|
I use the search and wasnt able to find anything dps related to answer this question.
hopefully i didnt miss something.
anyway, my question(s).
has anyone noticed that hydras actualy nearly the same dps per "money spent" than roaches?
and if so has this been talked about?
14.4 / 150 = .096 dps per money for hydra
8 / 100 = .08 per money spent for roach
add in movement speed and HP and the hydra seems pointless except when ytou wanna shoot up ?
i almost think going for corruptos or mutas for AA might be better and set up faster brood tech. But mainly im curious about the views of the community.
|
Agreed, in general roaches are way more cost effective than hydras. But hydras are more food effective. Also they have longer range. For a pure roach army unless you can get a nice concave in an open area, there will be quite a few roaches that won't be able to attack.
|
You must also consider hydras have better range. Also hydra are more 'economical' in terms of larva.
|
There's a limit to how many roaches can be shooting at once at any individual target. No other drawback.
|
Keep in mind that the main bottleneck for roach damage is their range, not their damage per second. They are entirely slaughtered by marauders with concussive shells or blink stalkers, which is why hydras are needed.
The two units of course complement each other very well, with the squishier hydras being protected by the hardier roaches.
Yes, roaches are more cost effective, which is why it's rare to see anyone go hydras and hydras alone. But it's sort of like how marines supplement siege tanks very well, certain combinations are stronger than individual parts.
|
That's the difference between theory and practice. In theory they're the same, but in practice they're not.
|
On March 05 2011 04:04 DeckOneBell wrote:
Keep in mind that the main bottleneck for roach damage is their range, not their damage per second. They are entirely slaughtered by marauders with concussive shells or blink stalkers, which is why hydras are needed.
The two units of course complement each other very well, with the squishier hydras being protected by the hardier roaches.
Yes, roaches are more cost effective, which is why it's rare to see anyone go hydras and hydras alone. But it's sort of like how marines supplement siege tanks very well, certain combinations are stronger than individual parts.
I'll give you Marauders but I can't see upgraded Roaches doing bad vs Blink stalkers.
|
Hydras will also start attacking earlier so if you start counting roach dps when hydra starts attacking it will be lower. ^^
|
Unit type also factors into why hydras are more effective vs stalkers. Hydras are light and roaches take extra stalker damage from being armored type.
|
I know it's already been said, but it's when the two units are used in combination that they're truly productive. A line of hydras behind a ball of roaches is where the real Zerg ground DPS is at. Add in the ability to attack air and no late-game roach army is really safe without hydras to support. That said, you DO want more total roaches than hydras in order to tank damage. I usually go for something like 3:1 roaches to hydras...not sure if that is perfect or not though.
|
On March 05 2011 04:16 Mercury- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2011 04:04 DeckOneBell wrote:
Keep in mind that the main bottleneck for roach damage is their range, not their damage per second. They are entirely slaughtered by marauders with concussive shells or blink stalkers, which is why hydras are needed.
The two units of course complement each other very well, with the squishier hydras being protected by the hardier roaches.
Yes, roaches are more cost effective, which is why it's rare to see anyone go hydras and hydras alone. But it's sort of like how marines supplement siege tanks very well, certain combinations are stronger than individual parts. I'll give you Marauders but I can't see upgraded Roaches doing bad vs Blink stalkers.
Ever seen good blink micro? A very good blink micro can take out half a roach army before they lose any stalkers.
|
Proves that Hydras need a buff! lol (I am Protoss for the record).
In anycase, shooting up is a huge deal, and range means that hydras scale much better in larger numbers (critical mass + ball effect). Hydras are also "light" and not "armored" so they don't die fast to stuff like marauders, immortals, stalkers or even tanks, all of which are very common unit compositions. The only +light damage you really have to worry about are hellions.
@above poster - that's an exaggeration. Good blink micro is effective, but isn't that great past a certain food count because even if you have godspeed hands you can't micro that well and roaches start 1-shotting stalkers. Additionally, 0/0 stalkers are reasonably cost effective against roaches, but once u hit 2/2, roaches start winning hardcore because they scale much better.
|
On March 05 2011 04:14 MoreFaSho wrote:
That's the difference between theory and practice. In theory they're the same, but in practice they're not.
