|
On November 11 2011 02:33 Roxy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:22 Blasterion wrote:On November 11 2011 02:20 Hermanoid wrote:
Should maelstrom have a high energy cost then? Otherwise ht's only are going to instantly counter muta harass with maelstrom + storm. I am here to give ideas, cost, duration, dps, is all balance which i am honestly no good at, when it comes down to small details. but yes 1 templar shouldn't be able to Maelstrom Storm back to back, 2 templars can however Say Maelstrom is 125 energy Say Storm is 75 energy Say the templar has 200 energy Say the templar maelstroms and then storms a flock of mutas How is this worse than chain-fungaling 4 times?
For 4 fungals you need 2 infestors. Fungal also doesn't disable attacking or spellcasting.
|
On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then 
How are mutas weak combatants?
i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix
protoss units are bad vs mutas
Terran units are better, but less mobile.
In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement.
|
A lot of people here are missing the point. We are not arguing that mutas are OP in a direct fight. Oc course they aren't.
Mutas are OP when you are able to mass them and force you to stay inside your base defending. If you move out zerg will attack your main and kill all the production facilities, then when your army arrives at his base he just turn back and defend.
edit: And please just stop saying that terran has easy time against mass muta because it's not true at all.
|
On November 11 2011 02:35 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:33 Roxy wrote:On November 11 2011 02:22 Blasterion wrote:On November 11 2011 02:20 Hermanoid wrote:
Should maelstrom have a high energy cost then? Otherwise ht's only are going to instantly counter muta harass with maelstrom + storm. I am here to give ideas, cost, duration, dps, is all balance which i am honestly no good at, when it comes down to small details. but yes 1 templar shouldn't be able to Maelstrom Storm back to back, 2 templars can however Say Maelstrom is 125 energy Say Storm is 75 energy Say the templar has 200 energy Say the templar maelstroms and then storms a flock of mutas How is this worse than chain-fungaling 4 times? For 4 fungals you need 2 infestors. Fungal also doesn't disable attacking or spellcasting.
oo.. stand corrected. i thought fungal was 50 energy.
I think max energy on a caster is 200?
How about maelstrom be 150 and storm remain 75.
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/game/unit/infestor
I am a little opposed to redundant spells though (maelstrom and fungal are very similar).
Honestly though, I think that fungal should only slow units, not root them.
|
On November 11 2011 02:35 Roxy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then How are mutas weak combatants? i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix protoss units are bad vs mutas Terran units are better, but less mobile. In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement.
You being sure means nothing when you can watch any pro game and see mutas all die once they are forced to engage the toss army. Same number of stalkers kill same number of mutas although mutas cost more. Add a few sentry to the mix and mutas are useless.
And to get that huge number of mutas (30+) you need to successfuly harass. You cannot engage directly before that number of you lose badly even against much weaker forces. Toss just needs to defend well and not let mutas do much damage.
|
On November 11 2011 02:35 Roxy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then How are mutas weak combatants? i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix protoss units are bad vs mutas Terran units are better, but less mobile. In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement.
Mutas are 100 gas per. Gas is the limiting resource for both Zerg going muta and toss getting units to defend them (stalkers, pheonix, arcon). Sure 20 mutas can rip through 5-6 stalkers that are walking in a line of 20 or so stalkers towards them then run away. But there is no way they can direct engage equal gas cost of protoss anti-muta and kill anywhere near all of it before being wiped out.
The trouble most protoss have that I've seen is they are trying to engage 2-3k worth of gas in mutas with 6-12 stalkers staggering in late to defend an exposed area. Of course that isn't going to work.
As for engaging a terran equal value army... once marines have combat shield and stim mutas can't even engage cost effectively on equal mineral cost of marines that have any form of medivac support... so arguing that would be silly.
|
On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then
1.) theres a difference between using mutas vs. toss and vs. terran
2.) "it is way easier to defend" - you either are a low level player or have never played PvZ against a decent muta user.
|
On November 11 2011 02:07 latan wrote:
ok 6 marines aren't going to kill 6 mutas either.
and it's not hard at all to keep macroing while controlling mutas tbh. it's harder to keep macroing while trying to defend muta harrass.
