| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Velr
Switzerland10694 Posts
The thing is: There is no reason for a Terran to lose to straight up Massmuta. Build Turrets at your bases (tons)... Mass up... PUSH. If the Z is still on Massmutas he now can't engage your bases (whiteout heavy losses) and he sure as hell can't engage your army. GG you won. | ||
|
Exarian
Poland58 Posts
Mutalisks aren't overpowered, they can be dealt with if you play against them intelligently. Thank god they don't have as many hard counters as other zerg units do. Mutas are not Overpowered stats-wise. They are even cost-inefficient compared to other units. Their main strength is huge positioning advantage completely negating their inferior stats and making them borderline OP in multiple scenarios. T and P, even if their army is 5 times more cost effective against mutas, cannot spread their forces across them map to reduce mutas positioning advantage without losing DPS advantage, which results in two possible scenarios: Army kept in deathball is not able to protect expose, while army spread to expos is not strong enough to counter large, single group of mutas. Perfect solution is giving T and P fast moving, long-ranged unit with good DPS and splash-damage against Air -something between Corsair and Valkyrie (or their ground version). | ||
|
Chaosvuistje
Netherlands2581 Posts
On November 04 2011 19:19 Exarian wrote: Mutas are not Overpowered stats-wise. They are even cost-inefficient compared to other units. Their main strength is huge positioning advantage completely negating their inferior stats and making them borderline OP in multiple scenarios. T and P, even if their army is 5 times more cost effective against mutas, cannot spread their forces across them map to reduce mutas positioning advantage without losing DPS advantage, which results in two possible scenarios: Army kept in deathball is not able to protect expose, while army spread to expos is not strong enough to counter large, single group of mutas. Perfect solution is giving T and P fast moving, long-ranged unit with good DPS and splash-damage against Air -something between Corsair and Valkyrie (or their ground version). If the flock of mutalisks is that high, you should already have a third base up. Build cannons/turrets and you can easily retreat or blink into the main should it get attacked. Why do you want to make the game easier by providing the races with an easy 1a sollution to the problem? Do you LIKE having the deathball situations? Mutalisks are one of those units that aren't part of a deathball and they force the opponent to spread themselves much like drops in SC1 did. Mutalisks are damn expensive, if you invest 2500/2500 into ANYTHING the opponent has to make a response. You don't hear me complaining about the protoss investing that much resources into immortals and claim that zerg needs to have some way that saps their energy and shoots an AoE ballistic missile to the clump of immortals to kill it. Mutalisks are NOT OP in any way. Terran and Protoss in particular just need similar units to deal that kind of positional damage. Nobody should want the game to be dumbed down anymore than it already has. | ||
|
Exarian
Poland58 Posts
If the flock of mutalisks is that high, you should already have a third base up. Build cannons/turrets and you can easily retreat or blink into the main should it get attacked. Why do you want to make the game easier by providing the races with an easy 1a sollution to the problem? Do you LIKE having the deathball situations? Mutalisks are one of those units that aren't part of a deathball and they force the opponent to spread themselves much like drops in SC1 did. Mutalisks are damn expensive, if you invest 2500/2500 into ANYTHING the opponent has to make a response. You don't hear me complaining about the protoss investing that much resources into immortals and claim that zerg needs to have some way that saps their energy and shoots an AoE ballistic missile to the clump of immortals to kill it. Mutalisks are NOT OP in any way. Terran and Protoss in particular just need similar units to deal that kind of positional damage. Nobody should want the game to be dumbed down anymore than it already has. Ok, let's say race X has 200/200 unit (lets say some kind of mech) able to counter up to 6 mutas [600/600] without dieing, but is significantly slower then muta (like 90% units mentioned as Muta Counters). In theory race X has really strong anti-muta option and can feel safe if they build it against mutaspammer... But how it is in practice? Let say both you and Zerg have 5 bases (so you basically have same eco, rare scenario because Zerg usually has more expos and better eco). Zerg go all-muta, you go all-counter. If you engage all his mutas with all your mechs, you will win with no problem... but it will never happen. Possible