|
I don't think mutalisks are overpowered, but I think that on maps that are Zerg favoured, Zerg usually wins with mutalisks. The problem is in the maps, though. If Terran can't take an easy third, Zerg will just spread the Terran out too much and eventually overrun him.
Edit: I just checked the statistic for Dual Sight, a map which I thought was Zerg favoured in ZvT because of how hard it is for Terran to split the map, but it has a 55% winrate in TvZ so it seems pretty balanced. Maybe my theory is wrong.
|
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.
If I see only 10 mutas, I'm just going to make an archon with those 2 and let my cannons handle them for the morph time/warpin time (cannons are assumed, because a gas-heavy build like that means I'm making extra vs mutas).
I'm more worried of something like 15-20+, where an archon is getting 2-shot by a magicboxed flight.
However, I think you have a good point that archons are better at the low-muta-count phase, where you could theoretically try to grab your third. Depends how quick you get the archives + how many mutas are out, I guess.
We should just discuss 'how best to handle mutas' elsewhere, since I think we accept they're not a balance issue :p
|
I'd say at pro level no, but anyone that is lower than masters is definitely going to have a ton of trouble with mutalisks. I'm a diamond T, and mutas are probably the most annoying/frustrating thing in the game. I kinda see them like banelings in a way: they take way more skill to defend then to use. Nothing makes me want to put a fist through my monitor more than mutalisks popping in, picking off 2 reactors and a factory tech lab and then leaving before i can do anything. It's so annoying to know that mutalisks are going to do damage, no matter what. I can put up 20 turrets sure, but that's 2,000 minerals not invested in my army or economy. Mutas shut down drops super quickly, so zergs can just expand freely. They can pick off a stray siege tank once in a while, and the whole time they are just getting a bigger and bigger flock of mutas while you just sit back pinned in your base. At least at my level of play, it's pretty much an "I win" button.
|
20 mutalisks are 2000/2000 so if spending 2000/0 can shut them down then why not do it?
|
the warhound isn't another unit to deal with the muta, it's THE thor, but smaller and more mobile. For protoss instead of the carrier being useless against muta, they now have the tempest. I don't think blizzard is saying mutas are OP, they are just replacing worthless units that get owned by mutas. So now finally, protoss has an air unit that is viable late game and terran can finally go mech without massing only thors and win.
I don't see anything wrong with blizzards intentions other than the warhound and marauder are in the same exact place in TvP.
|
On November 01 2011 13:22 Tishe wrote:
20 mutalisks are 2000/2000 so if spending 2000/0 can shut them down then why not do it?
Because he wouldn't actually be shutting them down, just preventing them from getting into his base.
That said! I don't think it's fair to call mutalisks and "I win" button when dancing them around feels kind of like entering a swordfight with a feather duster. Not only can you do little but annoy the shit out of him, if he actually manages to either hit you or your feather duster, you're in a pretty shitty situation.
|
On November 01 2011 13:14 IlIlIlIl wrote:
I'd say at pro level no, but anyone that is lower than masters is definitely going to have a ton of trouble with mutalisks. I'm a diamond T, and mutas are probably the most annoying/frustrating thing in the game. I kinda see them like banelings in a way: they take way more skill to defend then to use. Nothing makes me want to put a fist through my monitor more than mutalisks popping in, picking off 2 reactors and a factory tech lab and then leaving before i can do anything. It's so annoying to know that mutalisks are going to do damage, no matter what. I can put up 20 turrets sure, but that's 2,000 minerals not invested in my army or economy. Mutas shut down drops super quickly, so zergs can just expand freely. They can pick off a stray siege tank once in a while, and the whole time they are just getting a bigger and bigger flock of mutas while you just sit back pinned in your base. At least at my level of play, it's pretty much an "I win" button.
I am sure every Protoss at silver and bronze level feels the same way about stim + marauders. The only advice I ever got was getting better at forcefields and scouting. And the idea that they are easier to use than they are to defend, well I am just going to go back to the marauder for that one too. As a protoss, I revile the unit as a whole, but I suck it up because I know that it can be beaten. I have watched it happen.
