Cyclone Damage 11 + 2 vs armored -> 10 + 5 vs armored, +1 (+1 vs armored) per upgrade Speed 3.6 to 3.94, 5.1 to 4.96 after upgrade Upgrade now additionally increases health by 20, Cost 100/100 -> 150/150
...
And yes Vision i do agree that changing it so that the damage gives a bonus to Shield or Mechanical would be better than Armored. We don't need it to be good vs non-armored, we already have Hellions and WMs for that.
Happy to agree with you, in the case of mechanical bonus, TvT and TvP will take account of bonus damage. In this scenario Mech against Mech will be bloody for Hellions and Hellbats but it s assuming their zero cost in gas, so why not.
Cyclone Damage 11 + 2 vs armored -> 10 + 5 vs armored, +1 (+1 vs armored) per upgrade Speed 3.6 to 3.94, 5.1 to 4.96 after upgrade Upgrade now additionally increases health by 20, Cost 100/100 -> 150/150
Wow so it's more specialized vs expensive units which i agree with, the damage is such that attack upgrades will scale better (+2 dmg instead of +1), the base speed is buffed in return for only slightly worse upgraded speed, and the upgrade also gives them more HP so that they scale better and can also be better at tanking for Tanks
I'm not really sure they know what they're doing, it still just seems like a Warhound that skates. Other than the HP buff how does this compliment Mech specifically? And what clear counters are there? The new update makes it move faster so that Zerglings are even worse at surrounding them, and Cyclones are even better vs Roaches. So they're even stronger in TvZ. The increased damage vs armored is nice in TvP because it started to falloff in larger numbers in the midgame, and we already have the Hellion to deal with non-armored units, but the upgrade also giving it +20 HP is weird for an upgrade, and makes it scale even better into the midgame and lategame...
For the Cyclone specifically, it would be nice if they shared what their goal of the unit is. They said they want Mech TvP to be more viable and allow you to be more active, but how does the Cyclone facilitate that? Do they even agree that Mech TvP struggles in the early game, and that the Cyclone so far doesn't seem to compliment Tanks much, and just encourage mass Cyclone with a few Tanks as if it was MMM Tank?
And yes Vision i do agree that changing it so that the damage gives a bonus to Shield or Mechanical would be better than Armored. We don't need it to be good vs non-armored, we already have Hellions and WMs for that.
Harstem and Pig were pointing out a good point. Unlike the current cyclone (not the patch ones), which actually could be dealt with by Chargelot flanks/surrounds, the new Cyclone is really good vs Chargelots because they're so fast, can lockon infinitely, and lower supply thus take more space and are harder to surround. But we already have Hellions which are great vs Chargelots. And the new Cyclone will be pretty decent vs Stalkers and even Immortals now for how mobile they are, which Tanks already deal really well with.
I'm just anxious and really hope that the new Cyclone will actually be more useful than the current one... the current one DOES fulfill the role of being useful early game in dealing with early air harass or early air armies, helping defend drops, being able to poke and scout, etc. And if you want to go for more Cyclone based mech, you can do that before transitioning more into Tanks later as the Cyclones get clunkier and harder to trade effectively. I don't think the current Cyclone is far off from what it could be to help Mech TvP more. I think mainly it's just a bit gas expensive and comes out a bit late, and you can't get many of them, so it's heavily taxing on your production, without scaling as well as Tanks, and they are also a bit supply inefficient. From what I'm seeing so far I'd prefer if they just tweaked the current Cyclone design to be more supply efficient, easier to pump out, and move some of its damage from Lock-On to the auto attack so it's less volatile, then it might be much better than the new Cyclone.
Yeah those would be most of my worries there, well said
The +armored should not be replaced with +mechanical or +shields. Adding weapon bonuses that are useless by design vs a faction is bad because units only have one bonus damage modifier and adding what's effectively a matchup specific bonus means that you can't tune that knob for the other matchups.
The balance council's first priority should be making the cyclone useful (outside of the early game) in at least one non-mirror matchup, and given that mech is already close to viable in TvZ, they should focus there. Any improvements to TvP are a bonus, and the game should not be distorted around making mech TvP viable.
On August 29 2023 21:03 Athenau wrote: The +armored should not be replaced with +mechanical or +shields. Adding weapon bonuses that are useless by design vs a faction is bad because units only have one bonus damage modifier and adding what's effectively a matchup specific bonus means that you can't tune that knob for the other matchups.
