EPTThe obvious fix is to disable the regular weapon when lock-on is active. Or just increase the regular weapon range to 7 to match the lock-on range.
Serious problem (or Bug?) on Cyclone - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Athenau
571 Posts
The obvious fix is to disable the regular weapon when lock-on is active. Or just increase the regular weapon range to 7 to match the lock-on range. | ||
|
cheekymonkey
France1387 Posts
On February 07 2016 06:55 Athenau wrote: The obvious fix is to disable the regular weapon when lock-on is active. What do you mean by that, isn't it already disabled when lock-on is activated? | ||
|
Athenau
571 Posts
| ||
|
Jaaaaasper
United States10225 Posts
| ||
|
StateSC2
Korea (South)621 Posts
On February 06 2016 21:57 [Disruptor] wrote: The normal Attack of Cyclone has range of 5, and the Lock-on has a range of 7, ... but somehow, it locks target on range of 5, which is the range of normal attack! We also tested by casting Lock-on Skill manually, still, it casts it's lock-on on range of 5! This isn't true, and can be verified in a unit tester. ![[image loading]](https://i.imgflip.com/yqkms.gif) Excuse the low quality GIF (I have no idea what I'm doing), but here you can see a Cyclone locking on to an Archon at Range 7, in contrast to a Reaper attacking an Archon at Range 5. One thing I did notice is that although the Lock On Range is, in fact, 7, the Cyclone is kind of stupid and wants to keep charging at the Archon until it is at Range 5. While you can avoid that by simply controlling the Cyclone, I agree that Blizzard should remove this behavior in a future patch. | ||
|
StateSC2
Korea (South)621 Posts
On February 07 2016 07:59 StateSC2 wrote: This isn't true, and can be verified in a unit tester. Excuse the low quality GIF (I have no idea what I'm doing), but here you can see a Cyclone locking on to an Archon at Range 7, in contrast to a Reaper attacking an Archon at Range 5. One thing I did notice is that although the Lock On Range is, in fact, 7, the Cyclone is kind of stupid and wants to keep charging at the Archon until it is at Range 5. While you can avoid that by simply controlling the Cyclone, I agree that Blizzard should remove this behavior in a future patch. Playing around further in the unit tester, it seems the best way to avoid this behavior is to shift-queue both locking on and moving away. Here's an example: ![[image loading]](https://i.imgflip.com/yql5j.gif) | ||
|
cheekymonkey
France1387 Posts
| ||
|
Athenau
571 Posts
| ||
|
Loccstana
United States833 Posts
Blizzard how about giving back the cyclone that you promised us in the beta: | ||
|
TwiggyWan
France337 Posts
| ||
|
seemsgood
5527 Posts
On February 07 2016 07:51 Jaaaaasper wrote: I think Cyclone is just bad game design. In the beta it was massively over powered, now its really awful. Something is bad about the basic design if there is no middle ground between op and useless. Yeah they nerfed it because they don't want people mass cyclone.Compare with disruptor you can't mass it too because in direct engage you can't micro too much ball while you micro other unit but in small number they are very cost effect if use correctly. And cyclone.....Like disruptor it's very bad when en masses but when you build small number it's nowhere has the same impact as disruptor despite same cost and supply. Even with current issue disruptor's design is much better than cyclone imo. | ||
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
| ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20327 Posts
On February 06 2016 22:44 Charoisaur wrote: How could nobody notice this yet? I've noticed it a bunch, thought it was intentional design or opponents mismicroing but they tend to walk into your stuff unneccesarily | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2656 Posts
On February 07 2016 09:09 TwiggyWan wrote: what's the "normal attack of cyclone" that has range 5 the OP is talking about? The regular attack, kind of how ravager have 2 attacks, the corrosive bile and the normal attack Also. On February 07 2016 08:05 StateSC2 wrote: + Show Spoiler + On February 07 2016 07:59 StateSC2 wrote: This isn't true, and can be verified in a unit tester. Excuse the low quality GIF (I have no idea what I'm doing), but here you can see a Cyclone locking on to an Archon at Range 7, in contrast to a Reaper attacking an Archon at Range 5. One thing I did notice is that although the Lock On Range is, in fact, 7, the Cyclone is kind of stupid and wants to keep charging at the Archon until it is at Range 5. While you can avoid that by simply controlling the Cyclone, I agree that Blizzard should remove this behavior in a future patch. Playing around further in the unit tester, it seems the best way to avoid this behavior is to shift-queue both locking on and moving away. Here's an example: Thats if you have 1 cyclone and you are controlling only that 1 cyclones, as you get more units and, more importantly, more cyclones, it becomes much less responsive. | ||
|
hellokitty[hk]
United States1309 Posts
| ||
|
[Disruptor]
5 Posts
On February 07 2016 07:59 StateSC2 wrote: This isn't true, and can be verified in a unit tester. Excuse the low quality GIF (I have no idea what I'm doing), but here you can see a Cyclone locking on to an Archon at Range 7, in contrast to a Reaper attacking an Archon at Range 5. One thing I did notice is that although the Lock On Range is, in fact, 7, the Cyclone is kind of stupid and wants to keep charging at the Archon until it is at Range 5. While you can avoid that by simply controlling the Cyclone, I agree that Blizzard should remove this behavior in a future patch. really? so I did experiments again. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lEEJnjj.gif) but Very different results came out. | ||
|
[Disruptor]
5 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/hUyT2rM.gif) well, cyclone hit from bunkered marine. | ||
|
freeAll
34 Posts
| ||
|
phantomfive
Korea (South)404 Posts
| ||
| ||