No but 12 marines will, and that's a fair cost. 6 marines cost 300 min, 6 mutas are 600 min and 600 gas.
Actually, I just ran the following in the unit tester.
12 marines vs 6 mutas
Marines had NO stim, NO combat shields and NO upgrades. They were totally naked, right out of the rax, plain-old marines.
Mutas had no upgrades.
12 marines killed 6 mutas and there were 6 marines left over.
And you didn't even have to spend a dime on gas.
Ran it again:
12 marines with combat shield, NO upgrades, NO stim
6 mutas no upgrades
8 marines survived
Ran it again:
12 marines with combat shield, with stim, NO upgrades
6 mutas no upgrades
9 marines survived
Now, that's not really saying a lot in terms of the greater context of this discussion; but what it does say is people need to stop with the hyperbole. Marines are extremely cost-efficient vs. mutas, and they cost zero gas.
For what it's worth, 6 marines and a turret (which is where I think this number of 6 marines came from) will kill all 6 mutalisks, without using stim.
|
On November 11 2011 02:32 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 01:56 Celebreth wrote:On November 11 2011 01:43 foxmeep wrote:
The only people consistently losing to mutas are ones that don't know how to pressure efficiently. Of course you are going to lose if you sit in your base and try to defend mutas for 15 mins. Move out before their spire is up, you force Zerg to build units or die. You don't even have to kill much, or even anything at all, then retreat.
If Zerg commits to mass mutas, move out again, you can easily leave enough units in your base to not take huge amounts of damage. The way to beat mutas is to utilise the fact that they are almost useless in combat (for their cost).
Anti-Muta 101 - what do mutas cost a lot of? Gas. What else can Zerg build? Lings. What uses 0 gas and rapes lings. Zealots and marines. If Zerg doesn't commit his gas to anything apart from mutas, then neither do you towards muta counters, in which case your army is always going to win in a straight up battle. Force Zerg to spend his gas elsewhere or die.
The mass muta situation is exactly the same as the Protoss deathball situation was. Zerg cried that it was impossible to beat, and in part it still is. But then Zerg found ways to deal with Protoss before they ever accumulated the deathball.
So in other words you're saying kill a zerg within ten minutes or you lose the game due to them getting one unit that's just TOO good at harass. I've played games where I have constant pressure on zerg, they turtle it and get their mutas, force me to turtle due to harass and just go mass infestor/broodlord. When I get the vikings to hold off the broodlords, fifteen ultras come stomping in. The issue is that there is no real counter to the muta HARASS. Counters to mutalisks themselves? Yes. But they're also SO fast it's extraordinarily difficult to do any damage to a skilled player's mutalisks, and all the while that muta deathball is growing. For terran players - it's EXTREMELY difficult to drop when you're being harassed by mutas (You're sacrificing your anti-muta harass unit and there's a good chance they'll spot and intercept the drop with the muta deathblob). This leads to a lack of ability to do anything but turtle until you die. For protoss - if you move out with your army to do...well anything, really, it's a base-trade scenario that the zerg generally will win 'cause they're outside your base when you DO move out, and they have a buncha spines/infestors to slow you down. Either way, the mutalisk as a singular unit isn't quite overpowered, but their harassment potential certainly is - and when they get up to deathball size, they're damn impossible to fight  (I approve of the new HOTS units, in case you were wondering  Does the shredder work against air too? ) Marine just crush mutas, thors are good too, turrets too. All those are efficient, the only advantage muta has is their mobility. Also, I find your comment funny considering the fact that zerg just could not do anything against protoss deathball for a long long time, and nobody thought it was not balanced. You don't specially need to harass to gain against muta, but a timing attack works wonder, and you also can maccro up. Don't tell me terran can"t do shit against muta because that's ridiculous.
Not saying they can't do anything - just that it takes WAY more skill and micro/macro capabilities to chase them off (not even talking about killing) than it does to muta harass while the zerg is macroing + expanding.
