AoS: Hydralisk

General Discussion
http://youtu.be/Pn2DOQdNHVM

Video live in just a second or two, good place to discuss it!!
Vid live. :D
And not a single frig was given.

:p
zappy I swear to the god of physics that I will crush you with the fury of 1000 latino suns (those are the spiciest of suns!!!)
Einstein.
sour for days

http://labgrab.com/users/labgrab/blog/could-einsteins-theory-special-relativity-be-wrong_id%3D1150
sour for days

http://labgrab.com/users/labgrab/blog/could-einsteins-theory-special-relativity-be-wrong_id%3D1150
That experiment was proven wrong, if you knew anything, or even read the other threads, like the warpgate one, you'd know that.
It was repeated like 20 times brah

mad cause bad
Lol you said shaft XD
A thought on the lack of forward facing armor vs the giant shield: what if hydras are primarily meant as anti air, with providing support to ground forces being a secondary role? It would explain the way the armor faces, as well as how the firing mechanism works and the volume of missiles expelled, not to mention the positioning of the eyes.
the eyes would need even moreso to have good depth perception/binocular vision if they are targeting stuff in the air, that adds another dimension to their targeting (so going from horizontal and then including vertical)

the armour is there to protect them; if they are taking a lot of marine bullets (for example) wouldn't it make sense to give them some frontal armour? It really depends more on what is killing hydras than what they are killing.
the eyes would need even moreso to have good depth perception/binocular vision if they are targeting stuff in the air, that adds another dimension to their targeting (so going from horizontal and then including vertical)

the armour is there to protect them; if they are taking a lot of marine bullets (for example) wouldn't it make sense to give them some frontal armour? It really depends more on what is killing hydras than what they are killing.


based on what i have seen in the campaign and cenematics, hydralisks were never meant to take fire, even during SC1/BW. they were meant to be ranged support units giving cover fire and AA support to the legions of zerglings and ultralisks which would be eating the brunt of the fire.
In regard to zerg and overkill on spikes... could it be possible they are just there for intimidation purposes? Kerrigan certainly understands the concept f fear. And I'd surprised if the overmind didn't. So would it be beyond reason the seemingly pointless spikes and for the hydra that sick looking lower jaw, are just meant to make people be even more afraid of the zerg than they already are?
the eyes would need even moreso to have good depth perception/binocular vision if they are targeting stuff in the air, that adds another dimension to their targeting (so going from horizontal and then including vertical)

the armour is there to protect them; if they are taking a lot of marine bullets (for example) wouldn't it make sense to give them some frontal armour? It really depends more on what is killing hydras than what they are killing.

Well, if their primary purpose is to kill air units, wouldn't air units be their primary threat, just because the hydra is the biggest threat to a hydra? If you think about the geometry of the battlefield, and the ideal location of the hydras, it will be behind a wall of roaches and zerglings, presumably (we have yet to see a hydra in a large scale battle in a cinematic), and will require little horizontal protection. The eyes, yes, should be binocular, but we can probably chalk that up to Blizzard's uneducated artists than anything else.

Another thing that would support it's role as AA is the Swarm's lack of an alternative ground based GtA attack units. The only other units I can think of is the IT, but those are hardly reliable. Since the Swarm can't rely on having air superiority (lacking anything heavier than a mutalisk in the air for any conflict not of a high priority), they need a cheap way to engage air targets.
the eyes would need even moreso to have good depth perception/binocular vision if they are targeting stuff in the air, that adds another dimension to their targeting (so going from horizontal and then including vertical)

the armour is there to protect them; if they are taking a lot of marine bullets (for example) wouldn't it make sense to give them some frontal armour? It really depends more on what is killing hydras than what they are killing.

Well, if their primary purpose is to kill air units, wouldn't air units be their primary threat, just because the hydra is the biggest threat to a hydra? If you think about the geometry of the battlefield, and the ideal location of the hydras, it will be behind a wall of roaches and zerglings, presumably (we have yet to see a hydra in a large scale battle in a cinematic), and will require little horizontal protection. The eyes, yes, should be binocular, but we can probably chalk that up to Blizzard's uneducated artists than anything else.

Another thing that would support it's role as AA is the Swarm's lack of an alternative ground based GtA attack units. The only other units I can think of is the IT, but those are hardly reliable. Since the Swarm can't rely on having air superiority (lacking anything heavier than a mutalisk in the air for any conflict not of a high priority), they need a cheap way to engage air targets.


actually no, they wouldnt. the primary threat would come from long ranged or fast moving ground units capable of getting into attack range. since their focus was anti-air, they would naturally be somewhat weaker to land based attacks simply because they arent as good against land based units.
Man, I forgot Hydralisks were part of the game. Thanks for the reminder!

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum