EPTNow to my question: Do you think the matchup is more fun to watch if it is roach vs roach as it is the case right now or if it is muta-ling-bling vs muta-ling-bling as it was previously? While there is the possibility that it will evolve I'll exclude that option for now. I personally think the muta-ling-bling was faster, more control-focused and in general more fun to watch.
Was the second spore crawler buff worth it?
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Aunvilgod
2653 Posts
Now to my question: Do you think the matchup is more fun to watch if it is roach vs roach as it is the case right now or if it is muta-ling-bling vs muta-ling-bling as it was previously? While there is the possibility that it will evolve I'll exclude that option for now. I personally think the muta-ling-bling was faster, more control-focused and in general more fun to watch. | ||
|
Msr
Korea (South)495 Posts
| ||
|
lue
Sweden27 Posts
| ||
|
ThatGuyDoMo
Australia516 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:37 Msr wrote: well its 3 shots muta, and muta v muta the better player almost always wins, now it is slightly less so. I would not focus on blizzard's balancing as their patches at the end of wc3 showed how clueless and ignorant they are. I would argue muta vs muta has a lower skill ceiling and gave lower level skill players a higher chance of beating somebody better than them due to the predictability / simplicity of the style when compared to roach hydra infestor micro / teching / remaxing. | ||
|
Prugelhugel
Austria637 Posts
But the way ZvZ evolved after the second buff is fine to me. Mass upgrade lings vs mass upgrade ling is more of an APM/skill game. Muta vs Muta was just too broken. You had to blindly bang your heads against each other in the hope of having one or two units more. I also think we haven't reach the end stage of this matchup. Dimaga showed some pretty impressive fast T3 techs at WCS, while his enemies tried to counter with SHs. And I really see a lot more fast Ultras at the ladder - if you ask me, we are heading into the right direction. | ||
|
Tsubbi
Germany7979 Posts
gameplay wise muta ling rewarded better players way more than the wol like roach play so no, i think the change was bad | ||
|
ETisME
12384 Posts
but the patch could definitly be done differently, right now it feels extremely awkward and lazy. Hopefully this is just a placeholder patch for a proper ZvZ patch | ||
|
Figgy
Canada1788 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:48 Prugelhugel wrote: I'd love swarmhosts vs swarmhosts. Will never happen though.^^ Happened in WCS  The better player won it with much better micro by a longshot. | ||
|
RiSkysc2
696 Posts
| ||
|
Fody03
Italy310 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:49 Tsubbi wrote: it was a very strange bandaid fix and seriously it just feels wrong and lazy game design wise to buff static defense damage to a single unit of ones own race by 300% gameplay wise muta ling rewarded better players way more than the wol like roach play so no, i think the change was bad band aid or not,in ZvZ there more available tech patch now than just Muta vs Muta, i.e. SH vs Roach,fast ultras,etc Muta is still viable,its just more like WoL which was a way to get map control and then transition in other tech,like infestors. | ||
|
Cirqueenflex
499 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:34 Aunvilgod wrote: In case you do no know: The damage of spore crawlers vs biological was buffed twice from straight 15 to 15 +30 vs biological. The result of this is that spore crawlers 4shot mutas now which seems(!) to kill muta play in the matchup. Since the patch we predominantly see just roach into hydra play with hardly any lings or infestors in the mix. Now to my question: Do you think the matchup is more fun to watch if it is roach vs roach as it is the case right now or if it is muta-ling-bling vs muta-ling-bling as it was previously? While there is the possibility that it will evolve I'll exclude that option for now. I personally think the muta-ling-bling was faster, more control-focused and in general more fun to watch. In case you do no know: spore crawlers 3 shot mutas now! As they only have 120 hp, and 45*3 = 135 damage Also in case you do no know: at least for the NA and KR scene the game seems to already have shifted towards mass ling/bling. In WoL this style came to its limits when two fungals would evaporate 20 banelings, so hardly anyone would go for that. In HotS the Mutas denied banelings (and more important you needed the gas for more Mutas to win Muta wars). Then people tried to fall back onto Roach/Hydra wars. Turns out without the infestor support Ling/Bling still can easily win this, Mutas/Ling/Bling can easily win this, and even if it gets to a Roach vs Roach batlle the guy going infestors first most of the time loses, as infestors just don't cut it anymore against roaches (or lings, given the player controlling them actually does control them). There is also the dark horse of rushing T3, but I blame this rather on lack of knowledge of most players on how to punish it rather than becoming a viable main strategy in the matchup. I am sure most Zerg players would love to go to roach wars once more, or muta wars, as long as the game is not as coinflippy as the current state where at least half the games are decided purely on ling + bling wars. | ||
|
solidbebe
