|
On February 07 2016 14:36 [Disruptor] wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 07:59 StateSC2 wrote: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. really? so I did experiments again. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lEEJnjj.gif) but Very different results came out.
The Cyclone locks on at Range 7, but moves forward until Range 5. This is visible in both GIFs you linked. The easiest way to demonstrate this is to shift-queue a move command after ordering a Lock On, like so:
![[image loading]](https://i.imgflip.com/yql5j.gif)
..or tell the Cyclone to Hold Position as soon as you hear the unit Lock On.
You can prevent the Cyclone from moving forward by issuing another command, but it will still want to drift and 'chase' whatever is in front of it/whatever it's attacking, much like a Marine will move towards a group of Stalkers if they're close enough.
In my opinion, the best way to fix this issue would be to increase the default attack range of the Cyclone from 5 to 7. It doesn't make sense for its base range to be so low, even when not Locked On.
|
There are people that have been complaining cyclone's AI behavior for a while
Surprised so many people here still don't know and mistake it as a lock-on range bug
EDIT: and the amount of people don't read the comments : P
|
"In my opinion, the best way to fix this issue would be to increase the default attack range of the Cyclone from 5 to 7. It doesn't make sense for its base range to be so low, even when not Locked On."
yes, i agree this opinion. 
|
|
|
On February 07 2016 16:48 StateSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 14:36 [Disruptor] wrote:On February 07 2016 07:59 StateSC2 wrote: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. 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. but Very different results came out. The Cyclone locks on at Range 7, but moves forward until Range 5. This is visible in both GIFs you linked. The easiest way to demonstrate this is to shift-queue a move command after ordering a Lock On, like so: ..or tell the Cyclone to Hold Position as soon as you hear the unit Lock On. You can prevent the Cyclone from moving forward by issuing another command, but it will still want to drift and 'chase' whatever is in front of it/whatever it's attacking, much like a Marine will move towards a group of Stalkers if they're close enough. In my opinion, the best way to fix this issue would be to increase the default attack range of the Cyclone from 5 to 7. It doesn't make sense for its base range to be so low, even when not Locked On.
So it works if you target an individual unit but not if your move/attack command goes inside of 7 yards?
|
I think this debate whether lock-on is 5 range or 7 range is all for naught. The cyclone is so worthless right now nobody in their mind would actually use it to win games. Blizzard needs to completely revamp this unit or remove it.
|
Should stay the way it is, that way it takes more control/skill/awareness to execute properly
|
On February 07 2016 20:50 BalanceEnforcer wrote:
Should stay the way it is, that way it takes more control/skill/awareness to execute properly
Terran has enough of those units already, thanks.
|
And all of them do terrible terrible damage.
|
On February 07 2016 16:25 phantomfive wrote:
That explains how Maru lost his cyclone against Zest, when it wandered a little too far forward into the range of the pylon attack
Also how taeja got into pylon range with his cyclone before he killed the Protoss 3rd.
|
So it works if you target an individual unit but not if your move/attack command goes inside of 7 yards?
No, it will lock-on at range 7 with autocast as well.
|
United Kingdom20344 Posts
On February 07 2016 19:48 Loccstana wrote:
I think this debate whether lock-on is 5 range or 7 range is all for naught. The cyclone is so worthless right now nobody in their mind would actually use it to win games. Blizzard needs to completely revamp this unit or remove it.
7 range is a big deal because it means outranging PO and Stalkers. Right now terrans everywhere are derping their cyclones into taking hits whenever trying to lock on, especially with more than one. With the scan range effect thing in legacy and 7 range, they'd never take a single hit
|
On February 07 2016 22:09 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +So it works if you target an individual unit but not if your move/attack command goes inside of 7 yards?
No, it will lock-on at range 7 with autocast as well.
Yes, but will it continue the a-move command to within 5 unless you target (r-click) a specific unit? (Unless you a-move right to the scan range)
Also, what's the scan range? (Will it move from 8 -> 7 on it's own to engage lock on if it's not on hold-command?)
|
Yes, but will it continue the a-move command to within 5 unless you target (r-click) a specific unit? (Unless you a-move right to the scan range)
AFAICT, it'll continue moving to range 5 whether you manually target or not.
Also, what's the scan range? (Will it move from 8 -> 7 on it's own to engage lock on if it's not on hold-command?)
Looks to be 7, though someone would have to check the editor to be sure.
|
I would guess this is because the regular attack of the Cyclone is not properly deactivated while locking on. If the attack was deactivated the Cyclone would not try to move closer. So I presume this should be a trivial fix.
|
On February 07 2016 23:35 RoomOfMush wrote:
I would guess this is because the regular attack of the Cyclone is not properly deactivated while locking on. If the attack was deactivated the Cyclone would not try to move closer. So I presume this should be a trivial fix.
It's not just about deactivating regular attack. What should it do, act like an infestor and walk into the enemy on attack move? Most reasonably it should have attack range 7.
|
On February 08 2016 00:21 cheekymonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 23:35 RoomOfMush wrote:
I would guess this is because the regular attack of the Cyclone is not properly deactivated while locking on. If the attack was deactivated the Cyclone would not try to move closer. So I presume this should be a trivial fix. It's not just about deactivating regular attack. What should it do, act like an infestor and walk into the enemy on attack move? Most reasonably it should have attack range 7.
That is a good point. So, what you say is to change the attack range to 7 only during lock on? That would probably work.
|
On February 07 2016 22:31 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 19:48 Loccstana wrote:
I think this debate whether lock-on is 5 range or 7 range is all for naught. The cyclone is so worthless right now nobody in their mind would actually use it to win games. Blizzard needs to completely revamp this unit or remove it. 7 range is a big deal because it means outranging PO and Stalkers. Right now terrans everywhere are derping their cyclones into taking hits whenever trying to lock on, especially with more than one. With the scan range effect thing in legacy and 7 range, they'd never take a single hit
Photon Overcharge has range 7, so that wouldn't change anything. They would outrange Stalkers but like most units they'd still have to stop to fire so they would take hits unless they use their ability.
|
United Kingdom20344 Posts
On February 08 2016 01:50 Empirimancer wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 22:31 Cyro wrote:On February 07 2016 19:48 Loccstana wrote:
I think this debate whether lock-on is 5 range or 7 range is all for naught. The cyclone is so worthless right now nobody in their mind would actually use it to win games. Blizzard needs to completely revamp this unit or remove it. 7 range is a big deal because it means outranging PO and Stalkers. Right now terrans everywhere are derping their cyclones into taking hits whenever trying to lock on, especially with more than one. With the scan range effect thing in legacy and 7 range, they'd never take a single hit Photon Overcharge has range 7, so that wouldn't change anything. They would outrange Stalkers but like most units they'd still have to stop to fire so they would take hits unless they use their ability.
Ah, wasn't 100% sure on the numbers
They would outrange Stalkers but like most units they'd still have to stop to fire so they would take hits unless they use their ability.
Stalkers outrange marines by 1 and have to stop to fire with a pretty long animation, they still don't get hit with good control. Higher range + higher speed gives better kiting now than before
|
Maybe buff the cyclone by giving it an oracle like attack, but increasing range of lock on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
