I dont use them because marines just rape them, in every number. I tested in unit tester, 40marines vs 20 hydras, marines had stim and hydras had range, 20 marines were left after the fight.

Marines do cost only minerals, and are way better than hydralisks, both in DPS and HP, if compared 2rines/1hydra. And the hydra is gas also!

babysimba

10466 Posts

October 26 2011 04:50 GMT

#22

Support dps units' speed need to be faster than their tanking units, not the other way around. If zealots and colossus which are cost effective against hydras are at the same speed as them, it just means that hydras cant engage. And what happens when they retreat, they get slowly picked off by the faster stalkers. Just imagine toss' zealots and stalkers speed are reversed, would anyone even bother to build stalkers. Or marines without speed boost when they stim. If they continue to be viable units at such low speeds, it just means that their combat capabilities are 'op'. Thor deathball is different, because their effectiveness greatly increase when a critical mass is reached because of their high hp. Thors if produced sparingly and used as support dps unit suck, which prove my point.

In short, any low hp ranged dps units need to have the option to retreat when their tanking units die.

Cloud9157

United States2968 Posts

October 26 2011 04:51 GMT

#23

The problem with the Hydra is its HPs in my opinion.

Great dps, movement speed sets it back off creep, but it doesn't live for too long.

VillageBC

322 Posts

October 26 2011 04:52 GMT

#24

Blizzard is holding the Hydralisk back. Buff the damn unit already.

OreoBoi

Canada1639 Posts

October 26 2011 04:54 GMT

#25

Too much instant AoE damage kills them. In BW they could be used because protoss only had storms which could be dodged, or reavers that fire slowly as well as bug out. In SC2 the collosus does instant aoe and cannot be sniped easily like a templar. Against terran, hellions kill hydras way too well. In BW hydras could be used against mech because they countered vultures, but hellions own hydras too much for that to happen.

Doomblaze

United States1292 Posts

October 26 2011 04:56 GMT

#26

You already have three different answers as to why the hydralisk sucks, and all three of them are correct

This means that the hydralisk has three major flaws not one of three different flaws.

Roaches can be slow because they are tanky. Infestors can be slow because they're amazing, and if they were fast they would be even better. As it is, hydras are mediocre at best, and slow to boot. Yes, they have really high DPS, but they share the light unit type with zerglings, meaning that colossi rape both of them, and if the terran has BFH the hydras and the zerglings are screwed. Marines can beat them in a fight weight for weight, and terran loves marines.

If the terran has ravens, then PDDs completely negate the hydras attack, making them useless as an anti air unit, which should be their main function.

Marines and marauders have the same "slow" speed, but zerglings are incredibly fast, and theyre the unit which the rest of zerg is compared to, making hydras seems even slower. Roaches are also terrible, I remember idra saying that a roach ball will lose vs a ball of anything and i beat a zerg going roaches with marine hellion because theyre that bad. Hydras are worse.

There is a reason zergs dont go roach hydra anymore.

Peleus

Australia420 Posts

October 26 2011 04:57 GMT

#27

Thanks for the look at comparing the hydralisks speed to other races units, now we've seen your numbers we realise we've been wrong all this time, and the hydra is a wonderful unit. Almost every pro out there is simply not good enough to realise it....

A few reasons why your reasoning is flawed.

Firstly, you can't look at units in isolation. As you pointed out roaches and zerglings in their typical lair tech state are much faster than the hydras. This leads to very poor 'synergy' with the Zerg army which often requires fast response for both counter attacks, and for defending far flung bases in the typical Zerg sprawling macro style. This means that the hydra is often lagging behind the army and not proving as useful as it should. As you also pointed out things such as marines, tanks and maruders all share the same speed, there are examples of units working well together. In some ways, the speed of the unit is equally important as how that unit interacts with its fellow army units. In this way, hydras are bad.

You've also focused on speed, as if that's the only thing wrong with hydras, unfortunately there is more to it than that. Hydras have several counters than own them, and they happen to be core units in almost every matchup. Tanks for example are something we see in both mech and bio play, yet thier splash eats hydras alive. Storms and collosi, something you see in almost any ZvP matchup also destroy them. You end up with a unit that's fragile, expensive and almost always countered naturally by your opponents play.

Xyik

Canada728 Posts

October 26 2011 05:00 GMT

#28

If the cost for hydra range came down to 100/100 and movement speed off creep was slightly buffed we would see them more. Otherwise, move the hydra down to tier 1 and it might be useful for early game aggression / defense. Getting hydras by tier 2 is pointless when terran has tanks and protoss has collossi and the hydra can't retreat.

MajorityofOne

Canada2506 Posts

October 26 2011 05:00 GMT

#29

On October 26 2011 13:52 VillageBC wrote:
Blizzard is holding the Hydralisk back. Buff the damn unit already.

