|
On November 04 2011 03:10 taintmachine wrote:
browder says it's not that toss players can't deal with mutas, but the switch to them (mid/lategame switch) is very hard to respond to as toss? as in, a very hard tech switch involving dumping 30+ larvae or so into mutas? isn't that more indicative of an underlying problem with zerg macro than a balance issue w/ specific unit (the muta in this case)? because i imagine zerg will still be able to do hard switches that exploit lategame comps of other races. i still do not understand how the tempest will curb something like this.
If the zerg can pump out 30+ mutas at once, I think there is a problem with the toss player not the game.
|
On November 04 2011 06:10 Jermstuddog wrote:
@Ballistixz
Being a Zerg player doesn't make you more authoritative on Protoss counters to Muta play unfortunately, so don't try to justify your POV with such irrelevent details.
Anyway, Phoenixs hard counter mutalisks, no question about it. If the numbers are anywhere near close, phoenix always come out on top. That is called a counter. It works fine.
Stalkers generally win vs Mutas in relatively equal numbers as well, considering they cost 1/2 the gas, come at a lower tier and are all-around more versatile units, that sounds good too.
Archons, if given the opportunity to attack more than once, are always cost-effective. Add to that, Archons always kill mutas in 3-4 hits with a large splash depending on upgrades. No problem there.
2 storms can kill a theoretically infinite number of mutas. In particular, when teamed up with any combination of the previously mentioned units, it makes base defense a non-issue.
Cannons cost 0 gas and do better than stalkers in comparison. 1 probe can build infinity of them in rapid succession.
Protoss has no issues with mass mutas other than the fact that 99% of Protoss players have no clue how to respond.
Tell all of those to MC who literally had stalkers cannons archons and pheonix and storm and still lost to mutas.... In theory they all sound like good counter. BUT Archons are entirely to slow and bulky to do anything. Storm is insanely easy to dodge and you mostly only end up storming your own units. Stalkers are decent vs low numbers of muta but 20+ and its gets insane to deal with. Pheonix again like stalkers are okay against low muta numbers, but once the muta number gets decent pheonix get pwned. and cannons lol yea ima spend 10k minerals on cannons to stop mutas.. build 4 cannons and see how long they last against a flock of mutas.....
|
Mutalisks are really difficult to deal with. They require that the defender react quickly and spend a lot more actions to deal with then the Muta player spends controlling their mutalisks. That being said, the exact same thing is true for MMM Drops, Hellion Drops, Baneling Drops, Banshee Harass, DT harass, Phoenix harass, Warp Prism drops (if Protoss players ever actually decided to use them....) and basically any other form of harassment. Mutalisks are really good, but my only real complaint is how they force you to go Marine. Thor Turret can do alright, but once you get up to really big swarms and they magic box, pure Thor just doesn't cut it and there really isn't any other option. Then, if you build Marines, 2 burrowed banelings or a hidden infestor instantly destroys your entire anti-air.
I don't think they're overpowered, but redesigning the Thor to make it weaker, cheaper, and faster would be great. It seems that the Warhound is sort of like that, but we'll see. If it makes pure mech more viable TvZ then I'll be happy, but who knows. I think that the "vs Mechanical" bonus should become "vs Heavy," because vZ it seems that if they're worthless against Z ground units, then they would have to be super good vs Mutas to ever be a good choice.
I can't really speak to the balance of Mutalisks in PvZ, but I do remember TT1 vs DongRaeGu on Tal'Darim Altar and DRG managed to come back from a seemingly unwinnable position with Mutalisks. That being said, I think that a majority of that was TT1's stupid decision making, such as sending his army into 15 Spines instead of pulling back to defend. They're good if you catch the Protoss player off guard, but so is Double Stargate or Dark Templar.
|
So to generalize what people are saying in this thread:
1) TvZ: Mutalisks are strong but dealable
2) ZvZ: Mutalisks are strong, dealable and both players have them
3) PvZ: Mutalisks are too strong in big numbers, because you never have enough stuff to deal with them
so 1) seems pretty OK, as Terran also has a bunch of units that are strong but dealable (marines, tanks, ghosts...)
2) they are not ruining the mirrormatch up (unlike colossi do in PvP and tanks do, to a certain amount in TvT), which is an incredible high quality indicator, that the unit is pretty balanced, especially when you take into account that there is no way to counter them without hydrauseage, which is one of the least played zerg units
now let's talk about 3) (again):
Thinking about Mutahistory in PvZ:
-) 2base Muta/Ling was strong, when Protoss builds were 4gate aggression into expand and 3gate expand into colossus, so zergs were either ahead in the macro (very early SC2), or doing the counterplay to robo
-) Once Protoss found out that they can stay on gatewaytech longer vs zerg, that blink is pretty awesome and a 2base zerg that rushes mutas can't hold any 2base Protoss aggression, Mutaplay ceased to exist completly. All this was played 2base vs 2base.