Netherlands4921 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:46 ThatGuyDoMo wrote: I would argue muta vs muta has a lower skill ceiling and gave lower level skill players a higher chance of beating somebody better than them due to the predictability / simplicity of the style when compared to roach hydra infestor micro / teching / remaxing. In my opinion it is the complete opposite. Muta vs Muta has a way way higher skill ceiling than roach hydra infestor. In muta vs muta you have to play really tightly because every slight disadvantage will lead to less mutas, it's way harder to come back from those disadvantages with muta vs muta because there are no choke points in the air ( obviously) where you can force a good engagement. The micro is also way harder between all your lings/blings and your mutas/corruptors | ||
Liquid`Ret
Netherlands4511 Posts
 | ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
I do think roach/hydra is the better out of the two simply because a fight shouldn't come to pure numbers alone. Mutas vs mutas is not a fight you can micro in any meaningful way either. We are also seeing way more variety with mutas, infestors, ultras and swarm hosts all seeing some use. This wasn't really the case with muta vs muta where winning the fight in the air was the only thing that counted. | ||
|
Let it Raine
Canada1245 Posts
On June 08 2013 21:05 Liquid`Ret wrote: I really dislike the patch, Muta vs Muta at least kept the matchup logical and straight forward, now its back to random builds and timings I hate when zvz is like this. | ||
|
Tsubbi
Germany7979 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:56 Fody03 wrote: band aid or not,in ZvZ there more available tech patch now than just Muta vs Muta, i.e. SH vs Roach,fast ultras,etc Muta is still viable,its just more like WoL which was a way to get map control and then transition in other tech,like infestors. but thats just not how a game should be designed, like right now hellbat drops seem very strong especially in tvt, should they half the hellbat damage to scvs ? they should really come up with more elegant solutions | ||
|
Aunvilgod
2653 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:58 solidbebe wrote: In my opinion it is the complete opposite. Muta vs Muta has a way way higher skill ceiling than roach hydra infestor. In muta vs muta you have to play really tightly because every slight disadvantage will lead to less mutas, it's way harder to come back from those disadvantages with muta vs muta because there are no choke points in the air ( obviously) where you can force a good engagement. The micro is also way harder between all your lings/blings and your mutas/corruptors The reason I think Muta play has a higher skill ceiling is that I feel like we then see more and faster counter attacks than with roachplay. With roaches the game spirals out of control a little faster I think. | ||
|
theredsc
Romania19 Posts
. im a protoss player so i dont really watch zvz but those matches were really really good | ||
|
Serinox
Germany5224 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:37 Msr wrote: well its 3 shots muta, and muta v muta the better player almost always wins, now it is slightly less so. I would not focus on blizzard's balancing as their patches at the end of wc3 showed how clueless and ignorant they are. As someone who didn't follow the WC3 scene, can you give me an example of that? | ||
|
Chrono000
Korea (South)358 Posts
| ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
On June 08 2013 21:13 Serinox wrote: As someone who didn't follow the WC3 scene, can you give me an example of that? Even if that was true WC3 and SC2 were developed by entirely different teams, better just ignore him. | ||
|
ThomasjServo
15244 Posts
| ||
|
marcjpb
Canada64 Posts
I prefer the roach vs roach instead of muta vs muta mostly because in roach vs roach everything is how and/or where you engage. IF you have the perfect concave, you can win a roach vs roach having lower number of roach. As for muta, since they are a flyng unit, they are no obstacle so its a lot more A move type of engagement then anything else. I dont think ive ever seen the player with 4 muta less to win a muta wars. | ||
|
Orangered
289 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:53 Figgy wrote: Happened in WCS The better player won it with much better micro by a longshot. fuck I missed it. who did? | ||
|
JKM
Denmark419 Posts
.Roro vs Soulkey game 4 had a few swarmhosts enter the field at the end stages, but the army composition of both players was mainly roach-hydra. | ||
|
Usernameffs
Sweden107 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:37 Msr wrote: well its 3 shots muta, and muta v muta the better player almost always wins, now it is slightly less so. I would not focus on blizzard's balancing as their patches at the end of wc3 showed how clueless and ignorant they are. The better player won maybe 90% of the time in zvz before the spore buff, now its maybe 60-70% just my guess. But blizzard don really care about that they want a exciting game not a fair game. | ||
|
Koshi
Belgium38799 Posts
Spores get a change and we are seeing mass roach vs roach. While WoL has proven that you need to tech out of mono roach into roach/hydra or roach/infestor or even better all 3 whenever possible. I am just me, but I feel like ZvZ is the worst match-up played by pro gamers. Like there is nobody that "gets" ZvZ. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
But time will tell hopefully zerg vs zerg cotinues to evolve and not devolve back to mutas | ||
|
playerboy345
Netherlands194 Posts
On June 08 2013 21:05 Liquid`Ret wrote: I really dislike the patch, Muta vs Muta at least kept the matchup logical and straight forward, now its back to random builds and timings My exact thoughts, zvz is random as fuck and muta v muta was much more fun to play. | ||
