta upgrade really does not bode well for muta vs stalker. You're probably going to face a 2-1 stalker based defense early on and that is plenty well enough to deter any serious harass.
|
[The tempest I think is silly. If blizzard decided that thors were ineffective against mutas, why did they give us a flying one?
Good point!
Phoenix splash upgrade or range upgrade might be a much more simple solution instead of a T3 capital ship..
|
Mutas as an individual unit are probably overpowered.
Zerg however has other weaknesses that mutas are often required to cover. So it's a bad bandaid fix.
|
On November 01 2011 09:44 K3Nyy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 09:40 QTIP. wrote:On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game. I agree with you on some points, but I think that even a standard 3-base Protoss on a big enough map will face difficulties against Mutas. On Tal'darim, its nearly impossible to move out as Protoss when dealing with Mass (25+) Mutalisks. The number will only grow and Zerg will continue to take the whole map. Blink stalkers begin to really suck once the Muta numbers get up the high. Storm can be quite useful and can devastate the Muta ball if the Zerg is not careful.... but I can only see it being used defensively. Moving out with your HT's doesn't achieve much, Muta-ling is perfect for Base trades and picking off stray units. Engaging Protoss deathballs with Muta-ling is very uncommon. Leaving some HT's behind to storm harassing Mutas can be effective, but all it takes is a slightly slow reaction and all your HT's are gone. Not to mention, the Zerg won't let his Mutas sit for the entire duration of the storm. I still strongly believe that Mass Muta late game is overpowered vs WoL Protoss. Hence the introduction of a unit like the Tempest. I don't think mass muta in particular is overpowered late game. 200/200 Protoss balls vs 200/200 battles muta balls, Protoss should always win that. It's the macro and tech advantage that the mutas' harass/contain build up that is hard to overcome.
It's not about beating the army. Mutas aren't fighting units. The moment you move out, you begin to lose your entire base. You will always lose in a basetrade vs Muta-ling. No good Zerg player will engage your 200/200 death ball with Muta Ling, and definitely not expecting to win. Watch Nestea vs MC from Arena of Legends to get a good idea what base trading Muta-ling looks like.
|
Well, to put it simply: as a Protoss player, I find it easier to deal with mass marines than to deal with mass Mutas. That's gotta count for something, right?
Problem is: mutas are faster than every single unit I can think of, but the Phoenix. If we go double star + phoenix, we're dead, because the zerg switches to some ground army (Ultra?) and we're done, because the Phoenix is useless in such a scenario.
If we mass blink stalkers, we are forced to leave some behind to try and defend our base (it never works for me);
If we go Archons, they get magic-boxed...
And Mutas eat pretty much everything Protoss has... I really can't deal with them. It's not a matter of (im)balance, really, it's just that Protoss doesn't have a good unit to deal with them, because the DPS of Protoss units is laughable and their speed is... Well...
EDIT; However, adding a new unit to deal with a particular strategy is so FUCKING STUPID I can't even express it in words.
Plus, the Tempest looks like it moves slowly (as all the other protoss units do) and its DPS is just as shitty. AND it is more expensive than a Colossus.
|
Idk about overpowered, but I have the feeling Blizzard never intended Mutalisks to be THAT annoying. The difference is immensely different from Brood War, as their effectiveness goes beyond fifteen minutes into the game. (Except for surprise tech switches)
Mutalisks easily give the impression of an amateur player that they are overpowered. It took Protoss ages to figure out how to deal with Mutalisks, and good Terrans still lose to the exponentially growing Mutalisk-ball all the time. Mutalisks are not terrible against Protoss, you just don't stick to them as you do with Terran. IdrA vs (Some Protoss Player on Tal' Darim) showed that a couple of Mutalisks are great, even against Phoenixes.