Mutas are brutal and can become a snow ball unit. They really punish a player who cannot multitask or has poor map awareness. The main issue with them is that it is really difficult to zone them out effectively without an anti air AOE. Thors can get the job done, but can be magic boxed. Because of their high cost and long build time, I think blizzard is rethinking the counter with the warhound. Its not that the Thor is bad, but losing one or two of them can give the mutas a huge timing window.
As for protoss, well just watch Sase's stream some time. He encounters some pretty amazing Korean zergs with some solid muta play. The game does not even look like SC2, more like a messed up game of wack a mole, as Sase attempts to destroy endless ninja-expansions while the zerg works on killing every probe on the map. The armies never directly fight and the mutas just try to pick off any stragglers. The game ends when the zerg runs out of money to build ninja expansions.
Even if that sort of base trade situation is balanced, it sucks. It is like a great game devolved into two armies moving around the map, smashing each others stuff, but never fighting. If zerg gets some solid buffs in HotS, I can deal with less mutas.
|
OMG what happened to this thread...
Apparently Blizzard OKed it to say Mutas are OP, even though it's a complaint I had never heard of before Blizzcon, so now all the whiners are out...
Please, stop explaining why mutas are strong. We already know, they are annoying, they allow you to expand, to harrass, they are a strong, solid units. That's what a T2 unit that costs 100 gas should be.
And no, there shouldn't be an easy way to just completely nullify Mutas. The last thing we want is for Mutas to become a cheesy unit that is useless after a certain timing. It's supposed to be hard to deal with, and to require a reaction from the opponent.
Vipers are probably the reason why they are adding counters to Mutas, if they thought Mutas were too strong in WoL they would've fixed it in WoL...
|
I can't believe you guys actually think Mutas are OP Almost every unit that Shoots Air Counters them. Save Sentries, Vikings, VoidRays.
Terran has Marines, MissileTurrets,Thors.
Protoss see's Muta Tech with Obs just Use Photon Cannons, HT's, Arhchons, Blink Stalker.
Lol At people calling Mutas OP when Clearly they are the Least Cost Efficient unit. They're good for Counter-attacks and Run bys, Harass Etc.
Obviously you will use them when the Big Engagement Comes but Almost everything Counters them.
|
On November 01 2011 13:52 XRaDiiX wrote:
I can't believe you guys actually think Mutas are OP Almost every unit that Shoots Air Counters them.
Save Sentries, Vikings, VoidRays.
Terran has Marines, MissileTurrets,Thors.
Protoss see's Muta Tech with Obs just Use Photon Cannons, HT's, Arhchons, Blink Stalker.
Lol At people calling Mutas OP when Clearly they are the Least Cost Efficient unit. They're good for Counter-attacks and Run bys, Harass Etc.
Obviously you will use them when the Big Engagement Comes but Almost everything Counters them.
Uh, yeah, the problem isn't their straight up fight prowess, it's the mobility.
Noting that the only air unit that counters mutas is the phoenix, which is harder to mass (no larva mechanic for toss), and the only unit that is close to having 2/3rds of the muta mobility is Blink Stalkers. Thors are fucking clunky, marines are slow w/o stim, at which point they have taken damage and due to bounce severely weakens survivability. Missile turrets are 100 each, and unless you spend like 1.5k per base mutas can just kill them or ignore them long enough to destroy your econ anyway.
~~Slight siderant: Zergs, we understand your 20 mutas are 2k/2k. But Terran should not have to get 10-15 turrets *per base* to simply hold back mutas long enough to get other units in position to fight off mutas. It gets worse when they spread mutas into a line, because then turrets have to hit a muta 12 times to kill it, because they are all targeting different mutas, and ofc they'll oneshot all the turrets and trying to repair will result in moar dead scv's.....
I think the raiding power of mutas is slightly too strong compared to the ease that zerg has getting the resources to make them. What's this, the 10 minute mark? Let me just make 3 geysers, hit spawn larva twice, and have enough drones to mine the gas in ~1 minute =<
|
On November 01 2011 13:32 Plansix wrote:
I am sure every Protoss at silver and bronze level feels the same way about stim + marauders. The only advice I ever got was getting better at forcefields and scouting. And the idea that they are easier to use than they are to defend, well I am just going to go back to the marauder for that one too. As a protoss, I revile the unit as a whole, but I suck it up because I know that it can be beaten. I have watched it happen.