|
Scarecrow
Korea (South)9172 Posts
On June 08 2013 22:05 Usernameffs wrote: The better player won maybe 90% of the time in zvz before the spore buff, now its maybe 60-70% just my guess. But blizzard don really care about that they want a exciting game not a fair game. The better player doesn't win 90% of the time in any matchup, stop pulling statistics out your ass. Besides, mutas made it far more volatile, whoever got the most had an almost insurmountable edge. Now the better player can grind it out with better control/positioning/comp/macro etc. There's plenty of reasons to bash Blizzard but the spore change isn't one of them. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
| ||
|
Msr
Korea (South)495 Posts
On June 08 2013 22:18 Scarecrow wrote: The better player doesn't win 90% of the time in any matchup, stop pulling statistics out your ass. Besides, mutas made it far more volatile, whoever got the most had an almost insurmountable edge. Now the better player can grind it out with better control/positioning/comp/macro etc. There's plenty of reasons to bash Blizzard but the spore change isn't one of them. everything you said in this post is incorrect. | ||
|
Meatex
Australia285 Posts
I watch dimaga, snute and ret to see how the gameplay is evolving from time to time though. Seems like spores are now at least a threat to muta which is good I will return if the change ZvT otherwise will check out legacy of the void | ||
|
gingerfluffmuff
Austria4570 Posts
On June 08 2013 22:40 Meatex wrote: I quit sc2 in part because of how bad (read one dimensional) ZvZ I watch dimaga, snute and ret to see how the gameplay is evolving from time to time though. Seems like spores are now at least a threat to muta which is good I will return if the change ZvT otherwise will check out legacy of the void Nice foreign player bash bait, but i wont bite. OT: Imo the last buff was too much, it just killed mutas. It feels like way too "binary" - muta ok - muta bad. The required multitasking for controlling mutas (same as Phx if you are P) somewhat efficient raised the skill ceiling of that matchup nicely. | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
On June 08 2013 21:05 Liquid`Ret wrote: I really dislike the patch, Muta vs Muta at least kept the matchup logical and straight forward, now its back to random builds and timings I think this is proof that it worked. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16056 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:49 Tsubbi wrote: it was a very strange bandaid fix and seriously it just feels wrong and lazy game design wise to buff static defense damage to a single unit of ones own race by 300% gameplay wise muta ling rewarded better players way more than the wol like roach play so no, i think the change was bad The real issue with Muta War ZvZ is twofold. 1. It's boring as hell to watch. Pretty much been the case forever. No one likes to watch a bunch of Mutas flying around not engaging each other only to watch a player tap out before any kind of conclusive engagement happens. 2. Muta War ZvZ prevented any other unit type from ever really seeing the light of day in ZvZ. This feeds back into point 1. The alternative Roach/Hydralisk based core has room for much variation and incorporation of other unit types especially units on Hive tech, something Muta Wars never did. Even if players enjoyed playing it, Muta Wars was bad for ZvZ from a spectator and by that sense esports perspective. Buffing alternatives was necessary. Mutalisks still play a key role in ZvZ but they are no longer the titans of the match up, in the long run it's better this way. | ||
|
synd
Bulgaria586 Posts
But it's Blizz. What do we expect. Fix the matchup by not fixing the problem. As someone said already, it's just a bandaid fix. | ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
On June 08 2013 21:08 Tsubbi wrote: but thats just not how a game should be designed, like right now hellbat drops seem very strong especially in tvt, should they half the hellbat damage to scvs ? they should really come up with more elegant solutions No.... you should just make a couple more turrets. This ZvZ change was, imo, one of the best they've ever made.... it specifcally targets one matchup without effecting the others, which is how things should be done. There was no other way to do it, if you buff any other unit to deal with mutas then you would throw the balance off in another matchup, if you nerf mutas you do the same in favours of the other races. It wasn't a band aid at all, it was a targetted way to only effect that one specific matchup and strat. Mutas are still viable, they just aren't a killing blow any more... i've seen plenty of mutas since the patch in pro ZvZ, just no muta wars going on all game. | ||
|
lue
Sweden27 Posts
On June 08 2013 23:07 emythrel wrote: No.... you should just make a couple more turrets. This ZvZ change was, imo, one of the best they've ever made.... it specifcally targets one matchup without effecting the others, which is how things should be done. There was no other way to do it, if you buff any other unit to deal with mutas then you would throw the balance off in another matchup, if you nerf mutas you do the same in favours of the other races. It wasn't a band aid at all, it was a targetted way to only effect that one specific matchup and strat. Mutas are still viable, they just aren't a killing blow any more... i've seen plenty of mutas since the patch in pro ZvZ, just no muta wars going on all game. They could've just given the bio damage buff to hydras(but obviously not that huge), thus allowing zergs to go either hydras OR mutas, it would also make hydras somewhat useful against bio terrans, thus creating additional options aside from ling/bling/muta into ultras in that matchup aswell. | ||