No, just not enough factors have been taken into account. Theory is perfectly relevant as long as its rigorous.
|
There is flaw when comparing only with resources instead of with larva. I'm personally not a Z players but to my brief knowledge the larva is usually the main cap of production, and not money.
Once again, I'm not a zerg, so take my opinions with a grain of salt. I do belive however that this issue is something worth discussing :D
|
Ok, so ive seen some talk about the benefit of the range of hydras, but im ghonna disagree with most of those. Roaches range + speed is enough that they all get into range pretty quick.
second hydras do NOT start shooting sooner unless you put your hydras infront of your roaches, and thats instant fail.
About the food cap, thats a really good point actualy when you start having to worry about pop cap. so maybe in the late game the hydra is a better when your resourses can handle the heavier load of the Hydra. but then agian remaxing with the faster moving roach during battles is still very good.
and the corruptor can be your AA while setting you up for broods.
About larva effeciencies, ehhhhh. i could say this is the strongest arguement for have a couple of hydras in an army. making a macro hatch is a huge investment early game. But then agian the moneey your going to spend to fast tech to early hydras could have just been spend on UPS instead, which helps save larva a bit as well
|
On March 05 2011 06:10 hun13 wrote:
Ok, so ive seen some talk about the benefit of the range of hydras, but im ghonna disagree with most of those. Roaches range + speed is enough that they all get into range pretty quick.
When you send a big ball of roaches into a big ball of units with longer range than roaches, then the roaches are at a high disadvantage. This is because the opponent's ball will still be partially safe from the roaches while the roaches are fully exposed.. This is amplified when that ball of long range units are smaller, thus having a higher DPS density (marines).
|
On March 05 2011 06:10 hun13 wrote:
Ok, so ive seen some talk about the benefit of the range of hydras, but im ghonna disagree with most of those. Roaches range + speed is enough that they all get into range pretty quick.
second hydras do NOT start shooting sooner unless you put your hydras infront of your roaches, and thats instant fail.
It's not just about engaging, it's about things like fighitng melee units. Consider fighting zealots. up to 4 lines of roaches can shoot a zealot that is in melee combat with the first roach. Up to 7 hydras can shoot that same zealot. Similar stuff for zerglings, ultras etc.
Also, consider vs. blink stalkers. Stalkers with proper micro can make it so that 3 lines of stalkers can shoot 1 row of roaches, and thus blink away when the front row is going to die effectively. This isn't nearly as effective against hydras who out-range stalkers.
Also, on creep, hydra speed is pretty good.
|
United States7483 Posts
On March 05 2011 04:29 Kornholi0 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2011 04:16 Mercury- wrote:On March 05 2011 04:04 DeckOneBell wrote:
Keep in mind that the main bottleneck for roach damage is their range, not their damage per second. They are entirely slaughtered by marauders with concussive shells or blink stalkers, which is why hydras are needed.
The two units of course complement each other very well, with the squishier hydras being protected by the hardier roaches.
Yes, roaches are more cost effective, which is why it's rare to see anyone go hydras and hydras alone. But it's sort of like how marines supplement siege tanks very well, certain combinations are stronger than individual parts. I'll give you Marauders but I can't see upgraded Roaches doing bad vs Blink stalkers. Ever seen good blink micro? A very good blink micro can take out half a roach army before they lose any stalkers.
Not really against upgraded roaches, and not in large numbers. Blink stalker micro is fantastic in small to middle army numbers, but there hits a point when there are so many roaches they just one shot stalkers and there's no way blink helps kill the roaches there, it only helps to run away. Speed roaches are also faster than stalkers I believe.
|
Yes per cost they are about the same, which is why roaches are so good in the mid-game.
But late-game supply is the limiting factor, not cost.
DPS per supply (no upgrades):
Hydra - 7.23
Roach - 4
DPS per supply (level 3 attack):
Hydra - 9.035
Roach - 5.5
As you can see, hydra beat roach in terms of DPS per supply. This is why roaches are better mid-game (unless you need AA), but as you approach maxed army, you want to add hydras (and corruptors).
|
You're also forgetting one of the most major things of them all: The roach's dps suffers significantly from Overkilling. Roaches slow attack speed but high damage means lots of dps is wasted on overkilling units. Where as the fast attacking Hydralisk doesn't overkill nearly as much. Just something else to add to the calculation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
