|
On November 04 2011 23:12 Exarian wrote:Show nested quote +So zerglings are OP to? They have every advantage mutas do. Except buildings don't counter mutas. 1. Zerglings cannot ignore cliffs, If you block the gate, they will not enter base. They cannot attack from every direction. 2. Both Terran and Toss can reduce Zergling mobility (wall-ins, statis fields...) 3. Both Terran and Toss have units outrangeing Lings with good splash 4. On top of that Lings cannot stack... 5. ...And don't have magic-boxing ability negating splash damage 6. Important thing - Infinite mutas can attack target at once. How many lings at once can attack for example Thor/CC? Infinite? No, some lingls will attack, while most of them will run circles around target because of no space. 7. Lings are 1 range GtG only. Mutas are 3 range AtG and and AtA with SPLASH. So basically Lings don't have most of Mutas advantages, but have many unique disadvantages making them completely inferior in harassment to mutas.
But every advantage mutas have, zerglings have. They let you catch units out of position on the map, give you good map control, let you counter attack unprepared opponents. The only difference is, they don't stack as well and can't enter enemy bases as well. But then again what's stopping overlord drops?
Really mutas aren't that good. Your forced to go mutas in zvt because of medivacs. You can only really go mutas mid-late game against P, of you can just hope they don't scout and react. They're pretty good for map control and expanding in ZvZ.
I rarely see Terran get high tech auto tracking, or structure armor. If mutas were really such a big problem, those two upgrades would actually be more common. And I never see Protoss just make some phoenix to punish a muta player that attacks. Why can't stalkers and some phoenix just damage and deflect mutas, instead of feeling the need to counter mutas with one unit?
|
On November 04 2011 23:27 haffy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2011 23:12 Exarian wrote:So zerglings are OP to? They have every advantage mutas do. Except buildings don't counter mutas. 1. Zerglings cannot ignore cliffs, If you block the gate, they will not enter base. They cannot attack from every direction. 2. Both Terran and Toss can reduce Zergling mobility (wall-ins, statis fields...) 3. Both Terran and Toss have units outrangeing Lings with good splash 4. On top of that Lings cannot stack... 5. ...And don't have magic-boxing ability negating splash damage 6. Important thing - Infinite mutas can attack target at once. How many lings at once can attack for example Thor/CC? Infinite? No, some lingls will attack, while most of them will run circles around target because of no space. 7. Lings are 1 range GtG only. Mutas are 3 range AtG and and AtA with SPLASH. So basically Lings don't have most of Mutas advantages, but have many unique disadvantages making them completely inferior in harassment to mutas. But every advantage mutas have, zerglings have. They let you catch units out of position on the map, give you good map control, let you counter attack unprepared opponents. The only difference is, they don't stack as well and can't enter enemy bases as well. But then again what's stopping overlord drops? Really mutas aren't that good. Your forced to go mutas in zvt because of medivacs. You can only really go mutas mid-late game against P, of you can just hope they don't scout and react. They're pretty good for map control and expanding in ZvZ. I rarely see Terran get high tech auto tracking, or structure armor. If mutas were really such a big problem, those two upgrades would actually be more common. A nd I never see Protoss just make some phoenix to punish a muta player that attacks. Why can't stalkers and some phoenix just damage and deflect mutas, instead of feeling the need to counter mutas with one unit?
Why can't a protoss player just makes stalkers and phoenix? whats going to kill the mutalisks? Its a well known fact at this point phoenix do very well against mutalisk in small packs i would say anything less than 7 or 8 once the muta-ball gets out of hand it doesn't matter how many phoenix you have unless you 3 stargate toss cant keep up woth muta production. So you say i said "phoenix, stalker" ok well stalkers like phoenix do well against small pack of units they have high mobility but there dps absolute horrendous mutalisk and zerglings just kill everything on the ground to fast if they get a decent surround. A protoss player can't react to phoenix with mutalisk, the protoss player would have to pen SG it would just have to be a combination of luck and poor scouting by the zerg to not see the stargate and go mutalisk. Stalkers, can blink away but mutalisk + speedlings catch up to the stalkers and the toss army does better in a deathball with sentries and zealots so blinking away takes away a large bulk of force.
|
Who said you have to kill mutalisks? Stalkers and phoenix can defend against them, mutalisks won't want to attack a protoss player who protects his low number of phoenix, around 5-6 with stalkers. Every time after that the Zerg player is risking because they can't attempt to turn around and fight if the threat of stalkers is near. While every time the Zerg player is chased off he's taking damage from the faster phoenix.