The balance council's first priority should be making the cyclone useful (outside of the early game) in at least one non-mirror matchup, and given that mech is already close to viable in TvZ, they should focus there. Any improvements to TvP are a bonus, and the game should not be distorted around making mech TvP viable.
This is a tangent so bear with me, but i honestly think the idea that matchup specific balancing is to be avoided is just nonsense. I'd go as far and say that even if units would have different stats altogether depending on matchup (finetuning, ofc each unit should still feel like itself) that would be totally fine. Is it 'elegant' ? Maybe not, but who cares? That seems more like a misguided priority which ultimately doesn't matter as much as having a game which is fair and fun in each matchup. I've seen people say that it would be too confusing, but i honestly also do not believe that is a real reason to not try it, because i don't really think that people generally learn the stats anyway, they learn how units interact vs other units, relatively. So if a baneling has slightly more hp in one matchup to account for unit interactions which do not exist in another matchup, what really is the problem? (random example).
This is ofc just a random inclusion here, so people might as well ignore it, but that thought is something i have for a while now, and i hope future rts games aren't as married to the idea of 'elegance'.
On August 29 2023 21:03 Athenau wrote: The +armored should not be replaced with +mechanical or +shields. Adding weapon bonuses that are useless by design vs a faction is bad because units only have one bonus damage modifier and adding what's effectively a matchup specific bonus means that you can't tune that knob for the other matchups.
The balance council's first priority should be making the cyclone useful (outside of the early game) in at least one non-mirror matchup, and given that mech is already close to viable in TvZ, they should focus there. Any improvements to TvP are a bonus, and the game should not be distorted around making mech TvP viable.
This is a tangent so bear with me, but i honestly think the idea that matchup specific balancing is to be avoided is just nonsense. I'd go as far and say that even if units would have different stats altogether depending on matchup (finetuning, ofc each unit should still feel like itself) that would be totally fine. Is it 'elegant' ? Maybe not, but who cares? That seems more like a misguided priority which ultimately doesn't matter as much as having a game which is fair and fun in each matchup. I've seen people say that it would be too confusing, but i honestly also do not believe that is a real reason to not try it, because i don't really think that people generally learn the stats anyway, they learn how units interact vs other units, relatively. So if a baneling has slightly more hp in one matchup to account for unit interactions which do not exist in another matchup, what really is the problem? (random example).
This is ofc just a random inclusion here, so people might as well ignore it, but that thought is something i have for a while now, and i hope future rts games aren't as married to the idea of 'elegance'.
Yeah I think the game has suffered for homogeneity across matchups tbh, especially in maps. Trying to balance 3 divergent races across the exact same catch-all map pool has been part of the issue for forever. What’s wrong with fine-tuning specific TvZ/TvP/PvZ maps? At least try that, and I think a lot of issues would subside way before needing specific stat changes per marchup
Also EMP exists which has a secondary function that is explicitly anti-Protoss and has done forever, cyclones doing some bonus to shields is comparatively small fry
just spitballing here, in response to Yoshi and others worried that the cyclone will lose its usefulness
baseline cyclone:
lock-on is no longer on cooldown 9 max range 2 supply
new upgrade: charon boosters
every cyclone gains the ability to activate charon boosters, a spell which temporarily increases lock-on activation range from 6 to 7, increases the max lock-on range to 15 (the old values), and reverts to spell damage.
possible follow-ups:
A) put these "super-charged" spell-damage lock-ons on a very long cooldown (i.e. twice as long as the current live patch)
B) give cyclones two super-charged lock-ons (and only ever two, with each cyclone). a limited, expendable, non-replenishable resource like spider mines
the latter would be a very large mechanic to implement, but I think it would be the most interesting. it would preserve the mini-game of baiting out lock-ons (or at least, the most valuable kind of lock-ons) and the mini-game of saving scans so you can kite with impunity
it's a large mechanic because you would need some visual indicator to show the opponent when super-charged lock-on is active, and perhaps to show how many charges are left on each cyclone. maybe give it 2 red glowing laser dots inside its missile pods when it has 2 charges, then 1 glowing laser, then none when all charges are spent. also, you might need a different sound effect noise when super-charged lock-on is cast, and then differentiate the missile animation (or perhaps just cover the entire cyclone model in cheeto dust or something)
either way, I think that some of the cyclone's power ought to be locked behind a 2nd upgrade.