-) Now Zergs are going harder on the eco (3base openings and fast macro hatches), stronger on the basic units (slowroach/speedling, speedling/baneling, mass upgraded speedlings, speedroach/speedling) and are basically always ahead in the macro Suddenly costinefficient mutalisks reappear in the matchup, because they abuse the fact that protoss is focusing on winning the ground war by going for forcefields and colossi instead of them trying to keep up in the eco war and therefore can't match mutacounts
Sounds pretty simple to me: Protoss have to learn to play more economical, so they can keep up with the mutacount
Only if this can't be achieved they need a unit that can deal with mutalisks of lower economy than the zerg. But that basically had to fix that protoss must not be played of even economy with a standard style.
Speaking from my own experiences as a master zerg player: + Show Spoiler +It's not possible to go mutalisks vs Protoss if you're not ahead. You have to trade ground armies AND have money in the bank for the big mutaswitch, or you have to be on 1more mining base for somthing like 4-5mins, so you can afford mutalisks as a composition unit, without flatout dying to 90% of Protoss' builds.
|
Protoss are getting a dedicated anti mass muta air unit in HotS. So yes, mass muta are imbalanced vs protoss.
Or look at it this way: marines with stim and medivacs can match mutas unit for unit. Meaning 30 stimed marines can mop the floor with 30 mutas no problem. 30 stalkers can barely kill 30 mutas, and that only with blink and upgrade advantage. And 30 stalker cost 2,5x as much as 30x marines. I think nothing more needs to be said.
|
I feel like Bisu controlling a phoenix would wreck mutalisks 
|
I often think that blizzard makes changes to this game based upon what the average user struggles with. The average user sucks, and doesn't have a clue how to micro marines, so they make it easier by adding a better thor. At the pro level mutalisks aren't really a problem, but if I was in gold I could probably stomp on every player every single game with mutalisks.
Maybe I'm just paranoid, but it seems like many of their changes are geared to low-end players instead of the pro scene. And I guess from a financial perspective that makes sense, since the average SC2 player doesn't follow professional starcraft much, right?
|
On November 04 2011 07:49 IVN wrote:
Protoss are getting a dedicated anti mass muta air unit in HotS. So yes, mass muta are imbalanced vs protoss.
Or look at it this way: marines with stim and medivacs can match mutas unit for unit. Meaning 30 stimed marines can mop the floor with 30 mutas no problem. 30 stalkers can barely kill 30 mutas, and that only with blink and upgrade advantage. And 30 stalker cost 2,5x as much as 30x marines. I think nothing more needs to be said.
that just means marines r too good vs mutas....
|
Mutas are one of the most ; if not the most cost inefficient Unit in the game. They are good counter-attack and hit and run units to attack bases.
They have their uses being mobile for worker line attacks when the player is unsuspecting of it but in a straight up fight Mutas are pretty weak Especially against Protoss.- Not so much against Terran.
Mutas are really weak health and attack for their Cost though so if you scouted Muta tech which you should have if your not bad then have alot of static defense and anti-air units.
Mutas are actually alot weaker than they were in BW relatively
Also to add the way's Mutas attack units is extremely inefficient their volley usually targets one or two units closest to them at a time and wastes dps on units by stacking too many glaives on one unit; when they could have attacked more efficiently by attacking several units at once per each 5-6 mutas attacking per se a different stalker/marine.
The Glaives bounce yes but Mutas don't attack efficiently like marines or Stalkers.
|
United States1108 Posts
On November 04 2011 07:49 IVN wrote:
Protoss are getting a dedicated anti mass muta air unit in HotS. So yes, mass muta are imbalanced vs protoss.
This is the opposite of logical thinking.
Or look at it this way: marines with stim and medivacs can match mutas unit for unit. Meaning 30 stimed marines can mop the floor with 30 mutas no problem. 30 stalkers can barely kill 30 mutas, and that only with blink and upgrade advantage. And 30 stalker cost 2,5x as much as 30x marines. I think nothing more needs to be said.
30 stalkers cost less than 30 mutas and still defeat them.
Protoss also has archons and psi storm... storm is severely underused vs mutas. It is quite possible to defend against mutas, but so many protoss act like it's imba when they start up their deathball with zealots and colossi, mix in a few stalkers, and act surprised when it loses to mass air.
