In developing units for Starcraft there’s two basic/fundamental reasons for a unit to exist. First, a unit’s concept is interesting and fun to use and second, it fills a role or gap in a races’ arsenal in a way that conforms to a race’s design identity. Coming into Legacy of the Void every race is well-rounded so I believe making fun, interesting units is the primary goal. There’s no more strategic roles that need filling, just make units that interact in ways that challenge us somehow. It is my belief that the Cyclone is a failed design and should be scrapped, and I’m gonna tell you why.
In RTS games the ability for a unit to abuse an enemy unit that has shorter range by kiting it is an organic byproduct of design. It informs unit relations and promotes skilful unit usage. Some unit relationships in Starcraft are designed and balanced in such a way as to presume one player will be controlling their units in this manner, eg. Hellions and Reapers vs Zerglings, Stalkers against Marines and Phoenixes against Mutalisks.
But the Cyclone is designed from the outset to be the ultimate kiting machine. Once it locks on it outranges anything short of a deployed Siege tank or a Tempest, assuming it can maintain line of sight, and can theoretically defeat any unit in a 1v1 situation so long as it can maintain that Lock On and remain out of their attack range. If a player were to amass a massive force of Cyclones what’s to stop them running rampant? What sort of downside or weakness do you give a unit like that?
If you make it slow or short sighted then it can’t achieve a full Lock On and its potential is wasted. It risks being easily swarmed by fast low tier units so it can’t be useful early in the game against races that can produce fast basic units, i.e., all of them.
Instead, make it expensive and slow to build then it’s difficult to amass and most people will not bother, especially since if you’re turtling as Terran you’re kinda meant to be making Battlecruisers or something.
Alternatively, give it low DPS over a long period of time and demand it receives a lot of specific attention then you have something that cannot be managed as part of a larger army. Currently it takes 14 seconds for a Lock On to finish. If you want to deal 600 damage to an Ultralisk over a 14 second period during a battle then by the time the Cyclone is finished doing it’s thing, the Ultra has finished its meal of Marauder steak and Marine chips. It’s also poor at defending against enemy air units which can almost always escape the Lock On mostly unscathed, bar the occasional Overlord who decided to take their coffee break deep inside the Terran’s base.
If it can only attack ground, how do you appropriately balance it alongside a race that has Siege Tanks? In a game that’s primarily about ground armies duking it out you cannot have a Terran factory unit that’s superior to Siege tanks at handling ground targets, and due to the introduction of Tankivacs into the game we cannot consider mobility to be that much of an asset. This was something of an issue with the Warhound back in the HotS beta; it was frequently much stronger than the Siege Tank in ground engagements and Mech lost a lot of it’s identity. Simply unacceptable.
If it can attack both air and ground, how do you balance it’s numbers in such a way as to not become oppressive? The Cyclone cannot replace the Siege tank as an anti ground unit and it cannot replace the Viking or Thor as an anti air unit so what is it for? It can’t harass as well as a Medivac, Banshee or Liberator, can’t pick out individual units like Snipe, Yamato cannon or Seeker missile or you’d have a problem. The Cyclone is by design a Jack of all Trades but since it must be a Master of None, it struggles to find relevance in Terran compositions.
I believe this is the essential conundrum with the Cyclone as it exists in the game, since it suffers from a combination of all these issues. Earlier in the beta the Cyclone was actually quite a powerful unit; its Lock On was extremely oppressive to play against right from the start of the game, particularly for Protoss players. Now that it’s been brought into line we can see the issues apparent in its design with clarity.
I don’t think the Cyclone is fun. This is always a hard thing to properly elaborate, it’s not like you can dissect a copy of Starcraft II and see where the Fun is hiding amongst the code. For me, and I’m speaking extremely subjectively here, fun comes in two forms: One is when something feels imbalanced, possibly because it is, like when a quartet of widow mines make a Mutalisk flock or Probe line disappear. Two is that tactile feeling of satisfaction that comes from handling groups of units in an effective and skillful manner, like handling groups of Marauder/Medivac against Protoss or dunking a bunch of Tankivacs within range of something tasty.
And it fails at both of these. Obviously any unit can be powerful and I will admit to a certain giddiness when Protoss were forced to open Phoenixes in the early beta just to draw the game out a bit before their inevitable obliteration. In its current state the cyclone is frustrating to handle, the lock frequently breaks and it deals far too little damage too slowly. Trying to use it as part of a larger army composition is a mug’s game, too much effort for far too little reward. I cannot speak for other Terrans but the lack of a conversation about the Cyclone is quite telling. Nobody is making them, nobody likes them, nobody’s sharing gifs or highlight videos or screenshots about Cyclones on reddit. The considerable buzz that the unit generated in it’s unveiling at Blizzcon last year was impressive but it’s depleted itself now. We’re all about Liberators now!
So, I ask again, why does this unit exist? Well, I believe in the latest patch Blizzard has shown us why. It’s to handle beefy armoured units with it’s Mag-Field Accelerator upgrade, particularly the Ultralisk. And this is a role that it currently fails at quite miserably. BC’s and Carriers will shred Cyclones to pieces while they try to get into initial lock on range and they simply don’t do enough damage to Ultralisks fast enough within a battle and lack the mobility to harass them outside of battles. I have a suspicion the Cyclone is part of Blizzard's recent campaign to try and justify Chitinous Plating making Ultralisks immune to Bio units (Big Snipe and Anti-Armour Drone being the last two ideas implemented, gone unused and swiftly discarded) and it simply isn’t working.
One is generally required to offer a suggestion after a long critique so here goes: Scrap the Cyclone as a forced kiting unit. It’s inorganic, it’s not fun and it’s got more problems than benefits. Perhaps you could give it a simpler, single target focus like the Viper or the Tempest? I’m not really sure, Terran is quite well rounded strategically, but the important thing is that the unit just doesn’t work right now.There’s nothing wrong with admitting the Cyclone was a failure. Most unit concepts never turn out suitable for prime time and that’s ok. Making units for Starcraft is a tricky thing and I guess this is what betas are for. At least Liberators are fun, am I right?
I should add that I wrote this before the ghost Steady Targeting buff, which does actually make them really good at slaying Ultralisks, and a lot of Zerg units besides.
How about splitting it's ground and air attacks, keeping the anti-air attack to function as it currently does while giving it regular ground attacks (stationary when firing)? This would stop the infinite kiting vs early game units while allowing it to fare better against slower air units. Stats for it can be adjusted accordingly.
I just want the Viking and Siege Tank Thor be the core. I really love the interaction of 3 of those units. Sadly 2 of them way to overnerfed because the were to dominant in TvT.
I feel like the moment this unit is useful against a variety of units, it is unfun for at least the other player due to not being engagable. If it isn't useful against a variety of units, it just doesn't serve a proper purpse given its techlevel, costs, production speed. So far the unit has been hovering between imbalanced (enough range and dps to kite everything to death) and underpowered (not enough damage and dps to kite forever against most opponents). And I think this will just stay a fundamental problem of the unit, at best it can find a place where it is niche-strong against certain early-midgame build orders, but then drops of in usefulness quickly again because the opponent can just react to the acumulation of cyclones.
at the beginning it was pretty good after having removed the herk that was so imba, but now nobody uses it so I agree with him. But maybe a new terran unit ?
Coming into Legacy of the Void every race is well-rounded so I believe making fun
How can we know if every race is well rounded or not if we don't know what gaps mech has against Protoss? Y'know, because mech isn't usable against Protoss?