Also, thors die SO hard to a medium sized muta swarm. All you have to do is not bunch up - not hard considering how small the thor's air splash is. 4 mutas can take out a thor very easily - and that's a cost-for-cost scenario. Zerg produce mutas infinitely faster than terran can produce thors, plus thors are slow and very easily caught out of position.
Turrets are good against mutas, yes. But you need about 10 turrets to deal with the initial mutalisks that the zerg throw at you (about 8 or so, unless they do the fast 20 muta build that someone mentioned earlier) due to the fact that without the turrets, you can't do anything. The mutalisks have already achieved goal 1- impact your econ, which lets them accomplish goal 2- retain complete map control.
Again - not saying terran can't do anything against it, but it's the same argument you zerg were using a few months back about terran deathballs. Or maybe it was protoss, but "It takes a TON more skill to counter them [in this case, mutas] than it takes to use them."
So let's see - since thors are pretty much useless (just admit it, unless you're bad at magic boxing, which I can't help you with - I don't play zerg) against mutalisks unless you have them en mass - you're forced to go mass marine/medivac with some siege tank backup. Zerg, who should have 5 bases or so post muta harass makes an easy transition (since they should already have about 100 lings/blings on the field) to about 15 infestors, which essentially counters...everything in the game. Yay fungal growth. From there, it's an easy step to brood lord > ultra, all the while the terran is fighting to hold on to his third, whereas the zerg's taken over the map and eating popcorn.
|
On November 11 2011 02:39 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:35 Roxy wrote:On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then How are mutas weak combatants? i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix protoss units are bad vs mutas Terran units are better, but less mobile. In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement. You being sure means nothing when you can watch any pro game and see mutas all die once they are forced to engage the toss army. Same number of stalkers kill same number of mutas although mutas cost more. Add a few sentry to the mix and mutas are useless. And to get that huge number of mutas (30+) you need to successfuly harass. You cannot engage directly before that number of you lose badly even against much weaker forces. Toss just needs to defend well and not let mutas do much damage.
Wrong on all counts.
1.) sufficiently large numbers of mutas beat even count stalkers w/o sentry support (and sentries are too slow to matter)
2.) defending vs. muta means nothing - because zerg is expanding and droning behind it.
3.) if you walk out to try and kill zerg you're hitting a spine wall.
You clearly have no clue what youre talking about, sorry.
|
On November 11 2011 02:39 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:35 Roxy wrote:On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then How are mutas weak combatants? i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix protoss units are bad vs mutas Terran units are better, but less mobile. In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement. You being sure means nothing when you can watch any pro game and see mutas all die once they are forced to engage the toss army. Same number of stalkers kill same number of mutas although mutas cost more. Add a few sentry to the mix and mutas are useless. And to get that huge number of mutas (30+) you need to successfuly harass. You cannot engage directly before that number of you lose badly even against much weaker forces. Toss just needs to defend well and not let mutas do much damage.
as a matter of fact, i was just watching naniwa's stream where he got absolutely destroyed by mutalisks.
he could not take a third.
was on metalopolis
every time he went to expand to third, mutas would poke into main. hed send stalkers to main.
then ling/roach would come deny third.
This happened about 8 times before naniwa decided to just all-in off 2 bases (at like the 16 minute mark) with about 95 supply.
He opened with a standard FFE. Zerg did no early pressure. Nani had early blink and mostly stalkers in his army.
Good idea about the sentries. i forgot that mutas cant target sentries.
Having to split his army into 2 or 3 groups in order to defend harass left each group very vulnerable as it is known that protoss units are only strong in a ball and for cost can not hold their own vs ling/roach
|
On November 11 2011 02:42 willyallthewei wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then 1.) theres a difference between using mutas vs. toss and vs. terran 2.) "it is way easier to defend" - you either are a low level player or have never played PvZ against a decent muta user.
I am talking about PvZ, in ZvT marines are OP anyways so any other discussion is void :D
Yes, I am a real low level toss player. Probably because I play Zerg. But it doesn't matter anyways. My experience and your personal experience does not matter. Because you lose or I win mutas are not not OP or OP.