I don't agree with the health upgrade. a speedy 2 supply unit with this much micro potential doesn't need a health buff (especially not arbitrarily lumped in with the speed upgrade). the cyclone's defense should be its ability to kite and move out of harm's way.
these are not BW goliaths that move in staggered formation, and which can be attacked from all sides. cyclones clump up like a shoal of fish, leaving only limited surface area for zerglings and zealots to hit them.
the ability to mass them in greater numbers is already a huge defensive buff.
the health boost should be replaced with an upgrade that increases its lock-on activation range (cast range) and its max kite range, at least in some limited capacity
On August 29 2023 23:55 SHODAN wrote: just spitballing here, in response to Yoshi and others worried that the cyclone will lose its usefulness
baseline cyclone:
lock-on is no longer on cooldown 9 max range 2 supply
new upgrade: charon boosters
every cyclone gains the ability to activate charon boosters, a spell which temporarily increases lock-on activation range from 6 to 7, increases the max lock-on range to 15 (the old values), and reverts to spell damage.
possible follow-ups:
A) put these "super-charged" spell-damage lock-ons on a very long cooldown (i.e. twice as long as the current live patch)
B) give cyclones two super-charged lock-ons (and only ever two, with each cyclone). a limited, expendable, non-replenishable resource like spider mines
the latter would be a very large mechanic to implement, but I think it would be the most interesting. it would preserve the mini-game of baiting out lock-ons (or at least, the most valuable kind of lock-ons) and the mini-game of saving scans so you can kite with impunity
it's a large mechanic because you would need some visual indicator to show the opponent when super-charged lock-on is active, and perhaps to show how many charges are left on each cyclone. maybe give it 2 red glowing laser dots inside its missile pods when it has 2 charges, then 1 glowing laser, then none when all charges are spent. also, you might need a different sound effect noise when super-charged lock-on is cast, and then differentiate the missile animation (or perhaps just cover the entire cyclone model in cheeto dust or something)
either way, I think that some of the cyclone's power ought to be locked behind a 2nd upgrade.
I don't agree with the health upgrade. a speedy 2 supply unit with this much micro potential doesn't need a health buff (especially not arbitrarily lumped in with the speed upgrade). the cyclone's defense should be its ability to kite and move out of harm's way.
these are not BW goliaths that move in staggered formation, and which can be attacked from all sides. cyclones clump up like a shoal of fish, leaving only limited surface area for zerglings and zealots to hit them.
the ability to mass them in greater numbers is already a huge defensive buff.
the health boost should be replaced with an upgrade that increases its lock-on activation range (cast range) and its max kite range, at least in some limited capacity
I don't think the health upgrade is needed at all. I also don't think it needs a second upgrade--the change to +armored damage means that the scaling is now better late game anyway.
Just remove the health bonus and make the speed upgrade faster and cheaper, like 100/100/79, and I think it'll be in a good spot.
Yeah agree with both of you the health bonus is weird.
Interesting idea SHODAN with the charges! It wouldn't be too confusing to see, it'd be like how Carriers indicate how many interceptors they have.
I agree with Red Viper and Wombat that I think if we're taking MU specific balancing to the extreme, having different stats for different MUs being slightly weird or confusing is a small price to pay for potentially more amazing gameplay. And we're not even talking about the extreme when it comes to just giving a bonus to Mechanical or Shield. Viking already has bonus vs Mechanical, Spore and Archon has bonus vs Biological, Interference Matrix is Mechanical/Psyionic only, Snipe is Biological only, EMP is Shield/Energy only, and Widow Mines also have a bonus vs Shield because Protoss units are much more resilient to a little AOE splash unlike Zerg. We have all kinds of attacks and spells being strong/usable for all kinds of unit types. I think the only unit type that there is no bonus against is Heroic.
The current Cyclone already doesn't need any bonus damage in order to have roles in all 3 MUs, the new patch's Cyclone having a small armor bonus isn't really important in the first place, so I think replacing it with a Mechanical or Shield bonus would be totally fine. I think something like the Hellbat being both Biological and Mechanical is much weirder, but even we've gotten used to that. Or if a unit got 2 different types of bonus damage, which would be unprecedented.