This isn't a knock on Iaguz's article, it just seems circuitous to suggest that a race doesn't need any more units because nobody wants that race to do new things.
Heres a question for you, say that everything you just wrote about was right, and blizzard is on board with the idea of scrapping the unit entirely. What would you replace it with?
I cannot think of any infantry-based unit that terran needs since all respective roles are filled, nor can I think of any starport units with the addition of the liberator and the buff to BC's to warp anywhere.
The only place left to really add a unit would be the factory, but now you're looking at a unit to add that doesn't impede on the siege tank's crowd control or the thor's anti air/single target damage. Arguably all you're left with is a spellcaster slot in place of the cyclone to do... what exactly? Terran already has the best defensive options so you're left with an offensive spellcaster thats mech oriented which cannot directly control engagements else risk being massed instead of a siege tank.
Scrap the Cyclone and make the Thor good. It's wildly expensive, and slow, and just sucks at everything except scaring Mutalisks and getting lucky against Muta clumps.
I would gladly trade the Cyclone for a better Thor.
On October 08 2015 02:58 91matt wrote: they should remove the liberator and cyclone and put in the goliath
This. 100x.
But we like the Liberator. The Liberator is awesome. Novel, unique, fun to use. It's stats might be a bit off, atm, but I think us Terrans are fully bought in to the idea of the Liberator.
We all universally dislike the Cyclone, and I think we all secretly know that the Thor sucks--big time. It would be so easy to make the Thor awesome. Give it something cool and fun to use!
On October 08 2015 02:58 91matt wrote: they should remove the liberator and cyclone and put in the goliath
This. 100x.
But we like the Liberator. The Liberator is awesome. Novel, unique, fun to use. It's stats might be a bit off, atm, but I think us Terrans are fully bought in to the idea of the Liberator.
We all universally dislike the Cyclone, and I think we all secretly know that the Thor sucks--big time. It would be so easy to make the Thor awesome. Give it something cool and fun to use!
The liberator, you mean the sky siege tank with mad anti-air splash and insane utility. It's a unit that can win a game simply by finding a spot where there's no overlord and sitting there denying mining for long enough for terran to get an unbeatable advantage. No doubt it's fun to use. It's certainly not fun to play against though.
On October 08 2015 03:18 Musicus wrote: Thanks for the article!
Scrap the Cyclone and the Thor and give us the Goliath .
I just said it above but I'll repeat myself I suppose, the Goliath is already in this game! It's called the Viking now. The notion that adding Broodwar units = auto improved game should already be disproved by the Lurker.
On October 08 2015 02:54 Energizer wrote: I cannot think of any infantry-based unit that terran needs since all respective roles are filled, nor can I think of any starport units with the addition of the liberator and the buff to BC's to warp anywhere.
Why not an infantry space control unit? It doesn't have to be superior to the WM or Liberator, just offer an alternative playstyle, perhaps as an incentive for mech players to mix in a bit of bio!
Why not an infantry siege unit? Zerg has 4 siege-capable units in the Ravager, Lurker, Brood Lord, and Swarm Host. Terran has only two - Siege Tank and Liberator.
Why not an infantry unit that's capable of dealing with mass Carriers?
Why not an infantry unit that enables bio vs mech in TvT?
The only place left to really add a unit would be the factory, but now you're looking at a unit to add that doesn't impede on the siege tank's crowd control or the thor's anti air/single target damage. Arguably all you're left with is a spellcaster slot in place of the cyclone to do... what exactly? Terran already has the best defensive options so you're left with an offensive spellcaster thats mech oriented which cannot directly control engagements else risk being massed instead of a siege tank.
Terran has the best defensive options? Arguable. Protoss has PO, Recall, very fast defensive Warp Ins, Force Fields. Terran "defensive option" Siege Tank has been verging on unusable in TvP since 2010.
How about a defensive "anti all-in" unit that doesn't kill the enemy so much as stall for time? Terrans have arguably struggled against all-ins more than any other race has in HotS, and with no nerfs to the Oracle and a new pressure option added in the Adept, I don't know how much that will change... and in what direction.
How about a mech unit that enables mech vs Protoss?
This took me 5 minutes to come up with. I'm sure these aren't the only possible ideas for enriching the Terran race.
On October 08 2015 02:58 91matt wrote: they should remove the liberator and cyclone and put in the goliath
This. 100x.
But we like the Liberator. The Liberator is awesome. Novel, unique, fun to use. It's stats might be a bit off, atm, but I think us Terrans are fully bought in to the idea of the Liberator.
We all universally dislike the Cyclone, and I think we all secretly know that the Thor sucks--big time. It would be so easy to make the Thor awesome. Give it something cool and fun to use!
Liberators are effective but, that does mean it's a good unit.
For example, Warhounds were SUPER Effective, but really trash units that nobody liked.
On October 08 2015 03:18 Musicus wrote: Thanks for the article!
Scrap the Cyclone and the Thor and give us the Goliath .
I just said it above but I'll repeat myself I suppose, the Goliath is already in this game! It's called the Viking now. The notion that adding Broodwar units = auto improved game should already be disproved by the Lurker.
On October 08 2015 03:18 Musicus wrote: Thanks for the article!
Scrap the Cyclone and the Thor and give us the Goliath .
I just said it above but I'll repeat myself I suppose, the Goliath is already in this game! It's called the Viking now. The notion that adding Broodwar units = auto improved game should already be disproved by the Lurker.
Oh hells no, I love the new lurker.
Great article btw
Well, I'll leave it to Zerg players to give their opinions regarding the Lurker, but from my own games it's mostly been a bit of a dud. But the main point is that Viking = Goliath 2.0. It flies now! Yay!
On October 08 2015 02:58 91matt wrote: they should remove the liberator and cyclone and put in the goliath
This. 100x.
But we like the Liberator. The Liberator is awesome. Novel, unique, fun to use. It's stats might be a bit off, atm, but I think us Terrans are fully bought in to the idea of the Liberator.
We all universally dislike the Cyclone, and I think we all secretly know that the Thor sucks--big time. It would be so easy to make the Thor awesome. Give it something cool and fun to use!
Liberators are effective but, that does mean it's a good unit.
For example, Warhounds were SUPER Effective, but really trash units that nobody liked.
I caught an Avilo game last night. He was playing mech vs Protoss, using Liberators, Tanks, then adding in Ravens and Banshees, and finally Ghosts.
The Protoss was engaging him in different locations on the map every 30 seconds or so, and every 30 seconds, Avilo would have to disassemble his defenses, reposition them, and reassemble them all over again. By the time he was pushing out at the 25 minute mark, his army was harder to control than HotS bio Terran.
I have no reason to believe that this will be a viable way to play the game at a competitive level, but the Liberator is not some ezmode unit that you mass and win the game. It requires a shit ton of constant attention. If it's too strong when rushed, that is a separate issue that can be solved separately.
On October 08 2015 02:58 91matt wrote: they should remove the liberator and cyclone and put in the goliath
This. 100x.
But we like the Liberator. The Liberator is awesome. Novel, unique, fun to use. It's stats might be a bit off, atm, but I think us Terrans are fully bought in to the idea of the Liberator.
We all universally dislike the Cyclone, and I think we all secretly know that the Thor sucks--big time. It would be so easy to make the Thor awesome. Give it something cool and fun to use!
Liberators are so good at what it does to the point it makes Tanks redundant. Not to mention it's an overpowered unit. It's like Cyclones and Thors overlapping the anti-air role.
Last thing we need is Terran having 1000 different ways to do the same things...already the most flexible race that exists.
On October 08 2015 02:55 alpenrahm wrote: liquid Iaguz confirmed.
A fella can dream.
EDIT- For people discussing the Liberator. I don't think the Liberator is imbalanced generally, though it could use a little toning down in it's early game harassment potential. As it stands currently when the Liberator enters Defender mode it gains full vision of the area that it is targeting. I would posit that it does not get this extra vision or perhaps just not as much extra vision, so there's no way a Liberator can shut down a drone line safe from Queen and Spore reprisals. That's just silly. The Cloaked Banshee is for early game harassment and the Liberator has kind of replaced it since it's better, easier and transitions better against Zerg and (probably, haven't tried much early game stuff with it) Protoss.
The Liberator is a very scary unit for Protoss but considering how PvT works right now I'm comfortable with Terran having the stronger 200/200 force. It's not an insta win, I've played some fucking strong Protosses who know how to drag a Terran over the hot coals as they try to go across the map and besides that they've got plenty of ways to keep things interesting from start to finish.
I haven't made up my mine about Libs in mid-late game TvZ but they seem very map dependant. On a more chokey map like Terraform they seem really scary but on something wider like Ruins of Seras much less so. Dunno. Hard to say.
On October 08 2015 02:58 91matt wrote: they should remove the liberator and cyclone and put in the goliath
This. 100x.
But we like the Liberator. The Liberator is awesome. Novel, unique, fun to use. It's stats might be a bit off, atm, but I think us Terrans are fully bought in to the idea of the Liberator.
We all universally dislike the Cyclone, and I think we all secretly know that the Thor sucks--big time. It would be so easy to make the Thor awesome. Give it something cool and fun to use!
Liberators are effective but, that does mean it's a good unit.
For example, Warhounds were SUPER Effective, but really trash units that nobody liked.
But the point stands that I think most players are bought-in on the Liberator. Unlike the Cyclone, which Iaguz so rightfully points out, should be scrapped (i.e., replaced).
On October 08 2015 02:58 91matt wrote: they should remove the liberator and cyclone and put in the goliath
This. 100x.
But we like the Liberator. The Liberator is awesome. Novel, unique, fun to use. It's stats might be a bit off, atm, but I think us Terrans are fully bought in to the idea of the Liberator.
We all universally dislike the Cyclone, and I think we all secretly know that the Thor sucks--big time. It would be so easy to make the Thor awesome. Give it something cool and fun to use!
The liberator, you mean the sky siege tank with mad anti-air splash and insane utility. It's a unit that can win a game simply by finding a spot where there's no overlord and sitting there denying mining for long enough for terran to get an unbeatable advantage. No doubt it's fun to use. It's certainly not fun to play against though.
On October 08 2015 02:58 91matt wrote: they should remove the liberator and cyclone and put in the goliath
This. 100x.
But we like the Liberator. The Liberator is awesome. Novel, unique, fun to use. It's stats might be a bit off, atm, but I think us Terrans are fully bought in to the idea of the Liberator.
We all universally dislike the Cyclone, and I think we all secretly know that the Thor sucks--big time. It would be so easy to make the Thor awesome. Give it something cool and fun to use!
Liberators are so good at what it does to the point it makes Tanks redundant. Not to mention it's an overpowered unit. It's like Cyclones and Thors overlapping the anti-air role.
Last thing we need is Terran having 1000 different ways to do the same things...already the most flexible race that exists.
Firstly: liberator is not a siege unit, in the very specific sense that it cannot attack structures. So that's one way it is not like a tank.
Secondly: liberator's Defender Mode is single-target, with small zone it can attack into. This is another important difference from the tank (the tank being AOE with a large radial range).
Thirdly: liberator rush play was nerfed by time and cost. Don't really think that is still an issue.
Liberator is an example of a successful new unit, with novel abilities. But the cyclone should probably get the scrap (just like the HERC).
surprised & pleased with how well written this piece was. Props to Iaguz for bringing this issue out for discussion. Its well needed & imo obvious, that something needs to change in regards to this unit. Btw love the picture!
On October 08 2015 03:18 Musicus wrote: Thanks for the article!
Scrap the Cyclone and the Thor and give us the Goliath .
I just said it above but I'll repeat myself I suppose, the Goliath is already in this game! It's called the Viking now. The notion that adding Broodwar units = auto improved game should already be disproved by the Lurker.
Oh hells no, I love the new lurker.
Great article btw
Well, I'll leave it to Zerg players to give their opinions regarding the Lurker, but from my own games it's mostly been a bit of a dud. But the main point is that Viking = Goliath 2.0. It flies now! Yay!
Well but there is still a difference between a starport and a factory unit right? BeastyQT and Morrow definitely were very much in favor of getting the goliath back during remax. You are right with the Viking I guess, it's just that the Terran race already feels so complete, it's really hard to add something. But the Cyclone just feels wrong.
I love the gameplay the lurker delivers btw, definitely one of the best additions with the disruptor imo! Zergs can control space? Holy shit!
On October 08 2015 03:18 Musicus wrote: Thanks for the article!
Scrap the Cyclone and the Thor and give us the Goliath .
I just said it above but I'll repeat myself I suppose, the Goliath is already in this game! It's called the Viking now. The notion that adding Broodwar units = auto improved game should already be disproved by the Lurker.
Oh hells no, I love the new lurker.
Great article btw
Well, I'll leave it to Zerg players to give their opinions regarding the Lurker, but from my own games it's mostly been a bit of a dud. But the main point is that Viking = Goliath 2.0. It flies now! Yay!
Well but there is still a difference between a starport and a factory unit right? BeastyQT and Morrow definitely were very much in favor of getting the goliath back during remax. You are right with the Viking I guess, it's just that the Terran race already feels so complete, it's really hard to add something. But the Cyclone just feels wrong.
I love the gameplay the lurker delivers btw, definitely one of the best additions with the disruptor imo! Zergs can control space? Holy shit!
Well, then they're wrong and I guess I'm going to have to fight them.
Terran and Protoss have to be more flexible than Zerg because of the way Zerg production works, so your statement is a little sensationalist.
You can't compare a spell and a unit just because they both happen to do AoE damage. It's like saying HSM need to be removed because tanks exist since they both do AoE damage (I haven't advocated for HSM removal)
If you haven't seen me, I have been campaigning the removal of lurkers due to overlapping roles with banelings.
Last time I checked P was much more inflexible than Terran. P can't fly their buildings around, insta-regen (repair), create workers out of nowhere, get instant vision of anywhere instantly, have a radar system, upgrade their building armor, etc. T just has so much more options than the other races that it's not even funny.
And Terran's production resembles Zerg's mass-production thanks to barrack-reactors / starport-reactors, at least more so than Protoss.
On October 08 2015 03:54 CrimxnKnightQaos wrote: Can we just get the vulture back, with an easier to execute moving shot?
What, and only kill lings 1 at a time, 2 shots to a ling?! How am I supposed to stop ling/bane timings with that!?
I'd be willing to make that trade. I'd happily give up splash damage and greedier openings for the second cheapest and fastest harassing unit that also happens to lay mines.
On October 08 2015 03:18 Musicus wrote: Thanks for the article!
Scrap the Cyclone and the Thor and give us the Goliath .
I just said it above but I'll repeat myself I suppose, the Goliath is already in this game! It's called the Viking now. The notion that adding Broodwar units = auto improved game should already be disproved by the Lurker.
Oh hells no, I love the new lurker.