scenarios: - You will keep all mechs in one deatchball. Zerg will kill your expos one-by-one, then outproduce you. You've lost - You split your mechs to small groups to protect each expo. Each your mech is 3 times more cost effective then muta ball, but each of them is forced to engage 5 mutas at once - and you will lose expo after expo. You've lost. - You attack Zerg directly to try Base trade. Everything may happen, but before your units reach Zerg base, You've already lost half of your base to mutas. It's of course theorycrafting, I just want to explain how very cost-effective unit can be inefficient against relatively weak unit it is supposed to counter, just because this weak unit has huge positioning advantage. Mutas positioning advantage is making them Borderline OP in multiple scenarios, as long as T/P will not be able to negate their Positioning advantage without sacrificing firepower, Mutas will not be balanced. There are multiple ways to achieve this goal: - Reducing mutas speed - Giving P/T fast-moving unit with AA splash - Giving P/T some kind of spell/ability immobilizing/slowing down mutas etc. etc. Mutas desperately need some kind of rebalancing, and sooner is better. | ||
|
NeonFox
2373 Posts
On November 04 2011 19:51 Exarian wrote: Ok, let's say race X has 200/200 unit (lets say some kind of mech) able to counter up to 6 mutas [600/600] without dieing, but is significantly slower then muta (like 90% units mentioned as Muta Counters). In theory race X has really strong anti-muta option and can feel safe if they build it against mutaspammer... But how it is in practice? Let say both you and Zerg have 5 bases (so you basically have same eco, rare scenario because Zerg usually has more expos and better eco). Zerg go all-muta, you go all-counter. If you engage all his mutas with all your mechs, you will win with no problem... but it will never happen. Possible scenarios: - You will keep all mechs in one deatchball. Zerg will kill your expos one-by-one, then outproduce you. You've lost - You split your mechs to small groups to protect each expo. Each your mech is 3 times more cost effective then muta ball, but each of them is forced to engage 5 mutas at once - and you will lose expo after expo. You've lost. - You attack Zerg directly to try Base trade. Everything may happen, but before your units reach Zerg base, You've already lost half of your base to mutas. It's of course theorycrafting, I just want to explain how very cost-effective unit can be inefficient against relatively weak unit it is supposed to counter, just because this weak unit has huge positioning advantage. Mutas positioning advantage is making them Borderline OP in multiple scenarios, as long as T/P will not be able to negate their Positioning advantage without sacrificing firepower, Mutas will not be balanced. There are multiple ways to achieve this goal: - Reducing mutas speed - Giving P/T fast-moving unit with AA splash - Giving P/T some kind of spell/ability immobilizing/slowing down mutas etc. etc. Mutas desperately need some kind of rebalancing, and sooner is better. Just plain wrong, while I agree that in SOME cases mutas are maybe a tiny bit too good in ZvP, it's wrong in ZvT. Please link to me a replay or vod of a pro ZvT game where the terran and zerg are on equal footing and basetrade, with your scenario happenning (mass muta wrecking the terran base). If that was true then since most pros go for a muta based ZvT, winrates for zergs would be above 50%, which is not the case in pro games. You're saying that on equal footing you can't win against mass muta, which is not true. Edit: and as the poster below said if you have a 200 mech deathball and want to push out against mutas lategame just build 100 turrets with your stockpile of minerals and lol. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10694 Posts
Put 10+ Turrets around your command centers... Let's see how good it will do the Z to fly "in there". Push with your Deathaball and win. And another question: Why would you play pure Metal against (Muta) Z? Except your name is Goody  Mutas look OP as long as you are not willing to deal with them in a cost for cost manner. People behave like 2000/2000+ Mutaball should die to... 5 Turrets and a Thor... The fun thing is, if the Mutas are careless they will take HEAVY damage in that encounter... Terran allready has spells to affect Mtua effectivnes: HSM --> They need to run (or have a damn good eye to spot the right muta". Point defense Drone --> You do no damage here. To bad no Terran builds this unit because, Terrans can deal with Mutas whiteout it? | ||
|
Mentalizor
Denmark1596 Posts