On August 30 2023 01:46 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: The current Cyclone already doesn't need any bonus damage in order to have roles in all 3 MUs, the new patch's Cyclone having a small armor bonus isn't really important in the first place, so I think replacing it with a Mechanical or Shield bonus would be totally fine. I think something like the Hellbat being both Biological and Mechanical is much weirder, but even we've gotten used to that. Or if a unit got 2 different types of bonus damage, which would be unprecedented.
50% more damage against armored is not a small bonus and is very significant in TvZ, which is the matchup that should be the focus.
On August 29 2023 23:55 SHODAN wrote: just spitballing here, in response to Yoshi and others worried that the cyclone will lose its usefulness
baseline cyclone:
lock-on is no longer on cooldown 9 max range 2 supply
new upgrade: charon boosters
every cyclone gains the ability to activate charon boosters, a spell which temporarily increases lock-on activation range from 6 to 7, increases the max lock-on range to 15 (the old values), and reverts to spell damage.
possible follow-ups:
A) put these "super-charged" spell-damage lock-ons on a very long cooldown (i.e. twice as long as the current live patch)
B) give cyclones two super-charged lock-ons (and only ever two, with each cyclone). a limited, expendable, non-replenishable resource like spider mines
the latter would be a very large mechanic to implement, but I think it would be the most interesting. it would preserve the mini-game of baiting out lock-ons (or at least, the most valuable kind of lock-ons) and the mini-game of saving scans so you can kite with impunity
it's a large mechanic because you would need some visual indicator to show the opponent when super-charged lock-on is active, and perhaps to show how many charges are left on each cyclone. maybe give it 2 red glowing laser dots inside its missile pods when it has 2 charges, then 1 glowing laser, then none when all charges are spent. also, you might need a different sound effect noise when super-charged lock-on is cast, and then differentiate the missile animation (or perhaps just cover the entire cyclone model in cheeto dust or something)
either way, I think that some of the cyclone's power ought to be locked behind a 2nd upgrade.
I don't agree with the health upgrade. a speedy 2 supply unit with this much micro potential doesn't need a health buff (especially not arbitrarily lumped in with the speed upgrade). the cyclone's defense should be its ability to kite and move out of harm's way.
these are not BW goliaths that move in staggered formation, and which can be attacked from all sides. cyclones clump up like a shoal of fish, leaving only limited surface area for zerglings and zealots to hit them.
the ability to mass them in greater numbers is already a huge defensive buff.
the health boost should be replaced with an upgrade that increases its lock-on activation range (cast range) and its max kite range, at least in some limited capacity
I don't think the health upgrade is needed at all. I also don't think it needs a second upgrade--the change to +armored damage means that the scaling is now better late game anyway.
Just remove the health bonus and make the speed upgrade faster and cheaper, like 100/100/79, and I think it'll be in a good spot.
maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong. we'll see. I'm in favour of making units more interesting where possible, and also putting them in a good place
while the cyclone redesign is several steps in the right direction, I think it's also important to preserve the fun factor of this unit. for example, nuking an unguarded hatchery with multiple lock-ons. that's a beautiful thing. also, I'd like being able to punish over-extensions by activating charon boosters and melting a big clump of queens / roaches / ravagers
the natural counter to cyclones should be infestor / lurker. the infestor should be tweaked carefully so that it has a fun cat-and-mouse dynamic with the cyclone. speed-mech relying heavily on scans to do big damage is interesting because it gives zerg more opportunities with burrow. blowing up speed-mech with burrowed infestors + fungal, defensive lurkers, and maybe even burrowed banelings to to burn up scans too. that is fun! it's why I think it's not a bad idea to balance speed-mech around burrow, detection, and a longer maximum lock-on range that needs exceeds speed-mech's typical vision range
I have no fuckin idea how it would play out vP though lol. that's uncharted territory. maybe you would need to buff protoss so that they have a more nuanced counterplay. in the current balance mod, it seems to boil down to who has the critical mass of cyclones vs gateway units, and that shit is just boring... but we're still in the early days of pros figuring out how to actually play against cyclones in this matchup. zerg have at least had some experience dealing with weird speed-mech builds in the past. I guess the closest equivalent protoss have to a fungal-type spell is stasis ward. I think it'd be really cool if that became the go-to counterplay -- again, forcing T to burn up scans in order to be so active on the map
On August 30 2023 01:44 Athenau wrote: New HeroMarine video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psjWkrLcuR8&t=1021s TL;DR version is that the Cyclone is pretty busted with these changes. So yeah, get rid of the HP bonus.
This kind of video is really not reassurant at all..