|
Gben592
United Kingdom281 Posts
On June 08 2013 23:07 synd wrote: Idk how buffing static defense while not fixing the problematic unit itself is a fix. In ZvZ, ZvP - mutas are ridiculously good and with the muta regen/speed they can gain insane map control + harass potential. Demolishing mineral lines in seconds. But it's Blizz. What do we expect. Fix the matchup by not fixing the problem. As someone said already, it's just a bandaid fix. Well, in ZvP think Blizzard is hoping that the players just get on with it and learn how to deal with mutas, rather than have the players ask Blizzard to make the game easier to deal with their own inadequacies. The spore patch was mainly about making the matchup more diverse, thus more entertaining to watch. + I think map control and harass potential is the whole idea... | ||
|
The_Masked_Shrimp
425 Posts
Mutas are so fast that you can't really get caught with them even if you played badly and went into a ridiculous position. Ground play with roach/hydra looks way cooler for me from that perspective, but it is indeed less dynamic. | ||
|
shell
Portugal2722 Posts
The fact is that if you still have many mutas it's not because of one or two spores that you won't attack a base.. so it's not that bad! flying over with a pack of mutas destroy everything in seconds and get out without any damage was kinda silly.. you can still do it but you lose something now. I think it was necessary and maybe impossible to solve without affecting other matchups.. buff do queen/hydra/infestor or a nerf in the mutas would have a much bigger impact on the game | ||
|
Orangered
289 Posts
On June 08 2013 21:05 Liquid`Ret wrote: I really dislike the patch, Muta vs Muta at least kept the matchup logical and straight forward, now its back to random builds and timings simply means more patch | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:34 Aunvilgod wrote: In case you do no know: The damage of spore crawlers vs biological was buffed twice from straight 15 to 15 +30 vs biological. The result of this is that spore crawlers 3shot mutas now which seems(!) to kill muta play in the matchup. Since the patch we predominantly see just roach into hydra play with hardly any lings or infestors in the mix. Now to my question: Do you think the matchup is more fun to watch if it is roach vs roach as it is the case right now or if it is muta-ling-bling vs muta-ling-bling as it was previously? While there is the possibility that it will evolve I'll exclude that option for now. I personally think the muta-ling-bling was faster, more control-focused and in general more fun to watch. yes, the matchup is much better. It just hasn't settled at this point and a lot of people are metagaming mutas and double upgraded zerglings (the previous strongest options) with aggressive roaches at that point. If both players open roach, it should obviously play out much more WoL like (which is better in its own already than HotS muta-wars). But because infestors are much weaker, the WoL roach/hydra style would be the obvious transition. However, then swarm hosts play seems to beat that. And due to vipers, lategame broodlords just plainly suck (against hydra/viper), while ultras have become significantly stronger. Either from a mutalisk or from a roach midgame. What we have seen up to now isn't how the metagame will look, because there are obvious answers (one that even has been proven to work in WoL and since then has not been nerfed) to the showcased roachheavy style that straight up beat it. You don't give it enough time with this thread. It's been only a few weeks. And the first of those weeks have been used to figure whether it even helps against mutas. Now that we know that, we can slowly start building a metagame around it. | ||
|
Antylamon
United States1981 Posts
Why? | ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
On June 08 2013 23:18 lue wrote: They could've just given the bio damage buff to hydras(but obviously not that huge), thus allowing zergs to go either hydras OR mutas, it would also make hydras somewhat useful against bio terrans, thus creating additional options aside from ling/bling/muta into ultras in that matchup aswell. Hydras are already very strong in a straight up fight against bio. No bio terran would be able to hold a 2/2 timing with buffed hydras, not to even mention the fact that it would also buff roach/hydra against hellbats and thus mech. Also a buff against zealots, further complicating things... Luckily you aren't on the balance team. | ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
| ||
|
willstertben
427 Posts
it's all about who got his gases faster while maintaining somewhat okay mineral income (read: making 5k drones and super quick 4 gases and hoping opponent doesn't allin) and then he couldn't lose anymore because even just 2 or 3 mutas more makes you come out ahead gigantically in a fight which can't be microed at all. the outcome of a fight on even numbers is random because of the way muta bounces work. also making mutas doesn't really require good macro to get down perfectly so you can't get ahead through better macro either, except higher ling count which isn't mutas and therefore won't help much except eating a few bounces. best way to come back used to be crazy multi pronged multi task heavy aggression but the new spores coupled with a few spines pretty much make that option impossible. so now the only option is hiding a base, hoping your opponent doesn't see it. see the theme here? gamblegamble, hope, luck. once ahead you won. comebacks? skill? nah. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