On November 04 2011 19:09 Chaosvuistje wrote: Muta's are one of the only skill based harassers that require heavy responses from any race whatsoever. I don't understand quite how you can say mutas would require more skill than siege tank harrass - which takes a lot mroe to set up and execute... Hellion harrass - which has a great deal of potential dmg but leaves you sooo open to die if your opponent went roaches Warp prism play Phoenix play with graviton I'd say at least these were harder and more skill based. I can see how DT and a medivac full of bio can be HERP DERP, but please - having a decent fighter unit with incredible speed + flying doesn't require that much skill. High Master EU Protoss btw P.S. I'd even say infestor hit squad requires more skill than flying around with mutas | ||
|
MilesTeg
France1271 Posts
| ||
|
NeonFox
2373 Posts
On November 04 2011 20:11 Mentalizor wrote: I don't understand quite how you can say mutas would require more skill than siege tank harrass - which takes a lot mroe to set up and execute... Hellion harrass - which has a great deal of potential dmg but leaves you sooo open to die if your opponent went roaches Warp prism play Phoenix play with graviton I'd say at least these were harder and more skill based. I can see how DT and a medivac full of bio can be HERP DERP, but please - having a decent fighter unit with incredible speed + flying doesn't require that much skill. High Master EU Protoss btw P.S. I'd even say infestor hit squad requires more skill than flying around with mutas Because if you make a small mistake, like looking away from the mutas for one second and they fly above a thor and a couple of marines they all die and you lose. They require constant babysitting and you need to take risks, if you build them and leave them sitting around you just invested a huge amount of money into nothing. They are very fast and usefull, great harassing units but on the other hand they are paper planes and die very, very fast. Which is why skilled players with great multitasking like Idra and DRG use them to great effect, just watch a replay of their ZvT and you'll see the amount of apm they put into harrassing with mutas, then compare that to sieging tanks. Also you said hellion harass leaves you open to timings, same is true for mutas, stockpiling as much minerals and gas as you can instead of making units or expanding before the spire is finished isn't risk-free, that's the reasoning behind a lot of the 3 tank pushes of terrans. For this discussion to be usefull people need to stop saying random stuff. | ||
|
Exarian
Poland58 Posts
Because if you make a small mistake, like looking away from the mutas for one second and they fly above a thor and a couple of marines they all die and you lose. They require constant babysitting and you need to take risks, if you build them and leave them sitting around you just invested a huge amount of money into nothing. If you deploy tanks second to late, you lost If you stop your hellions in wrong place, they are surrounded and you lost If you missclick Storm/Fungal/EMP you may lose too... Mutas are relatively easy to micro (unless you mindlessly throw them against line of Marine/Thor), they are also extremely fast and versatile. And yes, IMO either mutas need nerf OR all races need better counters to mutas. And I am Zerg player BTW. | ||
|
NeonFox
2373 Posts
On November 04 2011 20:27 Exarian wrote: If you deploy tanks second to late, you lost If you stop your hellions in wrong place, they are surrounded and you lost If you missclick Storm/Fungal/EMP you may lose too... Mutas are relatively easy to micro (unless you mindlessly throw them against line of Marine/Thor), they are also extremely fast and versatile. And yes, IMO either mutas need nerd OR all races need better counters to mutas. And I am Zerg player BTW. That's the point, I'm not saying they are harder to micro then all the other stuff, I'm not one of those people who think that my race requires more skill then the others. But you can't just say that using muta effictively is easy and requires no skill. And yes they are very fast and versatile but that's the point of a fragile harass unit no? The problem I see popping up the most is when mutas are used out of harass situation like mass muta lategame ZvP. Again I don't see where the problem is in ZvT. Yes mutas are annoying to deal with and require multitasking and arguably more effort than the player using them. But so do sentries and hellions, and I see nothing wrong with them. | ||
|
Logros
Netherlands9913 Posts