Another important factor is upgrades, specifically armor upgrades... they destroy the efficiency of mutas. Put down two forges and chronoboost 2/2 upgrades and mutas are sooo much weaker.
Calling mutas imbalanced vs protoss is like zerg saying colossi are imbalanced against roach/hydra. Like colossi, mutas in ZvP are kind of supposed to be strong. You actually have to deal with them in a specific way and hard counter them, you can't just mix in some anti air units and say "I feel like this should be good enough".
|
Mutas en masse are extremely hard to deal with as protoss, the reasons being:
-Unless you open phoenix, you can never produce enough of them in time to counter mutas. "Reactive" 2 star phoenix sucks against muta builds.
-While blink stalkers are good vs. mutalisks, it is impossible for protoss to force them to engage. Muta flock will just avoid stalkers and force a base race when the army moves out. Cannons can't kill mutas in high numbers.
-Storm can be easily dodged, and archons can't get close enough.
So yeah, protoss needs a better option. That said, I'd have preferred a nice gateway unit instead of a high tech capital ship.
In terran's case, I think it's just to make mech viable thus creating more variety. I think it's a good unit.
|
On November 04 2011 08:06 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2011 07:49 IVN wrote:
Protoss are getting a dedicated anti mass muta air unit in HotS. So yes, mass muta are imbalanced vs protoss.
Or look at it this way: marines with stim and medivacs can match mutas unit for unit. Meaning 30 stimed marines can mop the floor with 30 mutas no problem. 30 stalkers can barely kill 30 mutas, and that only with blink and upgrade advantage. And 30 stalker cost 2,5x as much as 30x marines. I think nothing more needs to be said. 30 stalkers cost less than 30 mutas and still defeat them. Protoss also has archons and psi storm... storm is severely underused vs mutas. It is quite possible to defend against mutas, but so many protoss act like it's imba when they start up their deathball with zealots and colossi, mix in a few stalkers, and act surprised when it loses to mass air. Another important factor is upgrades, specifically armor upgrades... they destroy the efficiency of mutas. Put down two forges and chronoboost 2/2 upgrades and mutas are sooo much weaker. Calling mutas imbalanced vs protoss is like zerg saying colossi are imbalanced against roach/hydra. Like colossi, mutas in ZvP are kind of supposed to be strong. You actually have to deal with them in a specific way and hard counter them, you can't just mix in some anti air units and say "I feel like this should be good enough".
No. Colossi can be hard countered by just making the counter unit (corruptor). And they cant be massed, unlike mutas. Ever seen 20 colossi w/o escort?
There is nothing in the protoss arsenal, that hard counters mutas. Not even phoenix do that. And thats why tempest will be added to the game.
There really is no need to discus this. The fact alone, that Blizz has designed a dedicated anti mass muta unit says it all.
|
United States7483 Posts
On November 04 2011 07:18 Big J wrote:So to generalize what people are saying in this thread: 1) TvZ: Mutalisks are strong but dealable 2) ZvZ: Mutalisks are strong, dealable and both players have them 3) PvZ: Mutalisks are too strong in big numbers, because you never have enough stuff to deal with them so 1) seems pretty OK, as Terran also has a bunch of units that are strong but dealable (marines, tanks, ghosts...) 2) they are not ruining the mirrormatch up (unlike colossi do in PvP and tanks do, to a certain amount in TvT), which is an incredible high quality indicator, that the unit is pretty balanced, especially when you take into account that there is no way to counter them without hydrauseage, which is one of the least played zerg units now let's talk about 3) (again): Thinking about Mutahistory in PvZ: -) 2base Muta/Ling was strong, when Protoss builds were 4gate aggression into expand and 3gate expand into colossus, so zergs were either ahead in the macro (very early SC2), or doing the counterplay to robo -) Once Protoss found out that they can stay on gatewaytech longer vs zerg, that blink is pretty awesome and a 2base zerg that rushes mutas can't hold any 2base Protoss aggression, Mutaplay ceased to exist completly. All this was played 2base vs 2base. -) Now Zergs are going harder on the eco (3base openings and fast macro hatches), stronger on the basic units (slowroach/speedling, speedling/baneling, mass upgraded speedlings, speedroach/speedling) and are basically always ahead in the macro Suddenly costinefficient mutalisks reappear in the matchup, because they abuse the fact that protoss is focusing on winning the ground war by going for forcefields and colossi instead of them trying to keep up in the eco war and therefore can't match mutacounts Sounds pretty simple to me: Protoss have to learn to play more economical, so they can keep up with the mutacount Only if this can't be achieved they need a unit that can deal with mutalisks of lower economy than the zerg. But that basically had to fix that protoss must not be played of even economy with a standard style. Speaking from my own experiences as a master zerg player: + Show Spoiler +It's not possible to go mutalisks vs Protoss if you're not ahead. You have to trade ground armies AND have money in the bank for the big mutaswitch, or you have to be on 1more mining base for somthing like 4-5mins, so you can afford mutalisks as a composition unit, without flatout dying to 90% of Protoss' builds.