I've never understood why people think it's so important a counter is to kill a unit or composition out right. If you can get a unit that can deal with it intelligently what's the problem? The most common counter I've seen to infesters by Terran is lots of medivac drops in multiple places. It doesn't directly deal with infesters, but since infesters open up a weakness in the Zerg player it gets exploited. Now what's the difference between doing that and not allowing mutalisks to do damage, without a element of risk for the Zerg player, without over committing to phoenix?
|
On November 04 2011 23:12 Exarian wrote:
a) Tip: Zerg can make upgrades too.
b) If Zerg go Mutas, you are the one who is defending - unless you want to make base trade.
c) Zerg can Tech up and go 200/200 too. Broodlords are quite effective against T/P...
d) Zerg can make turrets too. And even if he decide to sac his mutas, he can rebuild his army faster then you do.
e) "Watch what is he doing and make counter" apply to zerg player too... And actually zerg is called "reactionary race" for a reason.
a) True, but as I previous show, terran upgrades escalate more than zerg ones, did u miss it or just ignored it?
b) in terms of base trading, most of the time T wins cause, Z got less buildings, and T does more dps.
c) Watch Jinro/Inka Stream, ages since I didnt see them loosing to BL. So fun to watch 10 BL die in 2 secs.
d) Ever heard of critical mass? sometimes you dont need to rebuild more than 20 supply.
e) True, thats why mix up armies does so well at late at high lvl, cause u cant counter everything.
|
With HoTS around the corner, the real question Terrans should be asking is:
Why are warhounds +mechanical and not +armored for ground damage, especially after removing the thor from standard play.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
On November 05 2011 00:36 Masq wrote:
With HoTS around the corner, the real question Terrans should be asking is:
Why are warhounds +mechanical and not +armored for ground damage, especially after removing the thor from standard play.
Because they already have a great anti-armoured unit in their arsenal, the marauder. The warhound is clearly in there as an AA, but they added a gimmicky ground attack just to make it not useless in everything else
|
United States7483 Posts
On November 05 2011 00:40 Hassybaby wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 00:36 Masq wrote:
With HoTS around the corner, the real question Terrans should be asking is:
Why are warhounds +mechanical and not +armored for ground damage, especially after removing the thor from standard play.
Because they already have a great anti-armoured unit in their arsenal, the marauder. The warhound is clearly in there as an AA, but they added a gimmicky ground attack just to make it not useless in everything else
Also because the siege tank fills the anti-armored roll pretty damn well. Armored units shouldn't be completely invalidated against mech play, and having an attack vs. armored would be ridiculous against zerg. It also makes the unit fantastic against protoss ground, and they want mech play to be more viable vs. toss.
|
On November 01 2011 05:58 mlspmatt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 05:21 Meff wrote:On November 01 2011 04:43 malaki wrote:
seriously to all the zerg players here,
offrace as terran, get an equally skilled friend of yours to play zerg, and see how annoying mutalisks are, enjoy building turrets everywhere only to then get the turrets 1shot, then get your teclabs and reactors sniped off, while you try to catch the mutas with stimmed marines, and they just fly away, only to return a few seconds later and harass your next basee
(btw I play random and zerg was my main) Well... mutas exist in ZvZ too. Things are a little different, since queens are better AA than marines (range, hp, transfuse, open base) and spore crawlers are slightly worse than turrets, but as far as base defence goes the tactics are similar. Thing is, no Z in their right mind tries to fight a flock of 20+ mutas with just static and mineral-only queens: they go for infestors. Likewise, a competent T player usually gets thors. That way the mutas cannot bunch up on turrets to one-shot them: the risk of a thor being within 10 range of that turret and shooting a volley into their middle is too high. What if the Thor was really big and really expensive and really slow? Hmmmmm. What then? Might a proposed solution be a smaller more agile unit that can deal with the mutas better? That's just common sense. Would you agree?
The answer is complicated.
First off, I disagree with the thor being expensive for what it does. It's actually a cost-effective unit against just about everything in the Z arsenal, save for zerglings in low numbers. Second off, I do agree that the thor is slow - but that is because every unit needs its downsides.
You can, obviously, design T to have a slow anti-air unit that is sort of good against everything else (thor) or a more specialized counter that is faster (warhound). What I was saying is that malaki finds mutalisk to be impossible to hold with stimmed marines and turrets... well, he's right, because that is not the proper way to stave off dedicated muta harassment. But the problem isn't mutas being OP, it's him picking the wrong strategy.
Right now, I'm not even able to say whether the warhound will be more or less cost-effective than the thor. Point is, my post was strictly for telling malaki, "If you're having trouble dealing with large numbers of mutas with marines and turrets, that is because marines and turrets are not meant to handle large numbers of mutas and you're supposed to supplement your defence with other things - not because mutas are broken."
|
On November 04 2011 08:34 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +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. Not irrelevant. Using colossi as part of a heterogeneus unit composition demands far more skill than using 30 mutas. Also, a heterogeneus unit composition has many counters. Against colossi zerg can make roaches and corruptors, or roaches and infestors, or a crap tonne of speedlings and banelings with drops. All these compositions work very well.