|
White Ra vs Nerchio IGN finals on Tai took his 3 bases pretty fast saw muta went phoenix into Colo/Stalker/Sentry. That Finnish protoss that is really good scouted fast muta stopped making a ground army made 3 stars and pumped phoenix while taking a 3rd into the same unit comp as white ra. Sometimes I feel Protoss players depend 2 much on Blink Stalker vs Muta Blink stalker + temps + mass cannons everywhere lol works good Gruddy is really good with this style he got 2x forges got nice ups early he made a lot of cannons + temps for defense and had really good obs placement
|
On November 01 2011 11:33 StarBrift wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 11:11 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 10:56 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 10:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 09:28 K3Nyy wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 acgFork wrote:
Mass mutas in PvZ are almost impossible to deal with. Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers. Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. 8 gas? ><" You don't continue building mutas if you have 8 gas. At that point you build an broodlord/infestor army. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). I feel like if the Protoss misses the timing push before or right when the mutas pop, a good zerg won't die to a push later or lose a base trade. Mutas in PvZ don't actually have to do explicit damage. All they have to do is contain the Protoss while the Zerg himself techs and macros. If the Protoss somehow gets 3 bases early on at the normal timing, then he should be perfectly fine. He can tech to templar and do a timing push later on. If the Protoss' 3rd is delayed, I feel like the game is already lost. By the time Protoss can mass enough Blink Stalkers and get Templar tech out, Zerg should have higher tech other than Mutas late game. But you don't usually want storm. You want archons. Teching to storm (200/200), getting templar that aren't going to be morphed into archons lowers your archon numbers.... you get storm later on. Initially, no. On November 01 2011 09:39 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 09:24 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:45 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 08:34 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 07:07 FabledIntegral wrote:
[quote]
Marine/Medic, eventually start adding tanks, then a science vessel. Move out with marine/medic/3tank/1 sci EE HAN TIMING! You could actually make the argument that Ravens are better against mutas science vessels was. Sure irradiate would be imba against 30 mutas. But improved seeker missile + PDD actually shuts down mutas completely especially in conjuction with turrents and/or thors. It's just that terrans chose to spend their gas on tanks and ghosts atm. Once ghost EMP area gets nerfed they may go into a viking / raven composition instead. PDD makes vikings dominate corruptors and mutas are completely shut down from harassing the tanks. I have also been chased out of harassing a main by a seeker missile (forced to run away until it expires) only to face 20 marines when I get back. Leaving a raven at the base when moving out late game could be really strong I think even for pro gamers. I have faced som GM and master terrans that go ravens on EU and I really am at a loss for what to do. I think the Neural range nerf + seeker missile speed buff really enables this unit to be super strong late game. I can only imagine a korean terran adding maybe 3 ravens late game to supplement the allready strong ghost/tank/marine/viking force. I really don't see broodlords working at that time. I mean it's gonna be ridiculously hard to micro that properly in some fights but PDD makes such sick defensive lines. I think if the raven was as fast as the science vessel was in sc1, every terran would use it every game against all races. Btw not to mention how insanely long PDD stays up. You can basically add PDDs close to your main turrets when a raven gets full energy cause it will stay there for like 3 minutes. I've used plenty of ravens prebuff. Seeker missile is good, but Raven simply isn't comparable to the Science Vessel for reasons already mentioned. Energy cost of the spell of irridiate is lower than seeker missile and is available nearly as soon as the vessel pops (67 energy after upgrade) compared to a Raven having 75 energy after popping. Sci vessels could thus be able to throw out multiple irridiates without question, up to a whopping 3 compared to a single seeker missile. Irridiate was also always guaranteed to hit. If Science Vessels were around, they'd def still be massed, considering they could irridiate infestors as well. If unburrowed, a seeker missile will never kill more than 1 full HP infestor! Being able to swoop in with 5 science vessels and irridiate infestors would be huge, although then you have to take into account the potential for fungal. I'm still convinced Sci Vessels are insanely better. I really agree that irradiate is better than seeker missile no doubt. But PDD is very useful and quite clearly better than defensive matrix (atleast for sc2). I think the Science vessel was another unit that would slowly pick away at your army by reducint eh defilers and lurkers etc while the Raven is more used