Great article btw
Well, I'll leave it to Zerg players to give their opinions regarding the Lurker, but from my own games it's mostly been a bit of a dud. But the main point is that Viking = Goliath 2.0. It flies now! Yay!
Well but there is still a difference between a starport and a factory unit right? BeastyQT and Morrow definitely were very much in favor of getting the goliath back during remax. You are right with the Viking I guess, it's just that the Terran race already feels so complete, it's really hard to add something. But the Cyclone just feels wrong.
I love the gameplay the lurker delivers btw, definitely one of the best additions with the disruptor imo! Zergs can control space? Holy shit!
Well, then they're wrong and I guess I'm going to have to fight them.
Well that would just be unfair, even 1v2 if you bring your axe.
Cyclones are good at two thing that mech lacks : - an ability to force a fight. With mech, your only way to force a fight is to siege a position that annoys the opponent. With cyclones, you can now force a fight by pursuing a fleeing opponent. For instance, in HOTS TvP, if you wanna go mech, the protoss can, with an immortal ball, just destroy your hellbats, then back when you siege. So you have to cross the map siegeing every 10 meters and loosing 4 hellbats each time - the ability to kill runbies : if 5-6 roaches, 6-7 blink stalker, 4 marauders and a medi, find their way to a spot you are not defending, how do you counter it without sending your whole army? With thors/hellbats/unsieged tanks? They're slow and you're not gonna trade efficiently. The only answer in HOTS are banshees. But since Blizzard wants to separate ground mech from air mech, terran now needs a mobile and skirmishy mech unit
So yeah, I agree the design of the cyclone is gimmicky, but it somehow fills holes in the terran mech play.
On October 08 2015 04:09 parkufarku wrote: insta-regen (repair),
What?! Protoss can insta regen, its called shields, terrans can't, they need special units for that (SCV and Medivac) and one of them costs money (repair).
On October 08 2015 04:12 JackONeill wrote: Cyclones are good at two thing that mech lacks : - an ability to force a fight. With mech, your only way to force a fight is to siege a position that annoys the opponent. With cyclones, you can now force a fight by pursuing a fleeing opponent. For instance, in HOTS TvP, if you wanna go mech, the protoss can, with an immortal ball, just destroy your hellbats, then back when you siege. So you have to cross the map siegeing every 10 meters and loosing 4 hellbats each time - the ability to kill runbies : if 5-6 roaches, 6-7 blink stalker, 4 marauders and a medi, find their way to a spot you are not defending, how do you counter it without sending your whole army? With thors/hellbats/unsieged tanks? They're slow and you're not gonna trade efficiently. The only answer in HOTS are banshees. But since Blizzard wants to separate ground mech from air mech, terran now needs a mobile and skirmishy mech unit
So yeah, I agree the design of the cyclone is gimmicky, but it somehow fills holes in the terran mech play.
On October 08 2015 04:09 parkufarku wrote: insta-regen (repair),
What?! Protoss can insta regen, its called shields, terrans can't, they need special units for that (SCV and Medivac) and one of them costs money (repair).
Protoss regen isn't instant. Terran "regen" does indeed cost money but it's very minimal and very very fast.
On October 08 2015 04:12 JackONeill wrote: Cyclones are good at two thing that mech lacks : - an ability to force a fight. With mech, your only way to force a fight is to siege a position that annoys the opponent. With cyclones, you can now force a fight by pursuing a fleeing opponent. For instance, in HOTS TvP, if you wanna go mech, the protoss can, with an immortal ball, just destroy your hellbats, then back when you siege. So you have to cross the map siegeing every 10 meters and loosing 4 hellbats each time - the ability to kill runbies : if 5-6 roaches, 6-7 blink stalker, 4 marauders and a medi, find their way to a spot you are not defending, how do you counter it without sending your whole army? With thors/hellbats/unsieged tanks? They're slow and you're not gonna trade efficiently. The only answer in HOTS are banshees. But since Blizzard wants to separate ground mech from air mech, terran now needs a mobile and skirmishy mech unit
So yeah, I agree the design of the cyclone is gimmicky, but it somehow fills holes in the terran mech play.
Interesting points.
I don't think you can completely play mech without some air support, similarly you cannot play bio with air some air support. Your points are still interesting, though. I mean, helions can run back, morph into Hellbats and then fight, but the amount of them you need to kill stuff is pretty funny.
On October 08 2015 04:09 parkufarku wrote: insta-regen (repair),
What?! Protoss can insta regen, its called shields, terrans can't, they need special units for that (SCV and Medivac) and one of them costs money (repair).
Protoss regen isn't instant. Terran "regen" does indeed cost money but it's very minimal and very very fast.
Just try and make your points without being so hyperbolic, man. Both Zerg and Protoss have healing that is passive, and free. Terran heals Bio with resources, supply, and energy (Medivacs), and Terran repairs mechanical units and structures with resources, SCVs, time, and APM. It's not free. It's not instant, and you have to pay twice (money for the repair, and lost mining time).
Yes, Terran can fly their buildings (if you're not over that by now, I don't know what to tell you) but our buildings are the only ones that can be prevented from building (by killing the SCV). And of course, each building has a cost multiplier from lost mining time.
So--please--with the "insta-regen" talk. It's not true. What happens if I'm out in the field with my mech army, and they all get injured? How do I heal them? You know how. I sit there, spend time, spend APM, grab SCVs, send them out on the map, or march my ass back home, or just deal with the damage.
Every Zerg unit heals for free. Every Protoss unit regenerates shields for free. Both need to be out of combat. Terrain can spend money and supply to repair or heal while in combat. Asymmetric differences in the healing mechanics.
On October 08 2015 04:09 parkufarku wrote: insta-regen (repair),
What?! Protoss can insta regen, its called shields, terrans can't, they need special units for that (SCV and Medivac) and one of them costs money (repair).
Protoss regen isn't instant. Terran "regen" does indeed cost money but it's very minimal and very very fast.
It isn't if you take into consideration you need to get units for that, SCVs and Medivacs cost money and they take supply, supply that you don't have in fighting units.
The races are asymetrical but balanced, saying that terran is TOO flexible because it has things protoss don't is stupid because protoss has things terran doesn't.
We don't need any new units (with the exception of Science Vessel, and Goliath - in place of Thor). Merely replace Cyclone and Liberator with further Viking upgrades.
All respective roles, as was said, have been filled.
Yes, cyclone is bit lacking but it in a way, provided factory AA unit that could handle other liberators/viking without trying to maintain air superiority 100% of time; an alternative to maintaining your air superiority.
In theory, it should complement the mech army, by kiting in and out of siege tank/liberators to draw engegements, but fact is, the unit is judt too expensive, supply heavy and not nearly good enough to do that job. If you get it for AA role, it is too expensive to maintain and is more expensive than viking, which does better job at AA
I ho estly think it should judt be the disposable, mobile AA unit with ground attack as bonus, maybe limited to judt auto attack to keep short but decent dps
The Cyclone is probably the most retarded unit in the game at the moment, it's great against everything besides Speedlings, absolutely murders single units, cannot be micro'd against, and pretty much does all of the work for the Terran player.
Not even honestly sure what role this is supposed to fill, factor anti air? Give me a break, Terran already has the Liberator and Viking from Starport, why does every area of their tech tree need an anti air unit when 2/3 already have units that aren't just good against air units they are FANTASTIC. Marines shred any air unit in the game in decent numbers, Thors shy away Mutalisks plenty good on their own and with Viking backup especially, and Liberators are just great vs. air units as well as ground units.