On November 04 2011 19:30 Chaosvuistje wrote: If the flock of mutalisks is that high, you should already have a third base up. Build cannons/turrets and you can easily retreat or blink into the main should it get attacked. Why do you want to make the game easier by providing the races with an easy 1a sollution to the problem? Do you LIKE having the deathball situations? Mutalisks are one of those units that aren't part of a deathball and they force the opponent to spread themselves much like drops in SC1 did. Mutalisks are damn expensive, if you invest 2500/2500 into ANYTHING the opponent has to make a response. You don't hear me complaining about the protoss investing that much resources into immortals and claim that zerg needs to have some way that saps their energy and shoots an AoE ballistic missile to the clump of immortals to kill it. Mutalisks are NOT OP in any way. Terran and Protoss in particular just need similar units to deal that kind of positional damage. Nobody should want the game to be dumbed down anymore than it already has. This is mainly a problem on big maps like Tal'Darim, but the strength of mutas is that you can't move out of your base. Even if you get 3 bases up and an army that would crush muta's, the moment you move out the huge flock will fly in, kill all your probes and start a base race. Because the Zerg has been free to expand all over the map there is no way you're gonna win a base race even if your army is stronger. This is from a protoss perspective. For Terran it's a lot easier because turrets>cannons, marines>stalkers and thors>any other protoss anti-muta. | ||
|
Lorch
Germany3679 Posts
That being said I don't think they are OP, I just feel like they are really good and Toss still hasn't figured out a real go to answer for them, which of course doesn't mean you can't win against mutas, you totally can (and I'm not talking about a timing that just kills zerg when they go muta, that is not a solution). | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On November 04 2011 20:27 Exarian wrote: If you deploy tanks second to late, you lost If you stop your hellions in wrong place, they are surrounded and you lost If you missclick Storm/Fungal/EMP you may lose too... Mutas are relatively easy to micro (unless you mindlessly throw them against line of Marine/Thor), they are also extremely fast and versatile. And yes, IMO either mutas need nerf OR all races need better counters to mutas. And I am Zerg player BTW. If you missclick your mutas, you lose... Tankmicro is really easy vs zerg... you unsiege one half and rally them forward and siege them in range of the other tanks, then you unsiege the other half and rally them forward... If you don't do that, you're taking a risk, just like it is a risk to do stuff in your base, while you harass with mutalisks. Good players can control that. Bad players always just move out "because MVP does this as well" and get caught in the open, because they are not MVP. They can't approximate how much stuff their opponent has right now, where his army is right now and they dont scan their front. Also, what better counters do you want? Mutas get already countered by most ground to air units pretty well, which leaves us with air units... So the other races should just get a unit that is a more mobile air fighter that is easy to mass? Because then you just designed a unit that is better than the mutalisk and plays like the mutalisk... tell me how this is not "even more imba" but this whole thread is just whining about having no clue how to defend vs a zerg. Zergs were the defending race since the beginning of the beta and had to learn to respond to everything Protoss and Terrans are doing. Now if ONE aggressive strategy is available for zerg, it is always immidiatly imbalanced, just because terrans (higher level terrans excluded) and especially protoss never learned to defend properly. Remember Roach/ling rush? IMBA! Todays Protoss' pros defend it without a forge, after a 1gate FE. Remember banling bust? IMBA! CC first Terrans easily defend it these days. Remember Infestor/ling rush? IMBA! well, no... Terrans and Protoss' defend it without any extra defenses. ... Just stop whining about something that has seen play in only a handful of progames, so it simply isn't figuered out. | ||
|
Chaosvuistje
Netherlands2581 Posts
On November 04 2011 20:51 Logros wrote: This is mainly a problem on big maps like Tal'Darim, but the strength of mutas is that you can't move out of your base. Even if you get 3 bases up and an army that would crush muta's, the moment you move out the huge flock will fly in, kill all your probes and start a base race. Because the Zerg has been free to expand all over the map there is no way you're gonna win a base race even if your army is stronger. This is from a protoss perspective. For Terran it's a lot easier because turrets>cannons, marines>stalkers and thors>any other protoss anti-muta. I'm not disagreeing that Mutalisks aren't hard to deal with as Protoss or Zerg, its just that people that want jsut another hard counter to the unit that make me filled with rage. If there was a unit for Protoss that allows for harass that does a lot of damage and can contain the zerg before he gets muta's up ( believe me, you can't just go lol mutas because lol - any unscouted gateway/robo push you lose unless you go mass spinecrawler ). Then you could reliably get a third up while using a skill based unit rather than something that makes defending even more inpenetrable. Terran is the best race micro wise, and it is terrible that Protoss and Zerg do not have the same kind of micro-able units that terran has. People shouldn't wish for things that reinforce the deathballs. They need to realise that if the skill ceiling goes up for better micro across the board, the game will be more entertaining to play and to spectate. Mutalisks are hard to deal with yes. But this thread talking about mutalisk imbalance and how we need more hardcounter units to deal with them is just silly and will get us nowhere. Imbalance talk only gets us nerfs. | ||