to scare away unit from certain positions. That's why I think the raven could be used to great effect in high level sc2. If you can get into one of those "zerg needs to attack me NOW or he dies" situations and you have ravens there. They will really really be useful. Cause if you have 3-4 of them you can make like 3 pdds and a few seeker missiles at any incoming mutas or corruptors (or indeed broodlords). Sure the problem might be with fungals but good micro and spreads can deter those. You also think very carefully as a zerg about running into an army even if its unsieged when they have the potential to seeker missile your banes if they clump up. But as I said. I see no reason what so ever to not add 2 ravens to your vikings late game agains a broodlord player. You can PDD when the battle begins and remove some very important corruptor shots. It doesnt require much micro and they then sit there doing a good job for the army. The big weak point though of seeker missile is obviously the friendly fire which is why I only really see use for it vs mutas and corruptors or broodlords (stuff that is not close to your army, or in the case of mutas it does so much damage that it can be worth risking friendly fire). Atleast in high level games. I think people are afraid of getting their full energy ravens neuraled and getting PDD or seeker missiles against themselves. But with the nerfed naural range they shouldn't be afraid of that if they are close toa tank line or have ghosts in their army. I see the raven as something that is part of the viking flock and will keep away from the front of the army until you know he is sending everything in. Then you can throw them forward and try to get good missiles if the situation presents itself. Again adding ravens will make micro even harder for terran (which is not exactly easy as it is even now) but this is why I think high level players could handle it. I'm fully aware of raven potential^^. I've made Raven/BC my go-to lategame combo since the release of SC2. Mass corrupters/queens/hydras? PDD + Seeker missile annihilate them. Corrupters fly in to try to shoot you, drop a PDD and seeker missile, corrupters instantly flee, and get off 6 yamatos for free kills, taking no losses yourself. If he tries to engage, drop another few PDD's and seekers. If he goes hydras it's even worse, kill all nearby creep, BC's shit on Hydras normally, but now you have seekers which they can't dodge and PDD. It's hilarious. Only thing they can try was NP, and the range just nerfed, and BC's kill each other REALLY slowly without yamato since their high armor value. Also, I recently lost a CW ace match vs NrGLuckyFool where he went 2 base 2 port Raven and used seeker missiles to make a huge comeback, as he denied my creep spread, when my banelings went to engage offcreep they couldn't avoid the seeker missile speed and they all got smashed. I had him down to 1 base (killed his nat and the OC, didn't float it away) to my 3 base at one point, although his counter attack took out my third. On November 01 2011 09:18 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 09:09 StarBrift wrote:On November 01 2011 08:58 Dfgj wrote:On November 01 2011 08:13 StarBrift wrote:
[quote]
Actually, in a situation where both players are one 4+ bases mutas get completely raped by archon/stalker/HT. You just need to storm properly. First storms goes on mutas before they get over your army. Second round of storms goes on ground units supporting the mutas. Then when ground is gone you can storm mutas again by splitting your army. You actually kill mutas by killing their ground support and then going to town on the allready damaged mutas with archon/stalkers.
Also you should very very rarely get into a situation where a zerg has been allowed to spend 2500+ gas on mutas without losing a base or a huge ammount of other units. As long as you dont mess up you stalker vs muta defense and lose a lot of probes I don't see how you can even be behind if you play properly as protoss. lol in a situation where one player has only probes, 1 muta is pretty OP too Mutalisks aren't a lategame weapon vP. They're a midgame tool (along with lings) to control the map and force P into turtling if they didn't already win with a timing attack. This lets Z run away with the game unless the P handles the harass extremely well and secures a third. Blink/Storm etc are fantastic against mutas, but getting those when you're bottled up on limited bases takes awhile. It's weird to me that the Tempest is being added since it doesn't address the main issue: lategame mass mutas, as you said, aren't a problem assuming the players are on roughly even economic footing. The 'lacking' of Protoss in my opinion is that the standard units, while beating mutas by cost, don't beat them enough - you need to sit in your base to defend with the bulk of your forces and thus can't easily pressure or secure expansions (compare this to turrets/marines) - this lets Z get more bases and more gas. ofc this is skill-based and depend how well you play the situation, so I don't really know if it's a situation that needs attention. I recognize I am bad. The Tempest is silly to me, regardless. I agree with what you say but I think thsoe protosses that are pushed back into their main defending against mutas are either playing it wrong or have lost