Just scrap the unit, Blizzard has shown no hesitance in scrapping dumb units before so why not now? Terran didn't even need a new unit really.
On October 08 2015 02:58 91matt wrote: they should remove the liberator and cyclone and put in the goliath
Goliath exists in this game already. It's called the Viking.
Built from starport Cost higher than the old one. Longer attack cooldown more fragile does not benefit from damage ground upgrade. cooldown to switch both attack weapons much much higher.
We conclude from this that Viking IS NOT the Goliath, or it was obliterated with the nerf hammer that it had to change its name.
On October 08 2015 05:12 jpg06051992 wrote: The Cyclone is probably the most retarded unit in the game at the moment, it's great against everything besides Speedlings, absolutely murders single units, cannot be micro'd against, and pretty much does all of the work for the Terran player.
Not even honestly sure what role this is supposed to fill, factor anti air? Give me a break, Terran already has the Liberator and Viking from Starport, why does every area of their tech tree need an anti air unit when 2/3 already have units that aren't just good against air units they are FANTASTIC. Marines shred any air unit in the game in decent numbers, Thors shy away Mutalisks plenty good on their own and with Viking backup especially, and Liberators are just great vs. air units as well as ground units.
Just scrap the unit, Blizzard has shown no hesitance in scrapping dumb units before so why not now? Terran didn't even need a new unit really.
Because it's a tech tree that is entirely separate from bio? Because the split between air and ground mech weapon further emphasizes the separation between the tree? Because said upgrade facilities is unlocked after factory and costs gas? Because factory doesn't have direct ground to air unit that does sufficiently?
A ground to air mech unit would make it so tvt isn't always about air superiority but a healthy mix.
On October 08 2015 05:12 jpg06051992 wrote: The Cyclone is probably the most retarded unit in the game at the moment, it's great against everything besides Speedlings, absolutely murders single units, cannot be micro'd against, and pretty much does all of the work for the Terran player.
Not even honestly sure what role this is supposed to fill, factor anti air? Give me a break, Terran already has the Liberator and Viking from Starport, why does every area of their tech tree need an anti air unit when 2/3 already have units that aren't just good against air units they are FANTASTIC. Marines shred any air unit in the game in decent numbers, Thors shy away Mutalisks plenty good on their own and with Viking backup especially, and Liberators are just great vs. air units as well as ground units.
Just scrap the unit, Blizzard has shown no hesitance in scrapping dumb units before so why not now? Terran didn't even need a new unit really.
Because it's a tech tree that is entirely separate from bio? Because the split between air and ground mech weapon further emphasizes the separation between the tree? Because said upgrade facilities is unlocked after factory and costs gas? Because factory doesn't have direct ground to air unit that does sufficiently?
A ground to air mech unit would make it so tvt isn't always about air superiority but a healthy mix.
See I agree with all of this, but they could have accomplished all of this with 100% less retardism by just adding the Goliath, units shouldn't be introduced for a mirror match anyways. PvP has been a shit fest for so long because of how many balance changes and game designs have to be molded around it.
I disagree that all races have a complete arsenal. Mech needs more reliable aa than thors. If you get enough mutas a couple thors do nothing. I think a goliath like unit that is faster and has decent aa would be a great addition.
On October 08 2015 05:21 WhaleOFaTALE1 wrote: I disagree that all races have a complete arsenal. Mech needs more reliable aa than thors. If you get enough mutas a couple thors do nothing. I think a goliath like unit that is faster and has decent aa would be a great addition.
Goliath didn't even do that well against mass mutas I believe.
Thors do very well against mass mutas. Combine it with liberator and opponent is just asking for loss
What is a really sad about what you say Iaguz, is that you start it off with a basic discussion about game design.
Blizzard is literally clueless when they add units because they fail to understand game design these days. It is like they poll a bunch of pre-schools about unit designs, then throw them into the game willy nilly only to haphazardly remove the worst offenders, like the Warhound, Shedder, Replicant, old Oracle, ect...
You might say "well at least they are removing them, that is the point of a Beta!" The problem is that they wasted time, money and energy on these terrible units. The fact they even got out of the designers head when they were thinking up new units is just shocking. They never should have made it to paper, let alone the game.
And even worse, once removed, there wasn't a whole list of other changes surrounding the removal. You'd think if you remove X unit, Y unit and Z strategy would need to changed because X unit was used to counter said unit and strategy.
But not with Blizzard! You remove the Warhound, which had no role anyway, and nothing needs to be changed. Same with the Cyclone...
I have a suspicion the Cyclone is part of Blizzard's recent campaign to try and justify Chitinous Plating making Ultralisks immune to Bio units (Big Snipe and Anti-Armour Drone being the last two ideas implemented, gone unused and swiftly discarded) and it simply isn’t working.
100% agree. It feels like the cyclone was created as a specific response to a specific problem they created for seemingly no reason.
On October 08 2015 05:26 BisuDagger wrote: Why not have a mule upgrade at 100/125 cost to become a permanent unit with weak ground and strong aa attack. It will receive armory upgrades too.
On October 08 2015 05:24 WhaleOFaTALE1 wrote: Sounds like we all agree? cyclone out, goliath in!
Why not scrap the Widow MineSC2 too and add VulturesBW instead?
On a more serious note, it would be really interesting to hear their reasoning for not replacing the Cyclone with the Goliath, as IIRC their approach with designing SC2 has been quite different up until LotV (If you want BW, go play BW, it's an awesome game, but SC2 is different). So with Valkyries, Reavers and Lurkers being in the game what's their argument against adding another BW unit people would actually be happy about since the early WoL days?
No, really, joking aside. Nobody likes the Cyclone and the Thor has become redundant with Liberators in place. The Odin was already planned in the Original HotS beta, and was actually pretty cool addition to both Mech and Bio armies.
I dont really like any of the new units, they just seem to be adding them because thats what blizzard do in rts expansions. Especially for terran they seem to be adding units that just overlap since it is such a complete race and hence are just weird. I dont really think they should have added the units terran got in HotS tbh. Honestly I think that MAYBE with the exception of the adept and the disruptor (just to replace the colossus) the only things that would be good to put in lotv are a revamp of the existing mechanics/units (e.g the economy system).
Yea I think it's a terrible unit. The Lockon nonsense feels contrived and out of place in sc2. But they are rarely made so who cares right? At least that's how I feel about it. I don't think there's anything wrong with having units that just don't see competitive play outside of extremely niche situations.
I don't even know the hotkey for it after 150 beta games; that should tell you how much I use the unit - and I only play mech. Thors deal with ultras just fine...
On October 08 2015 06:06 KawaiiSCV wrote: REMOVE CYCLONE AND THOR
GIVE US THE ODIN
No, really, joking aside. Nobody likes the Cyclone and the Thor has become redundant with Liberators in place. The Odin was already planned in the Original HotS beta, and was actually pretty cool addition to both Mech and Bio armies.
Thors can advance much better than Liberators. In a mech ball I'll take thors over liberators any day to counter ultras since most just circumvent the firing radius of a liberator. Don't get me wrong 4-5 liberators are good for securing expansions, but advancing with them is a different story with the siege timing.
What Iaguz wrote here was exactly how I felt regarding Cyclone the moment I saw them, a unit that is either to weak or too strong, nearly impossible to get right, dumb inorganic design. What saddens me most though, is that me, and several others were able to spot the bad design right from the get go, but Blizzard wasn't able to, and wasted so much time making a unit that doesn't really fill any role and is also by design stupidly hard to balance, and even if balanced probably wouldn't be fun to play against.
Part of the problem of discussing a better design of the Cyclone is that you can barely hear yourself talk over all the people who pointlessly demand the Goliath back.
As a Terran player I dont even know when to make a Cyclone -- their role is not obvious to me. I'd be happy if they scrapped the cyclone and the thor and brought back the Brood War Goliath w/ the range upgrade. The Thor does suck massively, even it is not really that useful outside of dealing with noobs that clump up their mutas.
Alas, I think we're too far down the beta path for anything to be drastically changed w/ the Cyclone other than its balanced numbers -- so we probably just need to focus on that for now.
Edit: Yeah, I guess Thors are for anti-Ultralisks and that's about it.
On October 08 2015 06:10 hitpoint wrote: Yea I think it's a terrible unit. The Lockon nonsense feels contrived and out of place in sc2. But they are rarely made so who cares right? At least that's how I feel about it. I don't think there's anything wrong with having units that just don't see competitive play outside of extremely niche situations.
this. Just let them add units to advertise the new expansion but keep them out of competitive play. Better no new units than terrible units. swarmhost, tempests and oracles were enough.
Iaguz has finally come around to the idea of criticizing bad game design in SC2? I'm pleasantly surprised and agree with the general opinion of the article.
On October 08 2015 08:53 iamcaustic wrote: Iaguz has finally come around to the idea of criticizing bad game design in SC2? I'm pleasantly surprised and agree with the general opinion of the article.
It's more critical of bad design of a single unit amongst a few other gripes with new toys they're testing, rather than bad game design overall.
I think the article itself is an important one and iaguz makes several really poignant points. Hopefully it's not too late to revisit the unit before launch.
On October 08 2015 06:10 hitpoint wrote: Yea I think it's a terrible unit. The Lockon nonsense feels contrived and out of place in sc2. But they are rarely made so who cares right? At least that's how I feel about it. I don't think there's anything wrong with having units that just don't see competitive play outside of extremely niche situations.
this. Just let them add units to advertise the new expansion but keep them out of competitive play. Better no new units than terrible units. swarmhost, tempests and oracles were enough.
but blizzard doesnt work like that. There's going to be some point in the next year when terran struggles with something when DK will come out and say: "we would like to push the cyclone a little to help in these situations". like the way they are currently considering to buff SHs again. but I guess you could say that blizzard doesnt scrap a unit either. at lest not at this stage.
Remove lock-on, drop damage point to 0, add turret tracking, change damage to 20+10 armored, change range to 6 or 7, bump speed to stalker speed (2.93)
Done, you have your straightforward single-target skirmisher and poking unit, without the lock-on that everyone seems to hate so much. It's still not cost effective in straight-up fights, but it's can kill static-d and establish map control against slower units. In main army fights you can use it to poke and force engagements under the cover of your own positional units (Liberators, mines, tanks).
What really baffles me is that people prefer Thors to Cyclones (redesigned or not). The Thor is a clunky, unmicro-able, eyesore that was an embarrassment from day one. At least the Cyclone has some potential to be interesting.
On October 08 2015 09:27 Athenau wrote: Remove lock-on, drop damage point to 0, add turret tracking, change damage to 20+10 armored, change range to 6 or 7, bump speed to stalker speed (2.93)
Done, you have your straightforward single-target skirmisher and poking unit, without the lock-on that everyone seems to hate so much. It's still not cost effective in straight-up fights, but it's can kill static-d and establish map control against slower units. In main army fights you can use it to poke and force engagements under the cover of your own positional units (Liberators, mines, tanks).
What really baffles me is that people prefer Thors to Cyclones (redesigned or not). The Thor is a clunky, unmicro-able, eyesore that was an embarrassment from day one. At least the Cyclone has some potential to be interesting.
Hm, I guess I agree, at least with maybe 3 or 4 months of balance changes after release (when the Koreans start playing) it will be okay, it's at least able to be shaped into a decent unit I suppose where the Thor is just beyond saving.
On October 08 2015 09:27 Athenau wrote: Remove lock-on, drop damage point to 0, add turret tracking, change damage to 20+10 armored, change range to 6 or 7, bump speed to stalker speed (2.93)
Done, you have your straightforward single-target skirmisher and poking unit, without the lock-on that everyone seems to hate so much. It's still not cost effective in straight-up fights, but it's can kill static-d and establish map control against slower units. In main army fights you can use it to poke and force engagements under the cover of your own positional units (Liberators, mines, tanks).
What really baffles me is that people prefer Thors to Cyclones (redesigned or not). The Thor is a clunky, unmicro-able, eyesore that was an embarrassment from day one. At least the Cyclone has some potential to be interesting.
Yeah, just some form of assault mech unit with decent mobility would be nice. Though I think it should have it's gascost dropped a bit in such a design, don't wanna trade 1:1 gas units against basic units.
It's inorganic, it's not fun, and it's got more problems than benefits
Of course it's inorganic -- it's mech! huehuehue
In all seriousness, three comments:
1. Fantastic picture 2. Well written -- I like the conversational style 3. Ever since last year I've wondered what new units Terran would get. As a spectator/noob myself, they really did seem complete. After reading this I definitely think the cyclone should go, but like you I'm not sure what else Terran needs/could use. Maybe another caster? The ghost needs some love before that, though....
But the Cyclone is designed from the outset to be the ultimate kiting machine. Once it locks on it outranges anything short of a deployed Siege tank or a Tempest, assuming it can maintain line of sight, and can theoretically defeat any unit in a 1v1 situation so long as it can maintain that Lock On and remain out of their attack range.
Iaguz
lol , that is all that one can say.
Blizzard reduce the strategies in SC2 for unit designs like this and widow mine? No wonder SC2 is so predictable and many games just played out the same way. This is why SC2 is not as strong as it should/could be.
I still play it, but I know I need to have the right build order, that is 90% of SC2, which is dull and predictable.
It's inorganic, it's not fun, and it's got more problems than benefits
Of course it's inorganic -- it's mech! huehuehue
In all seriousness, three comments:
1. Fantastic picture 2. Well written -- I like the conversational style 3. Ever since last year I've wondered what new units Terran would get. As a spectator/noob myself, they really did seem complete. After reading this I definitely think the cyclone should go, but like you I'm not sure what else Terran needs/could use. Maybe another caster? The ghost needs some love before that, though....
Mech AA (having to depend on Factory units for this makes many games develop into mass air strats, wich suck specially in TvT)
A fast skirmish unit that allows mech to be more rounded (try defending a drop with hellbats and unsieged tanks)
Are two very important roles to fill in terran ATM.
TBH, i don't understand this artcile when it talks about being unfun to play against? I myself have not experienced anyone being frustrated by cyclones and "unfairness". No streamers I have watched recently have voiced this concern either. I mean.... it just doesn't seem to be problematic to fight against and massing them isn't even effective... I will say however as a Terran player I have no desire to build this unit.
Like it or not cyclone is a necessary map control unit for mech against protoss. It took years for Blizzard to accept that hellions and benshees can't do the job and some sort of vulture replacement is needed. The current design may be questionable but we really have no idea if it works until TvP moves into post-adept era. Right now you are asking the analogue of 'What are battlecruisers for when I end every game with a bunker rush?'.
The new units are not designed very well, especially Terran. This post sums it up for one unit, but I'd say there's still a lot of work to do all over the place for the new units.
I know the work "gimmick" gets thrown out a lot, but that's exactly what's going on again. It's what the Widow Mines and Swarm Hosts were at the beginning of HotS, and I'm afraid we might be in for a long wait before these units become practical additions to compositions.
The versatility that units are supposed to provide in an RTS seems to not be a design focus of this team. Instead of creating units that are simple to use and execute but still have a lot of room for growth within their depth of micro, these units are just specialized nonsensical additions to a game that wasn't asking for any of them.
Zerg is about the only exception here. Both the Ravager and Lurker have potential as additions to this game. Adepts are also a decent addition to gateway units, but still need to find their place. However, that's where it stops.
The Cyclone seems to be workaround unit to replace what the Goliath used to do, similar to how the Disruptor is a workaround for the Reaver. The problem is, that those Brood War units had versatility, and these new ones are much clunkier. They don't feel fun to use.. instead they feel more like a chore. The extent of their micro mostly makes them one-trick ponies.
This doesn't mean we need to scrap them, but they need to be overhauled.. that includes the Liberator as well. Look at the rest of the units in the game, and make them work well in tandem. If they're simple to use at face value but can provide depth by allowing room to breathe within their micro capabilities, these units might be able to someday find a niche within the game's compositions. Let's hope that's sooner than later.
it could really use a cost nerf that came wiht hp/general other nerfs.
Its also really damn cost heavy. Since it isn't great massed, maybe have it nerfed slightly (more emphasis on AA maybe) and nerf supply to 2 and maybe 150/100 or 125/100
Scrap the cyclone and add the Goliath, make Thor always target ground first unless focus fired (but still aoe damage against air, woho for actually needing to micro) add Goliath with rapid fire against ground(many shots but weak ones, means strong against units with low armor but weak against armored targets. Opposite of Thor) Make the Goliath target air first and have it be missiles(or whatever it is in sc1) with heavy single target damage.
This gives Thor and Goliath opposite kits against ground while both are strong against air but in different ways, one doing single target and one doing aoe. Making Thor AA micro interesting and also removing the heavy payload fluff that is not interesting and is barely ever used anyway.
terran was a very well rounded race already in WoL, thats the reason they always got the worst unit concepts in expansions, at least the liberator is fun and interesting...
hots they got the awful widow mine because blizzard did not want to reintroduce vultures. they got another stupid transformer-unit in the hellbat, that had to have bandaid fixes like unlogical cargo size to balance it, and they initially got what was arguably the worst designed unit in any blizzard RTS ever, fully showcasing the amount of incompetence in the development team and needing a heavy counter reaction from the community to be scrapped
in lotv they got what have to be the two visually worst designed units since the warhound - both the liberator and the cyclone look stupid and un-terrany. at least the liberator is a fun, fresh and interesting concept...
I think it could have been interesting if it was a primary anti air unit, as an alternative to the Viking. Being a ground unit it wouldn't give the vision advantage the Viking has, but having decent HP and a mediocre anti ground attack, it could also harass bases with light defenses when Hellions are shot down.
The fact that there is a large enough portion of players with game knowledge that don't even understand this unit, or when to use it shows just how poorly designed it is.
I'm sure they will give it a role with some future patch where it becomes the specific counter to some other poorly designed unit, probably the Swarm Host after they are done buffing that enough to force it's poor design down our throats.
Terran have had enough units in their arsenal since WoL. The problem has always been that a shit ton of them simply weren't useful.
Why Blizzard has bothered to add additional units while continuing to ignore units like the Ghost, Battlecruiser and Raven and not acknowledging the horrible design of units like the Thor is beyond my understanding.
The Cyclone AND the Liberator could both easily be done away with and the Viking, Battlecruiser and Thor could both be changed to be more useful.
Wouldn't it be much cooler if the lock-on ability would reward you for keeping a specific target in range, instead of guaranteeing it? You'd have micro and counter-micro, and if the enemy pulls back your Cyclones would need to follow out of your otherwise defensive position so there is a positioning aspect to it as well.
For instance, let's start with this:
On October 08 2015 19:22 carcelink wrote: Mmm... What about giving the Cyclone an upgrade to make more damage to Massive Units, like Carriers, Broodlords...
What if we make lock-on an anti-air only ability that does normal damage for let's say the first three attacks, and after three consecutive attacks the Cyclone fires a missile volley for massive damage. That could threaten capital ships or force them to retreat.
Combine that with the following:
On October 08 2015 09:27 Athenau wrote: Remove lock-on, drop damage point to 0, add turret tracking, change damage to 20+10 armored, change range to 6 or 7, bump speed to stalker speed (2.93)
Done, you have your straightforward single-target skirmisher and poking unit, without the lock-on that everyone seems to hate so much. It's still not cost effective in straight-up fights, but it's can kill static-d and establish map control against slower units. In main army fights you can use it to poke and force engagements under the cover of your own positional units (Liberators, mines, tanks).
And you'd have a unit that feel rewarding to use and has an actual purpose.
On October 08 2015 22:40 Champi wrote: well said guz, i agree. I hate the unit too.
i still say Terran needs irradiate. not sure why they gave it to the viper without scrapping corrupters either
They gave something similar to the Ghosts in the form of Snipe, or Steady Targeting as it is now known. I cannot honestly say if it;s overpowered or not but I believe the potential is there. Only that it will take a better Terran than I to show everyone this.
I love how this thread has become a back door for vehement Liberator hate, lol. It reads something like, "Like, dude. Great article about the Cyclone. How about that useless unit the Cyclone? You know ... now that I think about it, maybe we should get rid of that--uhm, you know--that Liberator? Yeah. I'm a genius! Let's scrap it. The Liberator. Sound good? Do we agree? Sweeeeet ... no more Liberator, guys! We did it! *Zerg and Toss High Five*"
Lulz.
I'm a little confused though ... what is a Cyclone? Is that a new Raven spell?
So far I think what's cool about the Lock-On is the counter micro that is possible, granted there's not a whole lot. Blink, Phoenix Lift, Load Up and stuff like that, I think buffing the units stats and marginally decreasing the cooldown on Lock-On, while buffing it, would make it a lot more interesting. Should be super crucial to target the big unit you want dead with Lock-On and then for the opponent to get out of it.
As of now it's just an annoying ground Phoenix which doesn't do what the user wants it to and it's also annoying for the opponent, because there's not a lot of counter play against it that is actually viable.
The generic counter-play to lock-on is breaking vision (vision range is much shorter than the leash range of 15), which is easy for units that are naturally faster than the Cyclone, or that have abilities that allow them to do the same thing (blink, burrow, drop pick-ups).
I think that's interesting--vision is an underused mechanic in general and if the Cyclone sees more use maybe it'll become more important.
And let's be realistic, the unit is not going to be removed at this late stage, and it isn't going to be redesigned. So the best we can hope for is that Blizzard balances it properly. And, give them credit, Blizzard is very good at making these sorts of fine balance adjustments.
The unit seems a touch undertuned at the moment, so I expect the next patch to bring a small buff (like lower lock-on cooldown or slightly higher speed).
For all you people bitching and moaning about overlapping units, at least complain about the right thing. If you want to remove units, jettison godawful crap like the Thor and BC which do nothing but promote cancerous deathball play.
Amen brother.... they should just give the cyclone some sort of transform ability that changes it into something useful like let's say.. a Rail Gun perhaps that deals insane damage to massive units??
Since the popular opinion is to think there are no holes in the terran arsenal I think we should scrap the cyclone, the hellbat and the thor, also get rid of the armory.