Mutas are brutal and can become a snow ball unit. They really punish a player who cannot multitask or has poor map awareness. The main issue with them is that it is really difficult to zone them out effectively without an anti air AOE. Thors can get the job done, but can be magic boxed. Because of their high cost and long build time, I think blizzard is rethinking the counter with the warhound. Its not that the Thor is bad, but losing one or two of them can give the mutas a huge timing window.
As for protoss, well just watch Sase's stream some time. He encounters some pretty amazing Korean zergs with some solid muta play. The game does not even look like SC2, more like a messed up game of wack a mole, as Sase attempts to destroy endless ninja-expansions while the zerg works on killing every probe on the map. The armies never directly fight and the mutas just try to pick off any stragglers. The game ends when the zerg runs out of money to build ninja expansions.
Even if that sort of base trade situation is balanced, it sucks. It is like a great game devolved into two armies moving around the map, smashing each others stuff, but never fighting. If zerg gets some solid buffs in HotS, I can deal with less mutas.
Great analysis and great description of the "whack a mole" on Sase's stream. As far as your analogy goes, I'd say mutas vs toss are a different breed from marauders to the extent that a good deal more than half of my games if not 75% involve him massing marauders. I expect it and the timings aren't wonky.
With Zerg, muta play has fallen in and out of fashion. With this recent trend, I find that the timings of the mutts vary so drastically. I have raged a couple times when getting hit by a greedy Zerg etching to 8 minute mutas. Even scouting this early tech with hallucination, my 5 gate pressure still failed. This was due to my own ineptitude, but my point is not that they are OP, but that the lack of standard muta timings in PvZ make them really difficult to handle. When I played Terran, I found the muta timings much more predictable. My problems as toss, overall, are related to my misjudging of my opponents tech. When I am able to clearly scout them early enough, I do fine...Zerg tech switches can be hard to scout.
|
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.
Not sure DT Shrine is worth it that early in the game. It's really costly that early and it'll feel like you can just run me over with lings. Plus, Zerg has a lair at that point so dts aren't really gonna do much damage because of overseers.
About ling runbys, do you mean the 3rd? I don't see what walling off will do before I even established my 3rd. -.- If you mean ling runbys on 2 base, I don't think I ever seen someone do that for a longggggg time.
And upgrades, ehh.. Stalkers don't scale that well with upgrades. With +2, Stalkers do 13 dmg to mutas instead of 11. +2 is obviously better but I dunno if +2 would be the reason to deter "serious harass". It'll also be really hard to afford 2/1 upgrades with templar archives and mass stalkers already off 2 base. If I get an early 3rd, then mutas aren't a problem anyway.
|
... i think you are suppose to use a combination of units to def your base against mutas. like a few turrets, a thor and maybe 10 marines with scv repairing. with one thor you dont have to commit to too many marines in your base.
Even zerg uses queens to kite air units around spores and sometimes even hydras to def against air.
The lone turrets are not suppose to kill mutas they are just suppose to buy time for your defending units to engage and fend of the mutas. if you cant multi task properly it means your mechanics is bad and you have to work on it.
and if he gets up to 30++ mutas you deserve to lose. just surrender.
|
Some of the arguments here... just hurt my brain.
10-15 turrets per base? Really?
Mutas require multitasking to defend? Yes, Muta play requires multitasking from both players, and the player that's better at it should get the advantage. That's... excactly what Starcraft should be. What's abnormal is how massing units on 2 or 3 bases without ever needing to multitask is actually viable.
Mutas are very mobile? So wait, you're telling me that Mutas compensate their weakness in a straight fight with their mobility? I'm sure that was competely unintended by Blizzard...
Seriously, some people should think before posting. Mutas are very balanced. Do you think 10 Mutas are significantly stronger, and more of a game changer than, say, 10 Tanks? 7 infestors? 5 Collossi? Give me a break.
|
On November 01 2011 13:22 Tishe wrote:
20 mutalisks are 2000/2000 so if spending 2000/0 can shut them down then why not do it?
because then your army is weaker and the mutalisks will actually in an army engagement, as odd as that seems.