I personally see this change as a chance to go back to a 12 second root time, because their detection isn't as need anymore. And aside from that Mutas still work for me. Though I am rather inexperienced with them. Anyway one step closer to Viper wars, that will make ZvZ look really silly. Vipers pulling everything back and forth while nomming on buildings all the time yay. | ||
|
Tuczniak
1561 Posts
On June 08 2013 23:37 Bagi wrote: In worst case scenario terran would have to make 2 tanks right? It would break the game totally. Hydras are already very strong in a straight up fight against bio. No bio terran would be able to hold a 2/2 timing with buffed hydras, not to even mention the fact that it would also buff roach/hydra against hellbats and thus mech. Also a buff against zealots, further complicating things... Luckily you aren't on the balance team. | ||
|
Tarheels
United States55 Posts
It now seems more common to start ling/bane and go into roach/hydra in the ZvZ matchup. | ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
On June 09 2013 00:13 Tuczniak wrote: In worst case scenario terran would have to make 2 tanks right? It would break the game totally. Go ahead and see how much of an impact 2 tanks have against a maxed roach/hydra army. | ||
|
purakushi
United States3300 Posts
| ||
|
Targe
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On June 08 2013 23:37 Bagi wrote: Hydras are already very strong in a straight up fight against bio. No bio terran would be able to hold a 2/2 timing with buffed hydras, not to even mention the fact that it would also buff roach/hydra against hellbats and thus mech. Also a buff against zealots, further complicating things... Luckily you aren't on the balance team. Roach hydra trades nicely with bio at the moment I have to say. On June 09 2013 00:29 Bagi wrote: Go ahead and see how much of an impact 2 tanks have against a maxed roach/hydra army. Those two tanks would do nothing -.- | ||
|
Mahanaim
Korea (South)1002 Posts
Now that the patch has been applied for a few weeks, it seems that it is slowly starting to help diversify the ZvZ matchup, and we'll have to see how it unfolds in the future. So far, the changes implemented are creative, and notably well-done. | ||
|
ghost_face
Australia33 Posts
Usually they will stabalise and take their third, but this is when I take a fourth, tech to hive and get ultras out. I usually go for hive once I know they are commiting to roach hydra (pretty early), because it's basically impossible to lose once you get ultras and you have really good map control before then to tech safely. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:34 Aunvilgod wrote: In case you do no know: The damage of spore crawlers vs biological was buffed twice from straight 15 to 15 +30 vs biological. The result of this is that spore crawlers 3shot mutas now which seems(!) to kill muta play in the matchup. Since the patch we predominantly see just roach into hydra play with hardly any lings or infestors in the mix. Now to my question: Do you think the matchup is more fun to watch if it is roach vs roach as it is the case right now or if it is muta-ling-bling vs muta-ling-bling as it was previously? While there is the possibility that it will evolve I'll exclude that option for now. I personally think the muta-ling-bling was faster, more control-focused and in general more fun to watch. The matchup is already more evolved. Just go back and watch WoL games: many of them included muta-->roach and roach-->hydra transitions. Both of them have been buffed, while the pure roach was not. So there is no reason to assume that the metagame is roach vs roach. It just happens that we haven't seen it alot in the 3 highlevel ZvZ series that everybody points towards. | ||
|
_Search_
Canada180 Posts
Hydralisks should have been buffed instead of spore crawlers. Void Rays have essentially broken ZvP, Hydra/Roach is still a total troll build in TvZ and Hydralisks have been notoriously awful since 2010. Really, Hydralisks should be hatchery tech. So many balance issues would have been outright solved had hydras been hatchery tech. | ||
|
Emzeeshady
Canada4203 Posts
| ||
|
Emzeeshady
Canada4203 Posts
| ||
|
Hitch-22
Canada753 Posts
Think of spores like On June 08 2013 21:17 Chrono000 wrote: patch was good. just think of spores like terran turrets now Not quite, think of spores like 2 terran turrets (or more). Muta's roll terran turrets now whereas they get stomped by spores. | ||
|
Dr.Sin
Canada1126 Posts
| ||
|
willstertben
427 Posts
On June 09 2013 01:15 Emzeeshady wrote: Seriously this. Does Blizzard have a personal vendetta against Hydralisks or something? They are pretty much fucking terrible at everything. The units they "counter" fuck them up and Hydras are useless vs air. Mutas shit on them, Voids rays laugh at them and Roach/Hydra is the ultimate throw the game away strategy in ZvT. Blizzards big idea to make Hydras useful was to make another expensive upgrade available making it so you need to spend 300/300 before they can even be remotely useful. The speed doesn't even help the fact they melt vs any remote splash damage and cost as much minerals as 3 marines not even including the extra gas costs DESPITE 3 Marines having a WAY higher dps then a Hydra while being faster, available at tier one and can be healed. The thing is Hydras are cool units. They look scary, have great aesthetics and are great tactical units to watch. Even a slight buff vs air would make Hydras way better and I see no foreseeable way it which this could make them even remotely imbalanced. /end rant :p ONE HUNDRED FUCKING PERCENT AGREED. i said it right when i saw hydra speed upgrade: the units are still shit, speed's not gonna change it. the problem was never their movement speed, but their stats for cost ratio being utter shit. i don't think the problem is their damage though. hydras deal nice damage. the problem is their 80 hp at 2 supply and roaches being so bad so you can't really use them for tanking (which contrary to hydras they should be, cause low tech and cheap units. hydras on the other hand are expensive, higher tech and still bad units). hydras should either be 1 supply and have their stats adjusted or they should get a hp buff/upgrade. otherwise they will always stay shit. | ||
|
Penev
28475 Posts
| ||
|
saddaromma
1129 Posts
Giving spinecrawlers same bonus but removing root/unroot ability would be great change. Root/unroot gimmick should be removed from the game, its just a cool feature, has no strategic element whatsoever. | ||
|
Zarahtra
Iceland4053 Posts
On June 09 2013 01:21 Hitch-22 wrote: Mutas went from 6 shot (I believe?) to 3 shots which is absolutely ridiculous ... It should have been changed from 6 shots to 5 or 4 but not 3, it's so silly and ruins the MU. Think of spores like Not quite, think of spores like 2 terran turrets (or more). Muta's roll terran turrets now whereas they get stomped by spores. It went from 5(due to regen) shots to 3. I agree that they probably should've just gone from 5 to 4 to test the waters. Could've even made it just shy of 3 shots(such as 40 dmg instead of 45), so if the zerg player was microing against the spore, it'd take a while to regen after the encounter. That being said, I do feel ZvZ is byfar better after the change. With roach vs roach, you can see some strategy, where you're pulling your opponent out of position, harassing etc etc, but muta vs muta was just a clusterfuck with "who gets bases/geysers earlier and gets mutas out earlier". The only cool thing about muta vs muta was imo the fact that the ground fight mattered to the air fight, but it wasn't like you could see a whole lot of the ground fight anyway due to the mass mutas above. | ||
|
JacobShock
Denmark2485 Posts
The options are much more vast now. | ||
|
-Kaiser-
Canada932 Posts
On June 09 2013 02:05 JacobShock wrote: I think we might be complaining a bit too much (surprise) The options are much more vast now. The problem is that a lot of people don't think they're better options. Mutas may have been the only go-to strategy, but you always knew who the better player was at the end of the series. Right now it's back to pulling two builds out of a hat and mashing them together, and mutas aren't an option at all. | ||
|
Cereb
Denmark3388 Posts
Muta vs muta was completely retarded. I strongly disagree with the notion that "the better player won more often". In most cases, it was just a matter of who was willing to play more greedy and stupid or by catching the other person’s muta since you don’t get to have ovies out on the map, more randomness is introduced. Also it was by far the least skillful battles I have ever seen! Just bloody attack and if your lings won the ground war you could park them under the mutas, and that was it!! Completely ridiculous. Yeah there are more builds now to account for, but that is a good thing!!! That is where the skill of Starcraft comes in! Scouting your opponent and interpreting the moves! This was the perfect change as mutas still provide the map control they are supposed to give, but they are no longer the be all end all just mass me forever unit that they used to be. There are even so many scouting options for zerg to avoid losing to “random builds” and plenty of standard builds that are going to keep you safe even without scouting against most builds! You might as well start complaining that there is Fog of War in SC2 since there basically wasn’t in ZvZ before the patch (either complete all in or mutas)… | ||
|
DeathProfessor
United States1052 Posts
| ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
On June 09 2013 01:15 Emzeeshady wrote: Seriously this. Does Blizzard have a personal vendetta against Hydralisks or something? They are pretty much fucking terrible at everything. The units they "counter" fuck them up and Hydras are useless vs air. Mutas shit on them, Voids rays laugh at them and Roach/Hydra is the ultimate throw the game away strategy in ZvT. Blizzards big idea to make Hydras useful was to make another expensive upgrade available making it so you need to spend 300/300 before they can even be remotely useful. The speed doesn't even help the fact they melt vs any remote splash damage and cost as much minerals as 3 marines not even including the extra gas costs DESPITE 3 Marines having a WAY higher dps then a Hydra while being faster, available at tier one and can be healed. The thing is Hydras are cool units. They look scary, have great aesthetics and are great tactical units to watch. Even a slight buff vs air would make Hydras way better and I see no foreseeable way it which this could make them even remotely imbalanced. /end rant :p Someone isn't familiar with 3 hatch hydra in zvp apparently. They are a good tool to transition into a muta switch or into a late game viper timing. Problem is we see many progamers getting the vipers 5 minutes too late, when they could have afforded the switch, and making too many hydras. They are a unit you shouldn't spend more than 20-30 supply on, and plenty of people make the mistake of making too many. In ZvZ plenty of people win from behind by transitioning into hydras before the other zerg, so I do not accept that hydras are shit in that matchup. As for hydras in ZvT, well we have seen a little bit of usage of roach hydra in zvt, and it's not absolutely terrible. Plus swarmhost hydra has potential, just no one seems to be really pushing it to the limit in testing it out. | ||