But what pros do and win/lose in their matches matter. And in those matches both sides win/lose equally. I have not seen any imbalance in PvZ concerning mutas in pro matches. Yes, it seems harder for toss players to win but it was harder as well when mass infestor strats first appeared.
|
On November 11 2011 02:35 Roxy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then How are mutas weak combatants? i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix protoss units are bad vs mutas Terran units are better, but less mobile. In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement.
As a Protoss, I can tell you that Mutas are actually pretty bad in straight-up fights. The reason they seem so strong is that the full power of the Mutaball is always at a point, while the Protoss army is far more spread out. The perceived strength gets even larger when the Zerg gets an economic lead thanks to map control and worker kills. If you did more even-cost, straight-up fights, you'd see that Mutas are actually pretty weak.
That doesn't mean they aren't an absolutely fantastic unit that is extremely frightening.
|
On November 11 2011 02:50 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:42 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then 1.) theres a difference between using mutas vs. toss and vs. terran 2.) "it is way easier to defend" - you either are a low level player or have never played PvZ against a decent muta user. I am talking about PvZ, in ZvT marines are OP anyways so any other discussion is void :D Yes, I am a real low level toss player. Probably because I play Zerg. But it doesn't matter anyways. My experience and your personal experience does not matter. Because you lose or I win mutas are not OP or not OP. But what pros do and win/lose in their matches matter. And in those matches both sides win/lose equally. I have not seen any imbalance in PvZ concerning mutas in pro matches. Yes, it seems harder for toss players to win but it was harder as well when mass infestor strats first appeared.
Except I never said Mutas were op, check the post you responded to, i said its significantly more difficult for the protoss player, which it is.
|
Switzerland2892 Posts
On November 11 2011 02:50 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:35 Roxy wrote:On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then How are mutas weak combatants? i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix protoss units are bad vs mutas Terran units are better, but less mobile. In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement. As a Protoss, I can tell you that Mutas are actually pretty bad in straight-up fights. The reason they seem so strong is that the full power of the Mutaball is always at a point, while the Protoss army is far more spread out. The perceived strength gets even larger when the Zerg gets an economic lead thanks to map control and worker kills. If you did more even-cost, straight-up fights, you'd see that Mutas are actually pretty weak. That doesn't mean they aren't an absolutely fantastic unit that is extremely frightening.
At a sufficient number, mutas rape stalkers without any problem.
|
On November 11 2011 02:50 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:35 Roxy wrote:On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then How are mutas weak combatants? i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix protoss units are bad vs mutas Terran units are better, but less mobile. In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement. As a Protoss, I can tell you that Mutas are actually pretty bad in straight-up fights. The reason they seem so strong is that the full power of the Mutaball is always at a point, while the Protoss army is far more spread out. The perceived strength gets even larger when the Zerg gets an economic lead thanks to map control and worker kills. If you did more even-cost, straight-up fights, you'd see that Mutas are actually pretty weak. That doesn't mean they aren't an absolutely fantastic unit that is extremely frightening.
May I ask your league?
Why does you "as a protoss" opinion outrank mine?
I agree that in low numbers, mutas are bad vs stalkers. but like you said, we have to spread out stalkers. a muta ball of 30 can wreck a stalker ball of 15 pretty bad before the other stalker ball comes and joins up (not to mention how much damage a ling attack on the other side of you rbase would be)
Mutas beat stalkers in large numbers because stalkers overkill. Mutas dont.
Mutas bounce attack means they may kill 2 stalkers in 1 hit.
If you focus fire mutalisks, you may very well end up dealing 600 damage to each stalker.