On August 29 2023 23:55 SHODAN wrote: just spitballing here, in response to Yoshi and others worried that the cyclone will lose its usefulness
baseline cyclone:
lock-on is no longer on cooldown 9 max range 2 supply
new upgrade: charon boosters
every cyclone gains the ability to activate charon boosters, a spell which temporarily increases lock-on activation range from 6 to 7, increases the max lock-on range to 15 (the old values), and reverts to spell damage.
possible follow-ups:
A) put these "super-charged" spell-damage lock-ons on a very long cooldown (i.e. twice as long as the current live patch)
B) give cyclones two super-charged lock-ons (and only ever two, with each cyclone). a limited, expendable, non-replenishable resource like spider mines
the latter would be a very large mechanic to implement, but I think it would be the most interesting. it would preserve the mini-game of baiting out lock-ons (or at least, the most valuable kind of lock-ons) and the mini-game of saving scans so you can kite with impunity
it's a large mechanic because you would need some visual indicator to show the opponent when super-charged lock-on is active, and perhaps to show how many charges are left on each cyclone. maybe give it 2 red glowing laser dots inside its missile pods when it has 2 charges, then 1 glowing laser, then none when all charges are spent. also, you might need a different sound effect noise when super-charged lock-on is cast, and then differentiate the missile animation (or perhaps just cover the entire cyclone model in cheeto dust or something)
either way, I think that some of the cyclone's power ought to be locked behind a 2nd upgrade.
I don't agree with the health upgrade. a speedy 2 supply unit with this much micro potential doesn't need a health buff (especially not arbitrarily lumped in with the speed upgrade). the cyclone's defense should be its ability to kite and move out of harm's way.
these are not BW goliaths that move in staggered formation, and which can be attacked from all sides. cyclones clump up like a shoal of fish, leaving only limited surface area for zerglings and zealots to hit them.
the ability to mass them in greater numbers is already a huge defensive buff.
the health boost should be replaced with an upgrade that increases its lock-on activation range (cast range) and its max kite range, at least in some limited capacity
I don't think the health upgrade is needed at all. I also don't think it needs a second upgrade--the change to +armored damage means that the scaling is now better late game anyway.
Just remove the health bonus and make the speed upgrade faster and cheaper, like 100/100/79, and I think it'll be in a good spot.
maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong. we'll see. I'm in favour of making units more interesting where possible, and also putting them in a good place
while the cyclone redesign is several steps in the right direction, I think it's also important to preserve the fun factor of this unit. for example, nuking an unguarded hatchery with multiple lock-ons. that's a beautiful thing. also, I'd like being able to punish over-extensions by activating charon boosters and melting a big clump of queens / roaches / ravagers
the natural counter to cyclones should be infestor / lurker. the infestor should be tweaked carefully so that it has a fun cat-and-mouse dynamic with the cyclone. speed-mech relying heavily on scans to do big damage is interesting because it gives zerg more opportunities with burrow. blowing up speed-mech with burrowed infestors + fungal, defensive lurkers, and maybe even burrowed banelings to to burn up scans too. that is fun! it's why I think it's not a bad idea to balance speed-mech around burrow, detection, and a longer maximum lock-on range that needs exceeds speed-mech's typical vision range
I have no fuckin idea how it would play out vP though lol. that's uncharted territory. maybe you would need to buff protoss so that they have a more nuanced counterplay. in the current balance mod, it seems to boil down to who has the critical mass of cyclones vs gateway units, and that shit is just boring... but we're still in the early days of pros figuring out how to actually play against cyclones in this matchup. zerg have at least had some experience dealing with weird speed-mech builds in the past. I guess the closest equivalent protoss have to a fungal-type spell is stasis ward. I think it'd be really cool if that became the go-to counterplay -- again, forcing T to burn up scans in order to be so active on the map
We shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Blizzard has a skeleton crew working on SC2, and extra care should be taken to avoid breaking the game when any fixes will be gated by Blizzard's ability and willingness to deploy changes. The fact that a unit is being redesigned at all is very ambitious.
From what I've seen the current redesign is already more fun than the status quo, because removing the lock-on cooldown makes managing the unit more rewarding.
On August 30 2023 01:44 Athenau wrote: New HeroMarine video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psjWkrLcuR8&t=1021s TL;DR version is that the Cyclone is pretty busted with these changes. So yeah, get rid of the HP bonus.
