EPT[D] Viable Hydralisk Uses (ZvT) - Page 5
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
SpoR
United States1542 Posts
| ||
|
Roblin
Sweden948 Posts
On June 21 2011 01:43 Synystyr wrote: Hydras are only really good in ZvT when you need to get a quick squad of AA units out to deal with something. Also if the opponent is going really heavy Marauders, you could technically go Hydras and soft counter them. However mass lings or mutas would be better there, so Hydras really dont have a niche anywhere =[ They need more health and speed >_< health no, speed yes, the hydralisk was intended to be a glass cannon with "long" (long by zerg standards, 7 is almost siege range as far as zerg is concerned) range, much like the terran units. so in the same way the roach is a protoss unit in zerg skin, the hydralisk is a terran unit in zerg skin. in my eyes the hydralisk is a more expensive, higher tech, lower dps/cost, lower hp/cost and slower marine that is available for zerg, have slightly more range and costs gas. do the math, even on creep I'm right about it all (assuming stim). conclusion: the marine is strictly better than the hydralisk in everything except 3 very minor things, namely. 1. supply cost: the hydralisk costs 2 supply, equal resources in marines cost 3 supply. 2. range: while the hydralisk have 2 more range (1 unupgraded) than the marine and this may seem like a relatively major thing, it is not enough to make the hydralisk efficient vs marines. 3. it is a zerg unit: zerg units have the advantage of being able to be produced in masses at a time. so why would you go hydralisk vs terran when it is almost strictly worse than their tier 1 unit? X being strictly worse than Y meaning: "in any situation where you have unit X, it would be better to have equal cost of unit Y instead." | ||
|
nihlon
Sweden5581 Posts
| ||
|
nihlon
Sweden5581 Posts
On June 21 2011 12:06 sagefreke wrote: I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard modified the Hydra for HotS to make it more versatile seeing as it really has niche uses throughout all matchups. It really feels like the only way Hydras would be viable against Terrans is if they decided to go mass air, although I would argue that going Spire with Muta Corruptor mix would be much more effective simply for mobility and their overall dominance over Terran air. They'll just add the lurker so people will make the hydra, even for just a short period of time.  | ||
|
GMonster
686 Posts
| ||
|
GGPope
Australia367 Posts
| ||
|
AcidReniX
United Kingdom66 Posts
Their range. Going straight up hydra is never going to go well, they are weak units. But have a look at the other zerg units. Zerglings - Range melee Roach - Range 4? Hydra - Range 6 When you're in an engagement, your lings will move to within melee range, your front line of roaches will move to range 4 and start attacking, and any roaches behind that line will try to break through to start attacking. You have to push further into the enemy army to allow all your roaches to fire. This is fine in small numbers, when you can simply move your entire army closer to the enemy's army, but when you are talking maxed armies, you're not getting all of your roaches into the fight unless you're completely surrounding them. This means most of the time, you have units that are dealing no dps. If you mix in a line of hydras behind your roaches, you will have more units attacking during the battle as they will be attacking at their max range, instead of queuing up behind your other roaches waiting to get in range. The downside of hydras other than their cost effectiveness, is that they are terrible at retreating. In general, I don't think any zerg units are meant to be cost effective except for zerglings (and roaches). Roaches were added to the game to prevent zerg from being overrun in the early game, before they can get their economy up to produce the 'cost inneffective, game winning units'. The problem is, roaches are also way too good in the late game, so by default, they made the expensive hydralisk become a bit more of a specialist unit. | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On June 21 2011 01:43 Synystyr wrote: Then they also require a damage nerf. I like hydras as they are now.They need more health and speed >_< On June 21 2011 01:26 TheSambassador wrote: I use hydras as an anti-air force on creep. I also like to add some hydras if I go roaches as hydras adds nice damage and share the upgrades.Any other ideas? Has anybody seen Hydras used effectively in ZvT? Comparing to SC1, the new hydra is more a specialized unit. I am okay with that even though the hydralisk is now a snail off-creep, requires lair, and costs more. Hydras have sick dps and especially with the range upgrade they are very useful to snipe something quick. But I don't think about the hydra as a single unit, I rather think how hydralisks can improve my army composition or how hydra tech can have an effect on the opponent's play. Sometimes I find it worth it to show just some hydralisks to discourage him going air. | ||
|
Sporadic44
United States533 Posts
double port banshee play being the most obvious, they can also be used in ling infestor play as drop deterrent (assuming your creep spread is good). and adding a few to clean up vikings when you hit the lategame infestor broodlord composition is also nice. | ||
|
userstupidname
Sweden272 Posts
In my personal opinion | ||
|
VersaGER
Germany2 Posts
[ I'd like to see some small buffs to Hydras, maybe with conditions something like more attack-speed while they are off creep or more damage for 5 seconds after unburrowing something that would not only make them more viable but more fun to play. ] | ||
