Printable View
Unlimited unit selection = Easier muta micro. This means more regular joes can effectively use mutas en masse without microing 3 groups.
You can effectively use Mass muta to flank and support your troops, not simply be harassment tools for the top-end pros.
One of these statements is true, the other is false. SC2 has no selection limit. So massing Mutas will actually be rather easier than in SC1.Quote:
The problem is that it is much harder to mass in StarCraft 2 and it is hard to keep stacked.
Dragoons weren't much of a problem in SC1. Stalkers are slightly more of a threat thanks to Blink micro, but even there, it's usually a bad idea to take half of your army and go chasing some air units.Quote:
Currently the lair build is a little slower as hatcheries are a little higher in priority. Then goes their common enemies, marines and stalkers. This too units are way too common in StarCraft two as infantry increased in the terrans and the stalker is like a dragoon.
And Marines have been the standard backbone unit in TvZ. Marines can't get more common in TvZ, so this isn't much of a problem.
And again, I point to acid spores on Overseers.
Well, the 4 extra damage that Missile Turrets do to them is important. But otherwise, I don't see why they wouldn't be useful for most of the things they were in SC1.Quote:
Does nobody see that the mutalisk, will not be so effective as in sc1.
Also Medics are gone, and Medivacs are not always going to be guaranteed to be made to support infantry pushes. Mutas would have a fairly good time doing hit and runs.
The only big threats are Stalkers, Thors and AoE spells. Mutas are fast enough to deal with or avoid other threats like mass marines, archons etc.
I think she means like the Protoss Scout in Starcraft 1, only doing more damage towards ground units instead of air.Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfecttear
This is partly false. What makes the mutalisk so good in SC1 is stacking not massing. In fact, most zerg players transition to lurker in tvz after the early muta harass and so do not usually mass them because irradiate means GG for the muta ball and a mutalisk group can't engage a m&m group directly. In pvz, the transition is to hydra usually. If the z in the zvp sticks with mutas, really it's not the muta mass that help the z player but the scourges that are able to destroy the corsair advantage.Quote:
Stacking is not necessary for Mutalisks to be dangerous. Massing is. And nobody's losing any sleep over a single Zergling either. It's 50 Zerglings that are the stuff of nightmares.
If you remove stacking, they can’t effectively harass like they did in SC1. Strategic defence placement can annihilate an unstacked mutalisk group easily.
Scout failed, hence why it was replaced by the Void Ray. What you're suggesting, PT, is a Zerg Banshee. Which infringes on the Brood Lord.
This whole thing is fail.
How can you say that it will be easier for mutas in sc2, if air defences have
been hugely buffed in sc2, compared to sc1.
The Goliath and the Vraith only did 10 damage to mutas , where the viking does 20, and don't forget the viking can be upgraded to 8 ata range, where the muta has only 3 ;)
As for the turret, the turrets in sc2 does almost half more the damage to mutas as the old one did in sc1 and they can even have a larger attack range, have more hp, and still cost the same.
And as for other units, hydras do 8 damage to mutas in sc2 where in sc1 they did only 5, marines start with more attack range and hp, the new dragoon also does more damage to mutas than the old, and don't forget the Corruptor and the Phoenix, who just simply decimate mutalisk. How about the Archon, who does 70 splash damage to mutas in sc2 and the thor, how about the new BC with it's hugely improved damage and it's Missile Pods ability, and the new improved Carier, and what about the new seeker missile?
Almost every unit capable of atacking air units, is improved and buffed in sc2.
And look: Irradiate is gone. So it's no longer a real threat. Mutalisks are fast enough to avoid its replacement (HSM).Quote:
What makes the mutalisk so good in SC1 is stacking not massing. In fact, most zerg players transition to lurker in tvz after the early muta harass and so do not usually mass them because irradiate means GG for the muta ball and a mutalisk group can't engage a m&m group directly.
Look at some of Jaedong's 2-control group Mutalisk play. Now imagine that this takes less than half of the micro. And imagine that there's no irradiate anymore. And imagine that each Muta does 1 more damage.
Stacking isn't important: getting enough Mutalisks to AoE kill anything they come across is. On the way, you can do some base harassment.
Please. Mutalisks can kill turrets easily enough. Especially when built in sufficient numbers.Quote:
Strategic defence placement can annihilate an unstacked mutalisk group easily.
This is exactly as it should be. Mutalisks are air generalists; Vikings are AtA specialists. They damn well better be able to put some fear into Mutalisks; otherwise they're not worth the money.Quote:
The Goliath and the Vraith only did 10 damage to mutas , where the viking does 20, and don't forget the viking can be upgraded to 8 ata range, where the muta has only 3
Um, no.Quote:
As for the turret, the turrets in sc2 does almost half more the damage to mutas as the old one did in sc1 and they can even have a larger attack range, have more hp, and still cost the same.
They cost 100, not 75, so they deserve extra Hp. And their attack range is an upgrade; we don't even know what the base attack range is.
Oh, I'm all broken up about Mutalisks not being the end-game tech for ZvZ :rolleyes:Quote:
hydras do 8 damage to mutas in sc2 where in sc1 they did only 5
Marines start with 40Hp in SC2. Also, the range is irrelevant; if a Terran player is at all serious about Marines, by the time your Spire finishes, both range and stim will have already been upgraded. So it's a moot point.Quote:
marines start with more attack range and hp,
All of 1 damage more.Quote:
the new dragoon also does more damage to mutas than the old
What about them? Thors should be on the front lines; if your Mutalisk harassment is so substantial that they have to build Thors and station them inside their base to stop them, then you've probably already got map control.Quote:
How about the Archon, who does 70 splash damage to mutas in sc2 and the thor
As for Archons, they're at the bottom of the tech tree. And they can easily be avoided.
Really? You're talking about how Mutalisks stand up to late-game battleships? This changes nothing about how effective Mutalisks are at their task.Quote:
how about the new BC with it's hugely improved damage and it's Missile Pods ability, and the new improved Carier
This is far, far less effective against Mutalisks than its SC1 equivalent: Irradiate. Irradiate was guaranteed damage. HSM isn't.Quote:
what about the new seeker missile?
@Nicol Bolas as i've seen from your comments, it seems you might not want the mutas to have such importance as in sc1.
So i'm ending all of this debate by just asking you one last question; would you acept a new fresh unit that would replace the mutalisk in it's role if it would be introduced, or do you think that the mutalisk should stay in sc2 by all means necesary?
There's nothing inherrantly wrong with the mutalisk, why is it that this non-problem (lack of stacking) being discussed as if it were the mutalisk's only use?
30 mutas can 1-shot a stalker, and deal critical damage to the next target. 30 mutas can 1 shot a defense turret. Dealing more damage to mutas isn't going to change the fact they can be controlled in groups big enough to one-shot your units.