Obviously they shouldnt trade up, but if they have denied you bases, and pooled enough money to make a tech switch. them suiciding 30 mutas into your 30 stalkers will absoultely wreck you for whatever tech swtich they have coming.
|
On November 11 2011 02:45 Roxy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:39 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:35 Roxy wrote:On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then How are mutas weak combatants? i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix protoss units are bad vs mutas Terran units are better, but less mobile. In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement. You being sure means nothing when you can watch any pro game and see mutas all die once they are forced to engage the toss army. Same number of stalkers kill same number of mutas although mutas cost more. Add a few sentry to the mix and mutas are useless. And to get that huge number of mutas (30+) you need to successfuly harass. You cannot engage directly before that number of you lose badly even against much weaker forces. Toss just needs to defend well and not let mutas do much damage. as a matter of fact, i was just watching naniwa's stream where he got absolutely destroyed by mutalisks. he could not take a third. was on metalopolis every time he went to expand to third, mutas would poke into main. hed send stalkers to main. then ling/roach would come deny third. This happened about 8 times before naniwa decided to just all-in off 2 bases (at like the 16 minute mark) with about 95 supply. He opened with a standard FFE. Zerg did no early pressure. Nani had early blink and mostly stalkers in his army. Good idea about the sentries. i forgot that mutas cant target sentries. Having to split his army into 2 or 3 groups in order to defend harass left each group very vulnerable as it is known that protoss units are only strong in a ball and for cost can not hold their own vs ling/roach
I also watched that game. Naniwa looked outplayed in that game. He looked like he gave up half way through. He also had people making fun of him in the background. Basing anything on one game means shit.
But if you are so keen on doing that go watch Hero vs Crazymoving games from GSL ro48 Code A.
|
On November 11 2011 02:53 pPingu wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:50 Acritter wrote:On November 11 2011 02:35 Roxy wrote:On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then How are mutas weak combatants? i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix protoss units are bad vs mutas Terran units are better, but less mobile. In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement. As a Protoss, I can tell you that Mutas are actually pretty bad in straight-up fights. The reason they seem so strong is that the full power of the Mutaball is always at a point, while the Protoss army is far more spread out. The perceived strength gets even larger when the Zerg gets an economic lead thanks to map control and worker kills. If you did more even-cost, straight-up fights, you'd see that Mutas are actually pretty weak. That doesn't mean they aren't an absolutely fantastic unit that is extremely frightening. At a sufficient number, mutas rape stalkers without any problem.
Yes "sufficient", "rape". You sir, have totally proved your case with your superior arguments and numbers.
Now I am just waiting for the "In my league" for it to be complete
Let me say this again. Basing your general arguments about balance on your personal experience means shit. Only people at the top level and those with access to all the nice numbers can make such claims. Everything else is just wind.
|
On November 11 2011 02:56 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:45 Roxy wrote:On November 11 2011 02:39 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:35 Roxy wrote:On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 00:21 willyallthewei wrote:
I don't know that Mutas are OP, but I do know that they are extremely frustrating to play against Protoss.
The damn things are just so easy to control for zerg, so hard to stop for protoss. You can play near perfect as a protoss and lose to a relatively less skilled opponent who is going muta.
It is definitely frustrating. Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do. When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then How are mutas weak combatants? i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix protoss units are bad vs mutas Terran units are better, but less mobile. In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement. You being sure means nothing when you can watch any pro game and see mutas all die once they are forced to engage the toss army. Same number of stalkers kill same number of mutas although mutas cost more. Add a few sentry to the mix and mutas are useless. And to get that huge number of mutas (30+) you need to successfuly harass. You cannot engage directly before that number of you lose badly even against much weaker forces. Toss just needs to defend well and not let mutas do much damage. as a matter of fact, i was just watching naniwa's stream where he got absolutely destroyed by mutalisks. he could not take a third. was on metalopolis every time he went to expand to third, mutas would poke into main. hed send stalkers to main. then ling/roach would come deny third. This happened about 8 times before naniwa decided to just all-in off 2 bases (at like the 16 minute mark) with about 95 supply. He opened with a standard FFE. Zerg did no early pressure. Nani had early blink and mostly stalkers in his army. Good idea about the sentries. i forgot that mutas cant target sentries. Having to split his army into 2 or 3 groups in order to defend harass left each group very vulnerable as it is known that protoss units are only strong in a ball and for cost can not hold their own vs ling/roach I also watched that game. Naniwa looked outplayed in that game. He looked like he gave up half way through. He also had people making fun of him in the background. Basing anything on one game means shit. But if you are so keen on doing that go watch Hero vs Crazymoving games from GSL ro48 Code A.