So yup, going with the "cyclone being a busted, no-real-downside" unit. It's the warhound on steroids with its downsides removed
Hilariously, the updated change is even worse, they're doubling down on something that was already silly
We can now enjoy seeing some "mech" play that is going to consist of massing cyclones unsupported
It probably won't change much at the highest level as there are probably glaring holes in any strategy relying on them in competition but on the other hand, it means killing a lot of openings (some meta ones like the TvT cyclone/marine drops, or most defensive TvP/TvT openings, which are mostly what allows some mech play on the ladder in these matchups below the pro level), the current form of battlemech, and the niche usage of cyclone as a support unit in early game pushes, emergency anti air, or as a lategame skirmisher/base sniper unit for mech And if it turns out to be too strong at the pro level to the point it can compete with or even overtake bio as the standard, it will be nerfed -as any single unit able to dominate everything thrown at it should be-, which means all of these things would have been killed for.. nothing ?
Again, as someone who can claim a lot of experience, both playing and analysing mech play, since WoL has been out, regardless of the matchup, and always maintaining a decent level with it, i am confused and disappointed at the inner workings of this change.
How does it relate to mech as the strategy is generally understood after now several DECADES of seeing it played out over both SC games ? Hint : it's not "massing a single high damage high mobility versatile unit and calling it mech because it comes from a factory What was the expected result of the change ? Making cyclones an early powerhouse that is strong enough to cover mech usual weaknesses early, but somehow isn't so strong that it becomes spammed as the vast majority (or entirety) of any "mech" composition ? What was the logic behind it besides "hey we should make a bio-like fast, high damage unit so mech will feel more like bio" ? What were the alternatives, and why were they scrapped ? I'm assuming some competency here from the council™ and that it isn't the only thing they considered for mech Which part of this change is supposed to make it different compared to the previous reactored cyclone implementation, in which the most optimal way to use the unit was either to not make it, or mass it in any single situation with little to nothing else made alongside it ? And in a more tangential way, what is the experience of the people behind these changes with mech beyond "i wing a mech game every couple weeks on the ladder, and i once even played 5 mech games in a row couple years ago when the meta favoured it on a specific map so im like a complete mech expert" ? Because damn, i really, really want to hear how their mech experience made them end up with this as a """fix""" for it
The best they can do for mech TvP is to just leave it the hell alone - they obviously lack any idea about the issues of it, what people may want it to look/feel like, are just going to break a lot of stuff for the sake of change, wether it is current openings/playstyles relevant to proplay, or lower level mech TvP things that at least kinda work on the ladder It's not like TvP is even in a good place right now that leaves room to undertake a task that would completely change how it could be played, so dear council™, please stay in your lane - work on balancing the matchup in its current form, and if you want to look at mech, make a real effort about it, rather than going full Blizzard™ about it and making the laziest, lowest-hanging-fruit, weirdest change just to say you did something
On August 30 2023 01:44 Athenau wrote: New HeroMarine video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psjWkrLcuR8&t=1021s TL;DR version is that the Cyclone is pretty busted with these changes. So yeah, get rid of the HP bonus.
So yup, going with the "cyclone being a busted, no-real-downside" unit. It's the warhound on steroids with its downsides removed
Hilariously, the updated change is even worse, they're doubling down on something that was already silly
We can now enjoy seeing some "mech" play that is going to consist of massing cyclones unsupported
It probably won't change much at the highest level as there are probably glaring holes in any strategy relying on them in competition but on the other hand, it means killing a lot of openings (some meta ones like the TvT cyclone/marine drops, or most defensive TvP/TvT openings, which are mostly what allows some mech play on the ladder in these matchups below the pro level), the current form of battlemech, and the niche usage of cyclone as a support unit in early game pushes, emergency anti air, or as a lategame skirmisher/base sniper unit for mech And if it turns out to be too strong at the pro level to the point it can compete with or even overtake bio as the standard, it will be nerfed -as any single unit able to dominate everything thrown at it should be-, which means all of these things would have been killed for.. nothing ?
Again, as someone who can claim a lot of experience, both playing and analysing mech play, since WoL has been out, regardless of the matchup, and always maintaining a decent level with it, i am confused and disappointed at the inner workings of this change.