HotS is coming buddy

I can't wait to use fast hydras to pick off expos...they deal damage so fast and have such good range that even things like shredders just won't matter

Demonzii

Netherlands180 Posts

October 26 2011 05:01 GMT

#30

Its just a bad unit. Not only the slow movement speed makes you kind of deathball-esq. But the low HP and the investement into a couple of hydras is insane. Its not a costeffective unit.

Jerubaal

United States7684 Posts

October 26 2011 05:03 GMT

#31

Trying to convince people that the hydra is not 'omg it soooo slow' is the most futile argument in SC2.

This isn't BW. The hydra does not have the same role as it did. I'm sorry you can't go 'lolhydras' in all matchups (except for zvz).

There's nothing holding the hydralisk back. GSL games every season prove this. They are a niche unit for sure, but they are very powerful in the right situation.

Maybe you should ask what's holding you back.

R0YAL

United States1768 Posts

October 26 2011 05:03 GMT

#32

For how fragile it is combined with its inability to escape a confrontation as well as its cost, makes the hydralisk a risky unit to produce. You compare it to marines and marauders but they have stim which greatly increases speed.

me_viet

Australia1350 Posts

October 26 2011 05:04 GMT

#33

So when do you suggest Zerg use Hydras where they're not already? (pre-collosus/storm/the rare hydra bust).

darkscream

Canada2310 Posts

October 26 2011 05:04 GMT

#34

On October 26 2011 13:40 VirgilSC2 wrote:

See? We already have three different answers for what might be holding the Hydralisk back!

"unit clumping" and "aoe damage" mean the same thing.

The Stalker, Viking, Phoenix, Mutalisk, and Roach among other units seem to work just fine despite having missile-based attack animations!

those units all have great micro you can do with them. Hydralisk micro is... just painful. Its not about the speed, you can't kite units with them, you can't position them in an arc or split them very easily, and they are small so they bunch up and take maximum damage from splash.

unprecedented 14.5 DPS against a single target!

Single target dps is pretty meaningless in this game. If Colossus did 80 damage in one hit with no splash, do you think people would use it? Probably not, at least not to the extent they do now. They use it because the AOE lets you wipe away a line of hydralisks in two seconds, and roaches in 4-5 seconds.

common_cider

342 Posts

October 26 2011 05:05 GMT

#35

They are really really bad late game. You only want them to defend major air from any race or for an allin timing attack

foxmeep

Australia2337 Posts

October 26 2011 05:07 GMT

#36

See, the thing about Damage Per Second... it actually requires the unit to live longer than 1 second to deal it.

Horse...falcon

United States1851 Posts

October 26 2011 05:09 GMT

#37

cost

splash damage(spread mechanics in SC2)

low hp (higher dps of everything in this game)

Xapti

Canada2473 Posts

October 26 2011 05:10 GMT

#38

Hydralisks aren't bad because of their speed — virtually everyone knows that. OP just wasted their time in a huge manner (the post itself. The related discussion is somewhat fine albeit it's beating a dead horse), it's such a silly thing to write so much about, or even bring up at all.

Hydralisks are bad because they have overall poor stats (including no special abilities). Any buff would help them, including movement speed, but definitely not limited to it.
Mutalisks are terrible combat units, but they are good because of their reasonable speed. If mutalisks were 2.25 speed they'd be bad as well — people would probably also call them slow.

Zerg is a race that is designed to be able to frequently run away — Hydralisks cannot effectively run away from almost anything — colossus move over cliffs and have 3-4 extra range, siege tanks can siege (siege unit isn't supposed to be fast anyway), marines and marauders can stim, ghosts can snipe (4-5 extra range), stalkers can chase and/or blink, sentries can forcefield, zealots can charge (and are faster with upgrade); archons, hellions, vikings, banshees, reapers, phoenix, and most zerg units are faster.

It doesn't matter that some units are the same speed — it just takes a sufficient number 1 unit type (ie. stalkers, marines) in the opposing player's army to be faster to be able to kill most-of or all retreating hydralisks.

Exyia

United States17 Posts

October 26 2011 05:11 GMT

#39

I think the Hydra is weak in the same sense that the Carrier is weak

it's almost a 100% BW port, but there are so many more units/dynamics in SC2, it's as if the hydra/carrier missed the beta test with the NEW SC2 units because they were assumed "balanced from BW"

Carriers are still great dps, but with the introduction of the Viking/Corruptor, and no adaptation to the Carrier, it's rendered very cost in-efficient. As well as the strengths of the new roach and marauder, making Protoss in need of AoE tech. The Carrier is simply there for a role from BW that doesn't exist anymore in SC2

Same concept with the Hydra - a high (somewhat burst) dps, but with Marine balls protected by Marauders at the front, the higher attack speed of the Marine, smart tank-fire, and still having a high cost relative to BW, it's in a niche that rarely opens in SC2

Kuja

United States1759 Posts

October 26 2011 05:13 GMT

#40

They cost way to much, theyre slow, and they get destroyed by splash.... BUT they do have a dance!