Against mutas there simply is no standard composition, let alone 2 or 3, that work. Its a matter of luck, if you win.
On November 04 2011 08:34 Chocobo wrote: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." And whats that "specific unit composition"? Lets hear.
On November 04 2011 08:34 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +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. Storm is crap against mutas, just as it is crap against any flying unit. Blink stalkers are barely better than mutas, but not enough to offset the macro advantage, that the zerg always has.
On November 04 2011 08:34 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +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.) WOL was the first release, and it was bound to be flawed in many ways. HotS gives Blizz the opportunity to fix those mistakes. And if on of these fixes is a unit specifically countering mass mutas, then you can bet your ass, that mass muta was too strong in PvZ all this time.
On November 04 2011 08:34 Chocobo wrote: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.)
Mutas cannot be nerfed in the middle of the life cycle of the game. If Blizz were to nerf them for PvZ, they would be too weak in TvZ. So the only option is to give protoss some unit against mass mutas. But this also cant be done mid life cycle, because it could turn out to have unforeseen effects on other protoss MUs. Thats why the anti muta unit is coming with HotS, where a lengthy beta phase will allow the developers to tweak the anti muta unit, among other things.
|
On November 05 2011 10:15 Meff wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 05:58 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 05:21 Meff wrote:On November 01 2011 04:43 malaki wrote:
seriously to all the zerg players here,
offrace as terran, get an equally skilled friend of yours to play zerg, and see how annoying mutalisks are, enjoy building turrets everywhere only to then get the turrets 1shot, then get your teclabs and reactors sniped off, while you try to catch the mutas with stimmed marines, and they just fly away, only to return a few seconds later and harass your next basee
(btw I play random and zerg was my main) Well... mutas exist in ZvZ too. Things are a little different, since queens are better AA than marines (range, hp, transfuse, open base) and spore crawlers are slightly worse than turrets, but as far as base defence goes the tactics are similar. Thing is, no Z in their right mind tries to fight a flock of 20+ mutas with just static and mineral-only queens: they go for infestors. Likewise, a competent T player usually gets thors. That way the mutas cannot bunch up on turrets to one-shot them: the risk of a thor being within 10 range of that turret and shooting a volley into their middle is too high. What if the Thor was really big and really expensive and really slow? Hmmmmm. What then? Might a proposed solution be a smaller more agile unit that can deal with the mutas better? That's just common sense. Would you agree? The answer is complicated. First off, I disagree with the thor being expensive for what it does. It's actually a cost-effective unit against just about everything in the Z arsenal, save for zerglings in low numbers. Second off, I do agree that the thor is slow - but that is because every unit needs its downsides. You can, obviously, design T to have a slow anti-air unit that is sort of good against everything else (thor) or a more specialized counter that is faster (warhound). What I was saying is that malaki finds mutalisk to be impossible to hold with stimmed marines and turrets... well, he's right, because that is not the proper way to stave off dedicated muta harassment. But the problem isn't mutas being OP, it's him picking the wrong strategy. Right now, I'm not even able to say whether the warhound will be more or less cost-effective than the thor. Point is, my post was strictly for telling malaki, "If you're having trouble dealing with large numbers of mutas with marines and turrets, that is because marines and turrets are not meant to handle large numbers of mutas and you're supposed to supplement your defence with other things - not because mutas are broken."
No its not complicated. Thor has virtually no role in TvT or TvP and limited role in TvZ - and when magic boxed, they're not that effective vs Mutas. Its not a good unit.
Brood Lords/Colossus are tier 3 units for Zerg and Toss and are viable in every MU. Just from a unit design perspective a smaller, cheaper, quicker unit that has viability in other MU's is better. If you can make a point as to why the Thor should be kept I'd listen to it - but none have been made yet.
I haven't heard anyone from blizzard say mutas are OP or any hint about them being nurfed. My take is I don't think Blizzard likes the idea of any race massing 1 unit and it either winning the game, or essentially deciding the game. I'm watching a lot of TvZ, and TvP especially, where a gigantic flock of mutas is extremely hard to deal with, and Protoss especially just die. So Blizzard is giving both T and P some added help against this situation vs large amounts of Mutas. They're not OP but as a deterrent to massing large amounts of them.
Makes perfect sense to me.
|
Yeah I've never thought muta's were that bad before. But I've watched a few pro games recently vP where mutas just seem abusive.
