You are changing the topic because you lost the debate. Just type GG.
1 Like
It is amusing you pulled out that ROG stats vs serral series to counter my argument, just to have all of those games proving exactly what I was talking about, as serral lost the 3rd and 4th games because he didnāt made a spire against 3 oracles, also lost the last game because he transitioned too late, again because of no spire, letting the enemy oracles to undermine his economy for way too long.
Serral could have won all of these if he responded that 3 oracles 1 phoenix harass with a few mutas. I can say this since dark did exactly what Iām talking about to great success.
Now you are pulling random claims without proof or facts to back it up. Whine it all you want nobody can take you seriously, players are still making the mutas when they see fit, and it is not for you to decide. The tournament contenders and winners proved that mutas are viable, your claims proved nothing.
1 Like
I lost the debate? Funny how once I brought up a game to counter your argument I all the sudden ālostā, I think you have no counter argument because your game contradicts your position. Your mutas won you that game, mutas are not bad.
1 Like
Youāve also seen replays where I beat 5.7 K MMR protoss players with mass slow lings after giving them two free hatcheries. Time to nerf the two-free-hatchery-slow-ling-flood allin? Nope. Mutas are not viable and listing a game I played where I used mutas does not prove otherwise.
1 Like
Of course it doesnt. If it doesnt fit the narrative how can it count right? Mutas are fine. They got their place just like every unit does. A unit cannot be good at face fighting and harass. It got relegated to harass and you harassed the Protoss with mutas resulting in his GG after you defeated the main army. No probes no future all robbed due to mutas. They did their job, mutas are fine.
douĀ·bleĀ·think
noun
- the acceptance of or mental capacity to accept contrary opinions or beliefs at the same time, especially as a result of political indoctrination
E.g.:
āThe best player from HotS being unable to make mutalisks work isnāt proof that they donāt work, but that one troll game you played where you used mutas proves that they do!ā
The only person spinning a narrative here is you and your narrative doesnāt make any sense in the slightest - it requires applying doublethink.
1 Like
I find that assertion dubious, which dark game are you referring to?
Mutas are fine, accept that one.
Sorry, I donāt fall for indoctrination techniques. It does not matter how many times you say it, two plus two will never equal 7. There is a mountain of evidence that mutas are non viable and if you refuse to see that then that makes you blind as a bat.
1 Like
A mountain of evidence, I dont think so. Forcefields were supposed to suck vs Zerg since ravagers were made and guess what? 2 years later here we are, back to Sentry immortal allins. The same will happen with the muta, right now Zergs like you are convinced they suck and they dont. They will spring back like forcefields did.
Batz: look at the mountain of evidence that all concludes mutas suck!
Bacon: you are wrong because things might change in the future, evidence for the past 4 years be damned!
Sorry kiddo, no amount of meta change will make 1000 gas of mutas beat a single missile turret - things like this are written into the game design and no amount of meta shift can change game design.
Imagine if BCs were so bad that 2 of them would lose a fight with a single spore crawler. THATāS the realm of badness that mutas are in and itās only tolerable because itās zerg and everyone hates zerg so itās just fine as far as they are concerned.
1 Like
If missile turrets canāt deter mutas what is supposed to then? You canāt mass mutas and have them amazing at just destroying everything, by what you typed above I can conclude that is exactly what you want the muta to be, a fast flying brawler that can take damage. Do you even know how broken that sounds?
1 Like
A) You donāt need a 100 mineral unit that can beat a 1000 gas investment. It could be something else such as a 100 mineral unit that can only beat a 500 gas investment.
B) You could use marines, thors, vikings, ghosts, cyclones, widow mines, liberators, bcs.
1 Like
Then increase the supply cost to mutas relevant to the supply I need to keep at home to defend them from sailing into my base and ending the game. Secondly the only way a turret will deter 10 mutas is if the Terran is repairing the turret, which QQ get over it, you are on RBT levels of whine right now.
1 Like
Mutas are so bad that they are rarely usedā¦ so we should nerf them by increasing their supply? Youāre crazy.
Nope. Not even remotely close to true. It seems that way for you because I am talking about high level / pro level meta while you are talking about your own personal experiences and down in bronze league you lose to mutas all the time so you cannot understand the fact that they are indeed underpowered at the pro level. Instead of admitting to yourself that your own game experiences arenāt supreme you have to rationalize what I am saying by comparing me to RBT while you ignore anything and everything that contradicts your SUPREME experiences.
If anything what you ought to be saying is that yeah sure their UP at the pro level but at MY level they are pretty strong, so any changes should try to impact only the pro level. But, nope, you donāt say that - you say āMutas are fine, periodā.
1 Like
No, mutas are fine. You say I believe my experiences to be supreme but you are doing the exact the same thing by saying Iām in bronze. Mutas are used plenty, you want a high speed, high damage, high hp unit that forever keeps Protoss and Terran confined to their base worse than they already are with zerg runbys and insane creep spread. You arent getting buffed mutas because they are fine.
1 Like
Funny how he uses Stats vs Serral ROG as a proof mutas are bad but fail to realize that in that game the mutas stoped all Stats agression, forced him into turtle into late game that zerg dominates. That game the mutas got so much value even after early game harass, they were able to get what? 3 prisms? The next tree games Stats beat Serral in the mid game.
Even the casters were saying that all game long, looks like he didnāt even watch the game.
1 Like
You continue to waive away mountains of evidences because they contradict your assumption. Where on Earth did this assumption come from, if not the evidence of pro play? It must come from your own experiences on the ladder or vicariously from other terran whiners crying about their own experiences on the ladder.
It isnt assumption, watch the pro games. Mutas are used, they are not meant to be a core unit.
1 Like
You are focusing on the single white dot on a black piece of paper while simultaneously ignoring that the reason the white dots stand out to you is because the entire paper is black. Tell me, do you notice and count how many games the Zerg goes hydra ling bane? The reasons why Zergs go for hydras are motivated by the same reasons why mutas are not viable, but do you count this towards the evidence of how bad mutas are? Of course not. You only remember that one game where they did get used and did work and you ignore everything else.
For every one of those there is a hundred games where the Zerg went ravager/ling/bane or hydra/ling/bane instead because mutas donāt provide solutions to problems in the meta while those other unit comps do - this is patently evident to anyone who has played zerg. You CANNOT survive mid-game marine/tank timings if you open with mutas.
There is a simple test you can perform. Ask yourself: true or false, is this terran harassing with medivacs, liberators or banshees? If so, then this is a game where the zerg should be making mutas, as it would shut-down that harass with ease, but they donāt which begs the question of why (hint: mutas suck). Watch pro level play and count how many games are filled with mass harass - itās darn near 99% - yet mutas are rarely used.