How does it relate to mech as the strategy is generally understood after now several DECADES of seeing it played out over both SC games ? Hint : it's not "massing a single high damage high mobility versatile unit and calling it mech because it comes from a factory What was the expected result of the change ? Making cyclones an early powerhouse that is strong enough to cover mech usual weaknesses early, but somehow isn't so strong that it becomes spammed as the vast majority (or entirety) of any "mech" composition ? What was the logic behind it besides "hey we should make a bio-like fast, high damage unit so mech will feel more like bio" ? What were the alternatives, and why were they scrapped ? I'm assuming some competency here from the council™ and that it isn't the only thing they considered for mech Which part of this change is supposed to make it different compared to the previous reactored cyclone implementation, in which the most optimal way to use the unit was either to not make it, or mass it in any single situation with little to nothing else made alongside it ? And in a more tangential way, what is the experience of the people behind these changes with mech beyond "i wing a mech game every couple weeks on the ladder, and i once even played 5 mech games in a row couple years ago so im like a complete mech expert" ? Because damn, i really, really want to hear how their mech experience made them end up with this as a """fix""" for it
The best they can do for mech TvP is to just leave it the hell alone - they obviously lack any idea about the issues of it, what people may want it to look/feel like, are just going to break a lot of stuff for the sake of change, wether it is current openings/playstyles relevant to proplay, or lower level mech TvP things that at least kinda work on the ladder It's not like TvP is even in a good place right now that leaves room to undertake a task that would completely change how it could be played, so dear council™, please stay in your lane - work on balancing the matchup in its current form, and if you want to look at mech, make a real effort about it, rather than going full Blizzard™ about it and making the laziest, lowest-hanging-fruit, weirdest change just to say you did something
I've played thousands upon thousands of mech games in M1 / GM. SC2 mech was in the FUN ZONE at the start of LotV, before zergs learned knew how to deal with speedmech. that right there was a magical time for me
non-stop pumping cyclone / hellion / mines from 8 factories, with a single armory spinning that vehicle plating. I have always maintained that the synergy between those 3 units is something special, and represents a tragic missed opportunity. with just a few tweaks in the right direction, terran could have had an alternative style that rivalled stimmed bio / medivac at the top level. but no... Blizzard never followed up on it, and the cyclone got redesigned, revised, reverted so many times it'd make your head spin: until finally, it was relegated to an extremely vocational early-game crutch unit to defend against air.
it became one of those units, like the reaper, that you build one or two of and that's it. once it's served its purpose, you just move onto making the "real" terran units
I find that very sad. especially for the cyclone, which IMO is one of the most tactilely satisfying terran units to control. I think lock-on is a super cool spell and one of those unique units that helped give SC2 mech its own identity.
mass cyclone unsupported? nope. not gonna happen. once the balance team are done tweaking the damage stats, no. we are NOT going to see pure mass cyclone. cyclones will need support from hellions, widow mines and other units.
hellions to roast ling / zealot
widow mines to zone, grant vision, to bait out biles and novas and to deter strong ground armies from chasing after the cyclones
who cares about the diamond league meta? why is this even up for discussion? if a few lower league ladders find that their strategies are obsolete after a patch, so be it lol. SC2 should be balanced around the pro level first and foremost
SC2 mech has never had anything in common with BW mech. it's never about the tank. not in TvT and not in TvZ either. SC2 mech always meant something different. loosely: an army comp that isn't stimmed bio and medivacs.
it will never be about the tank, because SC2 is just too fast, too explosive, to become centered around a unit like the siege tank. cyclones synergize much better with hellions and mines in general. it's fine to have a version of mech where tanks are more of a support / specialized unit
the current test mod version of the cyclone looks busted, but I'd rather them go all-out with big design changes. maybe this is what it takes to incentivize a redesign of protoss and completely shake up the game. I prefer the experimental approach. I've lived through brood lord / infestor, stupidly strong hellbats, and the great book of protoss bullshit. I'm happy for the game to be unstable for a few months while they continue to experiment. exciting times we're living in!
On August 30 2023 05:31 SHODAN wrote: I've played thousands upon thousands of mech games in M1 / GM. SC2 mech was in the FUN ZONE at the start of LotV, before zergs learned knew how to deal with speedmech. that right there was a magical time for me
non-stop pumping cyclone / hellion / mines from 8 factories, with a single armory spinning that vehicle plating. I have always maintained that the synergy between those 3 units is something special, and represents a tragic missed opportunity. with just a few tweaks in the right direction, terran could have had an alternative style that rivalled stimmed bio / medivac at the top level. but no... Blizzard never followed up on it, and the cyclone got redesigned, revised, reverted so many times it'd make your head spin: until finally, it was relegated to an extremely vocational early-game crutch unit to defend against air.