Edit: nasl and AoL spoilers
+ Show Spoiler + Marrow v.s. Kiwikaki and MC v.s. Line
Once the zerg player gets 12+ mutas online it just forces a base race scenario that doesn't seem fair for protoss, MC even threw 6 storms at the mutas while trying to base race and it didn't kill any mutas. You can say that MC missed him storms, but i consider it a lot more likely that pro muta micro is just abusive v.s. toss unless they get a better anti air AoE.
So it's cool we are getting tempest. They seem to compliment protoss air forces much better than carriers did.
|
On November 04 2011 22:17 NewbieOne wrote:
Don't wanna be overalaborating and ranting but I'd be happy to see a good tool against mutas. On the other hand, to me, HotS seems to be about nerfing Terran by giving the other races more debuff and unit steal abilities, while the Terran isn't actually getting anything substantial (I may be wrong, though). Thor => warhound is basically a trade-off and in exchange, the Terran will be left without a 6-supply ground unit, which is not so cool. The super duper mothership-style one-of-a-kind thor will face the same problem the thor is currently facing (which actually aren't so big the way I see it), except more.
Oh well, we just need to wait and see.
Terran needs buffs?? Mutas are not even very efficient against tier 1 Terran.
|
They were borderline OP in brood war but the game has lots of ways to deal with them. Its amazing how balanced brood war is I mean maelstrom to freeze mutas and archons or psi storm to take them out as protoss. Starcraft 2 is just missing delicate counters like this that work but are not OP and take lots of skill to use effectively.
Since you arguably can not truly stack mutas like in brood war they are not OP even though the AA in starcraft 2 sucks compared to something like goliaths or cloaked wraiths.
|
Canada13379 Posts
Just thought of something for protoss. Why not make a lot pheonixes (8 ish for example).
Now hear me out here and please read the rest of this post.
Don't make the pheonixes to kill mutas. Instead leave small armies in the mineral line and use the pheonix to harass mineral lines and outlying expansions. Protect warp prisms maybe?
If the mutas go to attack your base use pheonixes to quickly (they are really damn fast after all) get back and help the stalkers/cannons/sentries defend the muta harass. When mutas are harassing pull off a zealot or dt drop/warp in?
IDK its just a thought that came to me today and I wonder if it would work. Im just diamond so idk if its a good idea or not.
|
On November 05 2011 12:25 snakeeyez wrote:
They were borderline OP in brood war but the game has lots of ways to deal with them. Its amazing how balanced brood war is I mean maelstrom to freeze mutas and archons or psi storm to take them out as protoss. Starcraft 2 is just missing delicate counters like this that work but are not OP and take lots of skill to use effectively.
Since you arguably can not truly stack mutas like in brood war they are not OP even though the AA in starcraft 2 sucks compared to something like goliaths or cloaked wraiths.
Why would you even want to? Stacking mutas makes no sense in SC2. In BW you kinda had to do it, because you coudnt micro more than 11 at a time. So the goal was to reduce the damage taken, while dishing out good damage.
In SC2 you just make 30-40 mutas, and you are unstoppable vs P. No need to stack what so ever.
|
Italy12246 Posts
The annoying thing with mutas as a protoss player is not necessarily that nothing can kill them, it's that nothing can engage them. In theory sure, blink stalkers, archons and templar will kill them, but in practice you will never be able to engage the muta pack so it doesn't matter if your army can kill him or not.
It's like being a colossus player vs a blink player in pvp, and not getting blink yourself: yes your army shits all over his, but eventually his econ will be so much bigger than yours thanks to his mobility and map control it doesn't really matter.
|
+ Show Spoiler +Watched White-Ra vs Ret in the ASUS ROG and man, if protoss do not prepare for Muta they lose instantly. The second game made Mutalisks seem imbalanced, but I guess it was mostly White-Ra not preparing.
|
I don't like Mutalisks in WoL, but no, I don't really think they're overpowered.
|
|
|
Mutalisks are definitely too good against Protoss if the battle took place in a vacuum without concern for economy or macro. Basically if mutalisk numbers get large enough and the map is designed in such a way that a Protoss ground army has trouble pushing/mobilizing, then mutalisks will completely dominate a toss.
Bringing up Terran is completely pointless. The hog thing replaces the Thor. This is not a question about mutalisks being overpowered or not. Blizzard has never, ever said that and you are putting words in their mouths. It's about designing the expansion to be complete and stand on its own multiplayer wise. Adding or removing just 1 unit creates countless shifts in strategy. As a whole they felt Protoss needed Tempest and replaced Thor with the hog. At their press conferences they mentioned why for all of them. Not once did I hear "Mutalisks are overpowered."
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