The issue is that with the larva mechanic and with spawn larva, the zerg can go from having nothing but drones to having 40 roaches in a little over a minute, which means taking a fast third as protoss is indefensible. You need to build up a strong force on two base to force zerg on the defensive in order to take a third, or at least present a show of force sufficient to prevent zerg from being aggressive. So Protoss has to do a gateway timing and hope zerg is teching and doesn't have units, or mass up and take the third and hope zerg didn't go mutas, which is really shitty.
That's not to say that it's imbalanced, since if toss is playing well zerg doesn't know for sure which he's doing either due to scouting denial, but since neither player really honestly knows what's going on, it's a really lousy matchup right now. Protoss needs to figure out a way to take a fast third defensively, and I honestly don't think there is one due to how fast zerg can drone. If you take a fast third as toss and zerg decides not to be aggressive and keeps droning/expanding, you'll have your third saturated when zerg has taken the entire map and is swarming units at you non-stop, and you won't have the army to hold.
I think the main issue with the matchup are roaches, mass roach is really powerful unless the toss has forcefields, observers to deal with burrow, and colossi/immortals, which pidgeonholes them into robo tech if they detect a roach warren. If you've watched AriA play vs. HuK, you'll recognize the idea I'm talking about (He was so far ahead it wasn't even funny, he screwed up really badly in the late game though). Throw down a roach warren, make some roaches, and throw down a spire behind it while you're third is going up. What exactly is protoss going to do about it? If he's aggressive, you just make a lot of roaches and crush him. If he's not, you can pressure his third that's going up and make mutas behind the roach aggression. Once mutas are out, so long as you have roach tech available, there's literally nothing toss can do to you, so just take the whole map.
Mutas are too powerful in terms of map control against toss, because protoss has no swing unit like terran to suddenly say "okay I can push now". Cannons aren't nearly as threatening vs. mutas as turrets are either, especially in mineral lines where the turret can be repaired by 30+ scvs.
|
I actually didn't think mass mutalisks were overpowered against P last week but not pretty much every zerg is using them. The reason they're OP is that they basicly force you to basetrade 100% of the time and you have no chance of winning against a zerg who can/has expanded all over the map. Even if your main army is stronger you're gonna lose almost always.
|
United States1108 Posts
On November 04 2011 08:13 IVN wrote:
No. Colossi can be hard countered by just making the counter unit (corruptor). And they cant be massed, unlike mutas. Ever seen 20 colossi w/o escort?
Whether they're massed as a single unit type or mixed into an army of other units is completely irrelevant to whether they're overpowered or not.
I should also mention that much like a protoss deathball requires both making corruptors AND skillful unit control for the zerg to win... a protoss player has to make a specific anti-muta composition AND use it well in order to win. It isn't like "he's massing nothing but roaches? ok I'll keep massing nothing but marauders."
There is nothing in the protoss arsenal, that hard counters mutas. Not even phoenix do that. And thats why tempest will be added to the game.
Psi storm does, and so do upgraded blink stalkers. And I'm not talking about going "oh crap I've been beaten up by mutas for 7-8 minutes straight, I better make 2 or 3 templars out of desperation". That works as well as losing your army to a colossi-filled deathball and then making a few corruptors.
The fact alone, that Blizz has designed a dedicated anti mass muta unit says it all.
This is called circular reasoning.
Blizzard designed goblin land mines in Warcraft 3, which could take out an opponent's entire base at the 3 minute mark. The fact that Blizzard designed them means they are balanced and make perfect sense as part of the game. Right? (No, of course not.)