|
nunez
Norway4003 Posts
| ||
|
Emzeeshady
Canada4203 Posts
| ||
|
408xParadox
United States140 Posts
Because the better player wins 100% of the time. | ||
|
Aunvilgod
2653 Posts
On June 09 2013 01:07 _Search_ wrote: The issue is that it was the wrong buff and mutalisks are still incredibly strong. The reason players stopped using mutas is because they're a mid-game unit so roaches tend to rule the early game. Hydralisks should have been buffed instead of spore crawlers. Void Rays have essentially broken ZvP, Hydra/Roach is still a total troll build in TvZ and Hydralisks have been notoriously awful since 2010. Really, Hydralisks should be hatchery tech. So many balance issues would have been outright solved had hydras been hatchery tech. I don't think you can change much about the hydralisk without ruining TvZ and PvZ. | ||
|
Nuclease
United States1049 Posts
I see your worthless post and raise you one more worthless response, except this time completely fitting:  | ||
|
convention
United States622 Posts
On June 09 2013 02:08 -Kaiser- wrote: The problem is that a lot of people don't think they're better options. Mutas may have been the only go-to strategy, but you always knew who the better player was at the end of the series. Right now it's back to pulling two builds out of a hat and mashing them together, and mutas aren't an option at all. Most of the comments I heard about muta wars was that it was super coinflippy. You aren't better because you put down your gases 15 seconds before the other player. You aren't better for taking a guess at a risk to get one more muta out. Now there is scouting to see what your opponent is doing, there is the ability to defend against mutas without requiring more mutas than your opponent. You no longer have to guess if your giant thing of mutas is larger than their giant thing of mutas. And most of all, as an observer, I don't have to watch two people think their muta blob is larger and a-clicking into each other. The patch was good. | ||
|
willstertben
427 Posts
On June 09 2013 02:58 408xParadox wrote: Because the better player wins 100% of the time. weird because there are lots of series that don't end to zero On June 09 2013 03:02 Aunvilgod wrote: I don't think you can change much about the hydralisk without ruining TvZ and PvZ. how. hydras are laughable units now. how would they break tvz and pvz if they were suddenly viable? how. | ||
|
willstertben
427 Posts
| ||
|
Foreplay
United States1154 Posts
| ||
|
willstertben
427 Posts
| ||
|
Foreplay
United States1154 Posts
On June 09 2013 03:44 willstertben wrote: well if you're far ahead you can kill them with baneling allins if they play something hydra based or just take more bases and get infestors to try and fungal their mutas if they spam mutas so at least there is something you can do if you don't want to sit there for another 10 minutes. That's true. I exaggerated a bit. I'm just saying this doesn't really solve the muta problem. If they don't go muta's I just use them to deny the third, keep map control, and transition to ground. The same as I would before the Spore buff. So I just don't really see what this buff solves. | ||
|
synd
Bulgaria586 Posts
On June 08 2013 23:18 Gben592 wrote: Well, in ZvP think Blizzard is hoping that the players just get on with it and learn how to deal with mutas, rather than have the players ask Blizzard to make the game easier to deal with their own inadequacies. The spore patch was mainly about making the matchup more diverse, thus more entertaining to watch. + I think map control and harass potential is the whole idea... The problem is that the mutas were already good harass units and overall good units. However as they are now - they can be mass 1 unit army. I think that is not how they should be. And there isn't really a way to deal with them. Zergs at high lvls do a lot of tech switches and no matter how much you try to use hallucinations, they can always hide a spire below an overlord spreading creep somewhere on the map. It's just up to the zerg, how clever he can be to hide the spire. As it is now, unless you have 3 stargates up and running, you're dead to mutas. | ||
|
BillGates
471 Posts
People don't like muta/ling because its way too hard to do, the control is hard and the better player always wins, with roach fests the lesser player can take some games off the much higher skilled player with some luck. So to me it seems like roach/hydra is preferred because people don't want to play muta/ling because its harder to control and requires skill, and Blizzard are clueless about balancing and making a game, so they will make it more noob friendly and more boring to watch. | ||
|
Jevity
United States67 Posts