|
oGs420
Canada46 Posts
It would be like saying you counter zerglings with Hydralisks. Why use Hydralisks when you can just use Ling/Bling for your ground army? | ||
|
dementrio
678 Posts
| ||
|
shizna
United Kingdom803 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
AcrosstheSky
United States237 Posts
if your looking for defense in your base mutalisks both dish out the pain and will defend you a nice idea as a whole but unless hydralisks get a buff it aint happenings, and it won't because it would break zvp | ||
|
darkscream
Canada2310 Posts
On June 21 2011 18:08 Roblin wrote: 2. range: while the hydralisk have 2 more range (1 unupgraded) than the marine and this may seem like a relatively major thing, it is not enough to make the hydralisk efficient vs marines. u are wrong, hydras only have range 6 upgraded, marines are range 5, this isnt beta  | ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
You actually do have enough gas to do all this provided you take your third quickly and drone while building your first 8 infestors. | ||
|
Trollhammer
Singapore94 Posts
In BW, every race had a basic melee unit (Zealot/Zergling/Firebat) and a basic ranged unit (Dragoon/Hydra/Marine). Things have obviously changed with the new units in SC2, but Terrans have incorporated their new basic ranged unit (Marauders) into their play whereas Zerguuus tend to neglect hydras. Why? IMO there are two reasons: 1) Niche. Marines cover anti air/general purpose DPS glass cannons while marauders have the obvious tanky, anti armour, and slow effect. They work well with each other, with each unit's advantages covering the disadvantages of the other and vice versa. Now what about roach/hydra? Hydras have the advantage of being able to shoot up and have marginally more range and DPS than a roach (the latter two traits of which come at a massive cost of resources and lack of mobility). The roach is a lot beefier (except vs tanks and marauders, but mutas are far more effective against those units than hydras), cheaper, and has a speed upgrade. If you're super gosu, you'll also note that roaches can use burrow shinanegans. Compared to marine/marauder, roaches and hydras have somewhat overlapping roles. In some early beta Q&A sessions, it was stated that hydras were originally intended to deal 12 (+3 vs air). That would be good for the hydra, but a soft nerf on the corruptor as both units would now have overlapping roles as the zerg's primary AA unit. What blizz needs to do is find a unique niche for the hydralisk. 2) Cost. The cost of a hydralisk is close to that of a protoss gateway unit, as opposed to BW where 2 hydras were about equal to 1 dragoon in terms of cost and supply. In SC2, the gas and supply cost of a hydra have doubled, while the hp (2 hydras in BW had 150 hp in total) and damage per shot (2 hydras in bw would do 2 * 10 dmg to a large unit) have decreased. Do note that upgrades scaled better in BW as well, as those two hydras would benifit more from the attack and carapace upgrades than a single hydra would in SC2. Basically, the SC2 hydra is slightly more effective against certain units (12 dmg per shot opposed to the BW hydra's 10 explo dmg) at the tradeoff of being more expensive, lacking a speed upgrade, and having worse upgrade scalability than their BW counterpart. Oh and did I mention the SC2 hydra is a lair tech unit? | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On June 21 2011 21:08 Trollhammer wrote: I consider it curse and blessing at the same time. I like to get some hydras for inbase air defense. While I also build some spores if I expect air, I cannot use spores to push out. Hydras allow me to kill his air and if he is licking his wounds, use them for a counter push.Hydras occupy an awkward niche in the current Zerg arsenal; as stated before, their cost plus lack of clearly defined role (except AA, but more on that later) makes people shy away from em in ZvT. [...] 1) Niche. SC1 hydras are essentially – you mentioned it already – just better marines or half dragoons. I think it is a good design decision to restrict zerg to need lair tech for regular units who shoot up but balance this with the queen and relocatable spores. This makes the races more distinguishable. | ||
|
jdsowa
405 Posts
On June 21 2011 08:20 Soulish wrote: dps per supply? archon,.bl. thor, void ray and many more DPS per supply: zerglings do 7.2 dps per .5 supply (14.4 dps/supply) hydras do 14.5 dps per 2 supply (7.25 dps/supply) thors do 46.7 dps per 6 supply (only 7.8 dps/supply) Zerglings have *twice* the dps/supply of the thor and hydra. Therefore, the only use for hydras is for their range and anti-air capability. As others have said, the range is not so much an issue vT (with no forcefields), and there are better AA options--mutas give you harassment options, ability to shut down drops, ability to contain your opponent, pick off tanks in a seige line, pick off reinforcements, etc.--hydras give you nothing). Additional useful info: DPS per total min & gas cost: zerglings (.28) hydras (.09) thors (.09) Again, zerglings are a much better value than a thor on paper. Yet, which would you rather have an army of? The point is that what you want most in SC2 is units that have a ton of HP so that they can stay alive long enough to do some damage. Now, it's also worth mentioning that roaches have the best hp/cost ratio (1.45 vs. 0.08 for the thor) in the game. But what good is that when you have a 200 supply cap? | ||
| ||