|
ChaosTerran
Austria844 Posts
On November 04 2011 20:09 Velr wrote: My answer would be: Put 10+ Turrets around your command centers... Let's see how good it will do the Z to fly "in there". Push with your Deathaball and win. And another question: Why would you play pure Metal against (Muta) Z? Except your name is Goody 2 things that really annoy me in this post. First of all... who in hell has enough money to build 10 turrets per base as anti-muta defense? on 3 base that is 3000minerals.... 3000minerals spent on something that is completely useless in a direct engagement. 3000 minerals that the zerg gets to spend on units. No way you can win a game if you spend so much money in static defenses. And second of all, why would you play Mech against Muta? Excuse me? Mech is a pre-planned strategy,you plan to go Mech from the start you can't just decide that on the fly.... "oh hey look he has Mutas im gonna go pure mech now". You either go bio/mech or pure mech in TvZ and you have to make a decision BEFORE the game starts. Mech isn't a reactionary build, in fact no terran build is truly reactionary, everything is pre-planned. Zerg gets mutas to counter mech and not the other way round. | ||
|
Applesqt
United States206 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On November 04 2011 21:05 Applesqt wrote: Mutalisks would be fixed if turrets, cannons and spore colonies were better. An example would be broodwar where mutas because useless if you had 3-4 per base LOL. Turrets and canons are way better now than back in broodwar. Marines are better than they were in broodwar. The difference is that noone could control more than 12mutalisks in broodwar, so mass mutalisk was not playable! Turrets are EXTREMLY good vs mutalisks. Just spread your marines all over your bases like good terrans do and you are fine. | ||
|
Applesqt
United States206 Posts
On November 04 2011 21:10 Big J wrote: LOL. Turrets and canons are way better now than back in broodwar. Marines are better than they were in broodwar. The difference is that noone could control more than 12mutalisks in broodwar, so mass mutalisk was not playable! Turrets are EXTREMLY good vs mutalisks. Just spread your marines all over your bases like good terrans do and you are fine. And then when they engage your army and their mutalisks are in the fight while 20 marines are back in your base doing nothing you lose. Stack the mutas up and take 1 turret hit while you 1 shot the turret, not hard to do | ||
|
Exarian
Poland58 Posts
Turrets are EXTREMLY good vs mutalisks. Just spread your marines all over your bases like good terrans do and you are fine. Then Zerg will just spread creep and bases all over the map and tech to broodlords... And laugh on you. You usually cannot win vs Zerg if you don't play agressively. You cannot sit in 2-3 bases and just spam marines and turrets - if you do this, you already lost the game. lso, what better counters do you want? Mutas get already countered by most ground to air units pretty well, which leaves us with air units... So the other races should just get a unit that is a more mobile air fighter that is easy to mass? Because then you just designed a unit that is better than the mutalisk and plays like the mutalisk... tell me how this is not "even more imba" Unit with anti-air splash, near-muta movement speed and decent (6-7) range "even more imba"? Muta AtA effectiveness is only small part of it's general usefulness, basically 90% of muta targets are ground stuff. How unit with decent anti-muta attack can be "even more imba"? And then when they engage your army and their mutalisks are in the fight while 20 marines are back in your base doing nothing you lose. Stack the mutas up and take 1 turret hit while you 1 shot the turret, not hard to do Exactly, it is another example of mutas positioning advantage. Even if you have force mathematicaly able to beat mutas, their speed and stacking capabilities are slaughtering it anyway. | ||
| ||
|
|
PiGosaur Monday
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
WardiTV European League
Replay Cast
Epic.LAN
CranKy Ducklings
Epic.LAN
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