an important battle early on, let me explain what I mean in detail. Mutas can not win a base trade unless you get 20-25 or so of them (and even then it's doubtful). So up until he gets those numbers you can be offensive and force him back to his side of the map. If you start winning battles majorly you can keep that agression up and expand and later roll him over. If you don't win any battles you will be able to move back, expand and go for a sick 3 base timing. Blinkstalkers out of 7 or so gates should be enough to defend it while teching to templars and cannons etc. Sure all that is map specific but I feel like that works on current maps. If you let a zerg get up to something like 8 gas and let him build on the muta ball then obviously it will be very hard to stop a muta build. But the whole point is that you dont let him do that. I guess that's why its so hard for low level players that can't pull off timings properly or guage economy or tech tmings of the opponent. Sure, I'm fine with everything you say. I think the bigger difficulty with mutas comes before the 3-base point, however, when speedling/muta can exploit Protoss immobility. Assuming you weren't already going for some sort of timing all-in, this leaves your options as 'try to take a third, tech towards storm', which is pretty passive and can be exploited. This is also a little map dependent, too, as some maps are easier to secure that third on. You certainly can poke at Z to secure the third, but you run the risk of just losing mineral lines while the Z makes spines and lings to defend until mutas return.. I've seen some players handle this situation beautifully, so again, it's not something I'd call 'imbalance' over. Still, Blizzard is adding anti-muta units (hi, Tempest) - though it's of questionable value. Tech to blink/archons, not storm :o. You're going to have both once you get the templar archives, so I figured that was explicit :o Archons aren't as sick as they were in BW, they act like thors with 3 range. I find 2 ht with storm are far better defense when left with a few cannons, freeing up your army itself to move out. Archons are great in the unit composition, though. Can you clarify a little more why you'd prefer them over storm tech? I disagree, archons are disgusting, and are such a ridiculous hard counter to muta I feel. It's really hard to use magic boxing because it makes you so much worse vs stalkers (just like magic boxing thors makes you so much worse vs marines). I find archons just INSANELY good. I used to be a mutalisk user in ZvP but had to stop when people started using archons (and this was BEFORE the massive change + range buff). When I heard the buff, all I did was cringe... Aha, in that situation I agree. The reason I preferred storm first is because I'd want to be able to leave smaller amounts of units in my base, and 2 hts + cannons beats an archon with similar in that situation, letting me bring comparatively more forces to hold a third or wherever else. That could just be me being overly worried about splitting up the core of my army to support archons at multiple locations, and I can see how what you're saying is true. Too often I've had an archon or two just boxed and blasted away defending a base, but by then I should have had storm, and archons may be better for that early timing when you want to secure a third and have limited gas. Reasonable. Honestly, I disagree. I think that if he has 10 mutas and sees two high templar with two cannons in the mineral line, he's going to go in and try to snipe those two HT. You're going to take 20dmg per muta MAX if you get perfect storms and they don't touch the probes. However, 10 mutas see 1 archon and two cannons... they're probably turning back. Yeah, they'll win, but it's a pretty good deterrent and will def buy time to warp in stalkers if needed. EDIT: and I might be mixing up who I'm meaning to specifically reply to. What I mean I disagree on is the notion of keeping 2 HT per mineral line when you try to take your third, if that's what you're saying . Maybe you're right though, who knows. It may be added that if you spot spire early, You could go for a dark shrine to both limit expansions / force spines/spores and get that archon defense up. You can add templar archives closer to the 3 base timing imo. Also in general about muta builds. I think they worked better when protosses didn't care to properly wall off their bases vs ling counters. Now that they do, there is basically no way to get lings into a base unless you outmultitask your opponent and he doesn't notice it or all his gateways are on cooldown. I also think that the fact that you can get 1-1 (and keep getting those upgrades) before zerg gets his first muta upgrade really does not bode well for muta vs stalker. You're probably going to face a 2-1 stalker based defense early on and that is plenty well enough to deter any serious harass.
I don't like the shrine because I feel that if you don't do dmg, you have paid for more expensive archons, and just have delayed teching to the archives that much longer. Of course, the DT pay off a lot I feel, it's just preference I suppose. I think Protoss these days take far too many risks such as that hoping to catch the Zerg off guard then are surprised when they get smashed in the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