Don't have a GSL subscription this season.
Care to summarize?
I'm guessing that Hero just got lucky and opened with 6gate blink stalker pressure.
If so, that is not balance, that is getting lucky with a build order win. There is no way that he would have been able to scout enough from the zerg to decide to open blink stalkers.
|
On November 11 2011 03:01 Roxy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:56 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:45 Roxy wrote:On November 11 2011 02:39 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:35 Roxy wrote:On November 11 2011 02:32 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 02:05 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:55 -Archangel- wrote:On November 11 2011 01:53 willyallthewei wrote:On November 11 2011 01:47 -Archangel- wrote:
[quote]
Actually you got it completely wrong. Muta play is the hardest for Zerg because it takes more micro then normal play. Mutas are useful if they are active all the time (this is a something only mutas let the Zerg player do as they are not melee, they are fast and fly unlike lings who are the other harass unit that you will use if you don't have mutas), and Zerg players need to still spread the creep, inject larva and do all the other macro things they usually do.
When you get defeated by mutas that Zerg players played better then the usual ones you meet. Strongly disagree with this statement. Inject larva spread creep, you act like that stuff is rocket science. A decent zerg will do all these things and control the mutas fine. It is harder then toss macro and using mutas with all that is harder then standard zerg game. So Zerg that wins with mutas is higher skilled player, not lower skilled. Disagree completely. Any decent zerg player will do well enough with muta control to deal damage to toss and prevent them from leaving the base. Macroing during that time is not hard at all because you have no fear of recourse, how is that harder than standard zerg play where an extra round of drones can kill you? Then we agree to disagree. And it is way easier to defend because mutas are really weak direct combatants. You need to babysit them a lot for them to be useful. You cannot inject larva and spread creep while doing that. Do you know what DRG is most known for? Best muta control and one of the best inject larva. No, not every zerg is good with that as you say or they would all be DRG. The ones you meet that kill you with mutas are just better then you. Plain an simple. Instead of whining here accept that and start working on your mechanics and game. Now I understand why toss players lose so much and complain if mutas are difficult to them. Spreading units against fungals and EMP must be impossible then How are mutas weak combatants? i'm pretty sure large numbers of mutas tear apart comparable army values of stalkers or pheonix protoss units are bad vs mutas Terran units are better, but less mobile. In either case, if protoss or terran move out of thei rbase to attack the zerg. the zerg can wreck their mineral line and still have the mutas back at base to join in the big engagement. You being sure means nothing when you can watch any pro game and see mutas all die once they are forced to engage the toss army. Same number of stalkers kill same number of mutas although mutas cost more. Add a few sentry to the mix and mutas are useless. And to get that huge number of mutas (30+) you need to successfuly harass. You cannot engage directly before that number of you lose badly even against much weaker forces. Toss just needs to defend well and not let mutas do much damage. as a matter of fact, i was just watching naniwa's stream where he got absolutely destroyed by mutalisks. he could not take a third. was on metalopolis every time he went to expand to third, mutas would poke into main. hed send stalkers to main. then ling/roach would come deny third. This happened about 8 times before naniwa decided to just all-in off 2 bases (at like the 16 minute mark) with about 95 supply. He opened with a standard FFE. Zerg did no early pressure. Nani had early blink and mostly stalkers in his army. Good idea about the sentries. i forgot that mutas cant target sentries. Having to split his army into 2 or 3 groups in order to defend harass left each group very vulnerable as it is known that protoss units are only strong in a ball and for cost can not hold their own vs ling/roach I also watched that game. Naniwa looked outplayed in that game. He looked like he gave up half way through. He also had people making fun of him in the background. Basing anything on one game means shit. But if you are so keen on doing that go watch Hero vs Crazymoving games from GSL ro48 Code A. Don't have a GSL subscription this season. Care to summarize? I'm guessing that Hero just got lucky and opened with 6gate blink stalker pressure. If so, that is not balance, that is getting lucky with a build order win. There is no way that he would have been able to scout enough from the zerg to decide to open blink stalkers.
I think the first game is free, or it should be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