On November 01 2011 15:05 MilesTeg wrote:
Some of the arguments here... just hurt my brain.
10-15 turrets per base? Really?
Mutas require multitasking to defend? Yes, Muta play requires multitasking from both players, and the player that's better at it should get the advantage. That's... excactly what Starcraft should be. What's abnormal is how massing units on 2 or 3 bases without ever needing to multitask is actually viable.
Mutas are very mobile? So wait, you're telling me that Mutas compensate their weakness in a straight fight with their mobility? I'm sure that was competely unintended by Blizzard...
Seriously, some people should think before posting. Mutas are very balanced. Do you think 10 Mutas are significantly stronger, and more of a game changer than, say, 10 Tanks? 7 infestors? 5 Collossi? Give me a break.
If tanks were 2 supply, cost 100/100.... *shudder*. The equivalent would be more like 6-7 tanks . But the answer is still no^^.
|
Mutas are obviously not OP and the fact that people are arguing otherwise is disgusting. Yea mutas are strong, and they should be, but literally nobody has been complaining about muta being OP until this thread was made.
I bet I could make similar threads about a dozen other units, regardless of race. I'm sure players from the other two races would argue for several hundred posts that they are overpowered. Planetarys, banshees, colossi, ghosts, infestors, tanks, hellions, mules, MARINES. Regardless of whether those units are actually overpowered, plenty of people who will say they are if given the opportunity.
|
I think what terran needs a more focused air dmg unit, not necessarily aoe. I'm pretty sure the goliath was just a single target unit, with no air splash, and it was pretty fucking deadly.
|
On November 01 2011 15:37 hitpoint wrote:
Mutas are obviously not OP and the fact that people are arguing otherwise is disgusting. Yea mutas are strong, and they should be, but literally nobody has been complaining about muta being OP until this thread was made.
nobody complained until Blizzcon and Browder said that mass muta are OP
since then I've been called noobs a couple of time for even dare to make 10 mutas and harrasing everywhere while waiting for broods to pop up on ZvP or kiting marines to outside the siege tank range so my banes wont die in an instant 
|
The main issue with Mutalisks (if there truly is one, I play Terran and I'm mixed about this) is that with solid micro, Mutalisks rarely die, and either force Terran back to the base for damage control or force a base trade / all-in.
Once the Muta flock reaches about 16+, Turrets, even with +2 armor and +1 range become null and void, giving you only a few seconds of time.
For Protoss, the direct counter is the Phoenix and although you can't mass them as much as Mutalisks, you generally won't need to unless Zerg is going purely for mass muta. In the case of mass mass muta, all you need to do is mass phoenixes and other AA since there won't be a lot of ground forces.
If Protoss manages to get rid of the mutas with the Phoenixes, they can still contribute heavily to the ground war, lifting up power units or doing harassment themselves.
For Terran, there is generally no air to air means to deal with a Muta ball.
Vikings, although somewhat massable via Reactors, lose badly to Mutalisks and have a bad tendency to all shoot the same Mutalisk. Furthermore, mass Viking is horrible against Zerg unless you manage to snipe every single Overlord on the map with them. Vikings also cannot chase down Mutalisks.
The best way I've found to deal with Mutas is to just not let it get that far and force them back for defense.
I aim to be shelling Zerg's third or natural before that 20 muta ball is up and running, forcing Zerg to deal with my marine/tank army instead.
If he then chooses to harass me with Mutas, I move the marine/tank army up faster.
At the same time, if Zerg does manage to get that 20 muta ball up (especially on maps like Metalopolis) whilst having decent ground forces / macro (or having defend my push), I feel completely lost as how to kill it off.
|
On November 01 2011 15:28 FabledIntegral wrote:If tanks were 2 supply, cost 100/100.... *shudder*. The equivalent would be more like 6-7 tanks . But the answer is still no^^.
Oops my bad, thanks for pointing out the mistake. I am aware of the price of a tank by the way, before people start the ad hominem :p
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