I mean since terran is ONLY bio and ONLY bio is complete, who needs to mech when you can make the "Oh so complete" bio all the time, is not like people like to play with different strats and compositions right?
Viking has the anti-armor long range air missile attack covered. But what if the Cyclone and the Thor were cut to add the Goliath back in with anti-light long range air missiles? The best part of the Thor is the anti-air attack. Its anti ground attack (despite its crazy single target DPS) is actually marginal due to the long wind up time and the poor stacking of Thors (consider their DPS per game board area). If you wanted the Cyclone's kite role, you could make the AL-Goliath's machine gun fire on the move at 7 range for only 10 damage or something. Then the AL-Goliath could be used against low numbers of harassing melee units without being a big death-ball contributor to anti ground.
//Has anyone else noticed that the guns on the Thor's back are 100% useless in game now? How can they go to release with such an iconic element of the Thor never being able to fire in game?
//If Thors were cut, I think Siege tank Siege mode should get anti-massive damage bonus on top of the anti-armor bonus, as some kind of answer for Ultras.
Cyclone is the only ugly unit in starcraft.. its much more than just ugly.. eh i've no power to explain..... i really hope blizzard will kick the cyclone as fast as possible. just change the cyclone, make goliath .. its will be much, much better damn...
On October 09 2015 02:02 felisconcolori wrote: Wait. What if they made it so the cyclone, like the hellion and viking, could transform?
Into a Warhound, probably.
What if they made it transform into the liberator and reworked both units a little so their abilities were more similar?
I've seen the transform thing a few times now, and I think I like it. But part of me thinks the design needs to be closer to what the unit already is, because of impending release date.
CYCLONE TRANSFORM IDEA - Get rid of lock on - Transform (A) is anti-ground attack. - Transform (B) is anti-air attack. - Tweak each mode so that it behaves and feels different.
Or you could make the Cyclone a mech healer, like the medivac. It's pea-shooter kinda looks like a grappling hook. Maybe give it a grappling hook ability to micro mech units around with it (sieged tanks, mainly, and this assumes medivac tanks go away). Doing this would remove the Cyclone's attack completely. Rework cost, etc ...
But, I would gladly forfeit the Cyclone for a Tier (3) unit that doesn't suck.
It would help if the visuals and sound didn't suck. In BW upgraded Goliaths shot awesome blue missiles everywhere while making a cool noise. Cyclones just make a weak-ass pewpew sound and you can barely see the projectiles. Balance and design issues aside, the unit desperately needs another FX pass.
Blizz said that they won't do any changes from now apart small balance updates. I don't think there will be any unit changes. Just think about the LotV tourneys starting from November 10th when it's released.
I'm of the opinion that while I totally hate the unit and think it is both ugly and low skill cap that it can still be salvaged through balance tweaks post release?
On October 09 2015 05:20 Athenau wrote: It would help if the visuals and sound didn't suck. In BW upgraded Goliaths shot awesome blue missiles everywhere while making a cool noise. Cyclones just make a weak-ass pewpew sound and you can barely see the projectiles. Balance and design issues aside, the unit desperately needs another FX pass.
Thank you, Iaguz.. I have been trying to find a use. I can't find one single use for Cyclones, maybe to kill a couple stalkers or roaches until they get A moved on in the later game...
Doesn't the auto lock-on have a cooldown? Say, a half of the kiting period? If it does, it can be simply defeated with a large number of fast and cheap small units i.e. speedlings, stimmed marines, or blink stalkers, even chargelots. However, this won't be a problem for the pros who can manually target at specific enemy units to lock on.
good post! I think the real issue however is that sc feels like you HAVE to make a new unit for the new exp. New game, new shit! Im pretty sure noone would be talking or playing sc2 if they went full port of hots but changed the way all units worked instead . . but i could be wrong with that because im never bored of this game . . so at least id be playing . .
Im still in the camp that not everyone is playing lotv, i mean really, im not seeing anything but archon from real pros. If nothing changes by christmas, im sure we can either call this post a good shout or let the community figure out the cyclones viability throughout the game.
im always convinced when blizz release new units, they know the spot its trying to fill so the play testers utilise it in this manner and it has their desired results. Give it to 1 million players of varying skill and then, as you put it, a by product of design people start the abuse or infact the total wrong way to utliise it. Im pretty sure one of their play tests would have been mass cyclone and over many games it didnt seem to be a problem if the other guy knew or scouted it was happening
Its quite frustrating to see how everything is turning out to be (a cluster f*** of unit design) especially when you see how the design has evolved from its predecessor.
In BW, factory units consisted of the vulture, tank and goliath. The vulture would be the fast unit which occupied several key roles like being meatshields for the tanks, zoning space via mini nukes and harass. The tank is the core ground firepower for the mech army but is very immobile. Goliaths provide the essential AA (instead of having to get air units) and were easily accessible. The beautiful thing about these three units was that the factory could stand on its own and depending on the enemy composition, all one had to do was adjust the ratio of the 3 as the game went along.
In HOTS, we get widow mines, hellions, tanks and thors. Widow mines overlap with siege tanks plus they also hit air. Hellions while being able to harass and be meatshields ala hellbats don't quite zone space (spider mines imo was one of the most important pieces for an mech army as it covered up immobility weakness). Siege tanks don't have enough firepower yet they cost more and take up more supply (plus a million hard counters). Thors are too clumsy and mineral intensive to provide a solid AA option requiring need for starport units ala viking. Unlike its predecessor the factory units NEED the support from starport based units. One cannot just adjust the ratio between the 4 to take on different type of enemy composition. Needless to say, the factory units here act better as support units.
Now in LOTV, we get two more additional units in the form of the liberator and cyclones. Liberators are literally a flying thor with siege mode for AtG. Cyclones on the other hand I have no idea what role they are trying to fill (Plus the lock on ability just doesnt fit in the world of SC). What are the purpose of these two units? Why not just take out the siege tank and have the liberator only because the way I see it, they've combined two units that somewhat get rid of each others weakness e.g. can get only attacked by air units so one can't just mass zealots say in TvP against a liberator line and ignores terrain and is fast unlike a thor.
Its a complete mess. From a perfect harmony of 3 well thought out units to 4 units that is less efficient at the same task at hand into 2 additional units that make others redundant or don't have any real advantage as into why they are there in the first place.
Imo all they had to do was the following: -Replace thors with cheaper more accessible GtA AA option. Be it a goliath or something idm because it takes far too long and far too many resources to get thors only to get tech switched or magic boxed. Not only that but they are very slow. This also means that you won't get viking vs viking wars because I can go with a ground unit to offset that air advantage**. -Tanks need to be lower supply/cost less or simply do more damage to certain types e.g. massive/light or shields. Especially against protoss. I think this has been spoken out for the past 5 years. -Hellions/hellbats are somewhat ok but i always liked the idea of hellions with abilities to drop flaming bettys (forgot the TL user who suggested this idea) to zone space or add more to the meat shielding because the transformation between one type to another is so cumbersome.
**I really dont like how they are putting TOO much emphasis on air units especially AtG options at each races disposal. Air units are far too powerful throughout this game without the proper ground AA units. The air vs ground dynamic is too onesided imo and there was a reason why most AtG attacks were pitiful in BW other than capital ships..
On October 10 2015 06:25 Ovid wrote: Well this backfired horribly.
Blizzard didn't make the current balance iteration based on a day of testing after this thread being posted to the community feedback update. It hasn't backfired, it has generated valuable discussion.
EPT
.
![[image loading]](http://gamersyndrome.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/thor.jpg)