On June 09 2013 01:48 saddaromma wrote: buffing spores was one of few things that I liked from blizzard. They should be buffing more static defenses, afterall sc2 is a strategy game, not a micro-battle crazy shit. Any RTS game should encourage positional and thoughtful play. Not the game of who a-masses more mutas or roaches. Giving spinecrawlers same bonus but removing root/unroot ability would be great change. Root/unroot gimmick should be removed from the game, its just a cool feature, has no strategic element whatsoever. Trolling? Crazy micro is what an element that makes starcraft amazing. Root/unroot is not a gimmick, it's just something that makes zerg what it is and it doesn't take away from strategy, if anything it adds to zerg, making it more dynamic. Static defenses are good, they should always be part of the game, Blizzard just needs to make sure that they don't buff something so much that it completely negates another player's advances by placing just one spore crawler. Like someone in the thread said earlier, it is somewhat interesting how you can still micro phoenix's around and score some kills even if there are spores down. You would want muta to be somewhat viable even if there were spores down. | ||
|
dreamsmasher
816 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:46 ThatGuyDoMo wrote: I would argue muta vs muta has a lower skill ceiling and gave lower level skill players a higher chance of beating somebody better than them due to the predictability / simplicity of the style when compared to roach hydra infestor micro / teching / remaxing. what roach hydra micro. lings are harder to control, this much is obvious. they're smaller units (harder to box groups of them), faster, and groups of them die instnatly to banes. and the entire matchup is much more delicate. roach hydra micro is just a move, and hug your opponent while stutter stepping when you have the advantage. | ||
|
aZealot
New Zealand5447 Posts
Agreed. It will take a while for new builds to be developed, and we may yet see a return to Muta play. The change may have been an overly powerful one, but on the whole it looks to have been the right one. The whining by (sections of) the community is typical. More evidence that Blizzard should follow their current philosophy of patching lightly but, ultimately, as they see fit. | ||
|
Oboeman
Canada3980 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:46 ThatGuyDoMo wrote: I would argue muta vs muta has a lower skill ceiling and gave lower level skill players a higher chance of beating somebody better than them due to the predictability / simplicity of the style when compared to roach hydra infestor micro / teching / remaxing. Muta vs muta was really zergling vs zergling, and lings are really one of zerg's skill units. the game would end when one player got a mutalisk lead, but he gained the advantages with his zerglings. what if they pulled back to 4-shot mutalisks instead of 3. 15+22 or something (15+15 ended up being 5 shots because of regen) I really dislike the patch, Muta vs Muta at least kept the matchup logical and straight forward, now its back to random builds and timings zvz wasn't only random builds and timings at the end of wol. It seemed to play out pretty consistently with both sides using lings and banelings to defend while getting 3rd base and going into roach. just because its based on roaches doesn't mean it has to be random, does it? | ||
|
MonkSEA
Australia1227 Posts
On June 09 2013 03:48 Foreplay wrote: That's true. I exaggerated a bit. I'm just saying this doesn't really solve the muta problem. If they don't go muta's I just use them to deny the third, keep map control, and transition to ground. The same as I would before the Spore buff. So I just don't really see what this buff solves. You can't see what it solves? I don't know what league you're in, but if you watch the pro-level ZvZ it was all about Muta vs Muta balls, never anything else as everything else was to immobile to deal with the mutas, now with the spore buff mutas can be defended a lot easier with an immobile army, allowing for a larger pool of diverse play. | ||
|
lue
Sweden27 Posts
On June 08 2013 23:37 Bagi wrote: Hydras are already very strong in a straight up fight against bio. No bio terran would be able to hold a 2/2 timing with buffed hydras, not to even mention the fact that it would also buff roach/hydra against hellbats and thus mech. Also a buff against zealots, further complicating things... Luckily you aren't on the balance team. it'd also increase damage against HTs and DTs, but considering how cheap hellbats are, I dont mind them taking some additional damage from hydras. Couldn't do much about the zealot ofcourse but thats just a sideeffect I'd have to live with. | ||
|
iyasq8
113 Posts
| ||
|
Foreplay
United States1154 Posts
On June 09 2013 05:31 MonkSEA wrote: You can't see what it solves? I don't know what league you're in, but if you watch the pro-level ZvZ it was all about Muta vs Muta balls, never anything else as everything else was to immobile to deal with the mutas, now with the spore buff mutas can be defended a lot easier with an immobile army, allowing for a larger pool of diverse play. Mutas don't have to do damage directly to be good. If you are doing a speedling into muta build you have map control for the entire early/early-mid game. All you have to do is deny the third which still makes the muta player have a huge advantage. This is my theory anyway. I haven't watched a lot of pro zvz's since patch. As for my rank, I am mid-masters (so i understand that i am no authority on starcraft.) But I think after pros stop experimenting we are going to see the game swing back towards muta play, regardless of how much damage spore crawlers do. | ||
Waxangel
United States33345 Posts
that said it's still by far the least tolerable match-up to watch  | ||
|
RezChi
Canada2368 Posts
On June 09 2013 01:47 Penev wrote: Kerrigan is doing a piss poor job evolving the swarm imo; The Overmind would turn in his grave.. She's running out of ideas | ||
|
dirtydurb82
United States178 Posts
| ||
| ||