By the same flawed logic I could argue that mutas are perfectly balanced right now, because Blizzard put them into the game the way they are, and haven't nerfed them in several patches. This is undeniable proof that I'm correct, right? (No, of course not.)
|
On November 04 2011 07:18 Big J wrote:So to generalize what people are saying in this thread: 1) TvZ: Mutalisks are strong but dealable 2) ZvZ: Mutalisks are strong, dealable and both players have them 3) PvZ: Mutalisks are too strong in big numbers, because you never have enough stuff to deal with them so 1) seems pretty OK, as Terran also has a bunch of units that are strong but dealable (marines, tanks, ghosts...) 2) they are not ruining the mirrormatch up (unlike colossi do in PvP and tanks do, to a certain amount in TvT), which is an incredible high quality indicator, that the unit is pretty balanced, especially when you take into account that there is no way to counter them without hydrauseage, which is one of the least played zerg units now let's talk about 3) (again): Thinking about Mutahistory in PvZ: -) 2base Muta/Ling was strong, when Protoss builds were 4gate aggression into expand and 3gate expand into colossus, so zergs were either ahead in the macro (very early SC2), or doing the counterplay to robo -) Once Protoss found out that they can stay on gatewaytech longer vs zerg, that blink is pretty awesome and a 2base zerg that rushes mutas can't hold any 2base Protoss aggression, Mutaplay ceased to exist completly. All this was played 2base vs 2base. -) Now Zergs are going harder on the eco (3base openings and fast macro hatches), stronger on the basic units (slowroach/speedling, speedling/baneling, mass upgraded speedlings, speedroach/speedling) and are basically always ahead in the macro Suddenly costinefficient mutalisks reappear in the matchup, because they abuse the fact that protoss is focusing on winning the ground war by going for forcefields and colossi instead of them trying to keep up in the eco war and therefore can't match mutacounts Sounds pretty simple to me: Protoss have to learn to play more economical, so they can keep up with the mutacount Only if this can't be achieved they need a unit that can deal with mutalisks of lower economy than the zerg. But that basically had to fix that protoss must not be played of even economy with a standard style. Speaking from my own experiences as a master zerg player: + Show Spoiler +It's not possible to go mutalisks vs Protoss if you're not ahead. You have to trade ground armies AND have money in the bank for the big mutaswitch, or you have to be on 1more mining base for somthing like 4-5mins, so you can afford mutalisks as a composition unit, without flatout dying to 90% of Protoss' builds.
They are not strong army wise. I don't think any really good Protoss will complain about 200/200 mutas while having a 200/200 army themselves. The strength that they have is they harass while macroing themselves, keeping Protoss on 2/3 base long enough so the macro and tech advantage just overruns them. Protoss are struggling somewhat already to take a 3rd base against a really aggressive Zerg that just streams roaches and lings and mixes in hydras; mutas are like 10x harder than that.
|
I fail to see how muta are imbalanced vs terran. The marines in this game have 5-15 more HP than they did in BW. They also don't have fumbling medics to get around to shoot the mutas (a la medivac). And you can fit more of them in a dropship since you dont need to bring a medic.
Thors are just extra icing for terran really.
Not to mention that vikings are probably much better vs mutas than wraiths were. You can basically extend the range of any ground AA with a viking holding position over it. because they either have to run away from its pecking attack at long range or dive in to kill it and take much more damage in the process.
And vs protoss the only disadvantage they have is in super late maxed out games like FFAs. Where protoss really only has stalkers and archons to deal with mutas. HT and sentry to some extent. but after a half a dozen or so fenix and muta in the same numbers muta actually arent countered by fenix anymore. Which is why they decided to add this late game crap unit that is slightly more useful than a poorly designed carrier from WOL. But it's kinda silly because Im pretty sure muta can still magic box these guys and they fire much slower than a thor and they are very expensive. its basically like a flying thor, no big deal really.
|
off the top of my head the tempest gives a good counter for all air, not just mutalisks...
broodlords were nigh impossible to take care of against a properly macroing zerg player.
|
i'm pretty sure everyone is overreacting to the warhound
i think the goal with that is less to create a harder counter to mutalisks, but more to make the thor smaller
you can't just take the thor artwork and make it tiny, its really bulky so it would look weird
i won't be surprised at all if the end result is that an equal cost of warhounds handles just the same as a thor, the advantage will be that you can navigate between buildings better and split them up to cover more angles of your bases. one thor can't be in two places at once, but two warhounds that cost the same as a thor can be
the benefits to doing it this way is blizzard can pretend they're giving terran a new unit when really it's just an artwork change. they already did make the thor a bit smaller in beta, but they seem to think they can't go any farther without it looking really bad
the tempest however is a seperate issue, and if protoss is really having trouble with mutalisks, imo just goes to show that psi storm is too weak relative to bw storms
|
Mutas are really hard to deal with as toss, especially when they get up to a flock of around 20-30, it's extremely good. They are really hard to effectively counter once in those numbers, because phoenix and stalkers start to have a hard time and cannons are worthless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