To each their own - i barely consider this as "mech", the only real commonality is that it comes out from a factory. It is bio without the drops and more emphasis on the kiting/poking instead Although i do agree that it was an interesting alternative to bio play (and not least because of its commonality with bio, which would appeal to most terran players with the emphasis on aggression constantly) and it was a shame Blizzard never developped - but there was a reason for that, as well, and it is that this kind of style is absurdly hard to balance, when it is based about a unit that should (and can) never get hit while doing high damage
On August 30 2023 05:31 SHODAN wrote: it became one of those units, like the reaper, that you build one or two of and that's it. once it's served its purpose, you just move onto making the "real" terran units
I find that very sad. especially for the cyclone, which IMO is one of the most tactilely satisfying terran units to control. I think lock-on is a super cool spell and one of those unique units that helped give SC2 mech its own identity.
And why is that an issue ? The unit is seen in a large number of games, in every matchup, just like the reaper, which can be used both as an universal scout, and is also part of several relevant early strategies. Not every game is destined to be spammed at every stage of the game, and that's particularly true for terran, that comes with a lot of specialist units. It has several robusts roles as an early game defender/map controller, can be used in several drop builds that are semi-common, and battlemech did pop its head quite regularly until the recent evolution of the TvZ bio into lategame mech style
On August 30 2023 05:31 SHODAN wrote: mass cyclone unsupported? nope. not gonna happen. once the balance team are done tweaking the damage stats, no. we are NOT going to see pure mass cyclone. cyclones will need support from hellions, widow mines and other units.
hellions to roast ling / zealot
widow mines to zone, grant vision, to bait out biles and novas and to deter strong ground armies from chasing after the cyclones
That's largely hypothetical, and as the previous reactored cyclone era has shown, not necessarily true - the nature of the unit (high mobility, high damage, decent durability) means that if it's good, it's often too good - it kills stuff fast while staying safe, and exponentially becomes strong as it gets massed. Hellions in particular are a generally bad unit, and it doesn't take much for cyclones to be better than them, even at killing light units - their main usage is as a mineral dump/meatshield to keep the cyclones alive... which isn't as much of a big deal when the cyclone is cheap, fast to build, tanky, and good at fighting almost everything in the game The mine is largely a dream for mech, as it interfaces badly with other units - you aim to grow a highly efficient army that can kill the enemy from range with high efficiency, and that goes badly with the short ranged mine. There is a reason why even more modern versions of battlemech don't use it - competent opponents are simply going to avoid it entirely, you run a high risk of killing your own expensive units, and it limits your mobility without the huge power of the siege tank. In addition, it isn't as good against traditional mech counters, compared to the massacre it does against banelings, or removing the tankiness of zealots versus retreating bio. That would go double if we get the new Flash-grade cyclone - not only would it get slowed by the mines to get to the enemy, but it would very easily run away from them... or, if strong enough to just stand and fight without kiting, why are you even making mines?
On August 30 2023 05:31 SHODAN wrote: who cares about the diamond league meta? why is this even up for discussion? if a few lower league ladders find that their strategies are obsolete after a patch, so be it lol. SC2 should be balanced around the pro level first and foremost
It becomes a factor when the change is supposed to affect a strategy that essentially doesn't exist in proplay, but is playable at lesser levels, since they're the only people actually affected by the change.
On August 30 2023 05:31 SHODAN wrote:
SC2 mech has never had anything in common with BW mech. it's never about the tank. not in TvT and not in TvZ either. SC2 mech always meant something different. loosely: an army comp that isn't stimmed bio and medivacs.
it will never be about the tank, because SC2 is just too fast, too explosive, to become centered around a unit like the siege tank. cyclones synergize much better with hellions and mines in general. it's fine to have a version of mech where tanks are more of a support / specialized unit
This is a strawman argument that doesn't have much relevance, despite having been thrown it since day 1 of sc2 - there has been plenty of times where broodwar style mech (centered around tanks, and overall around positional, defensive or maxed timing based, slower play) has been present - it was a reasonable proportion of games, even at the pro level, in WoL (oh IMMVP mech games, i miss you), it was meta for several times during HotS (with the unfortunate pairing with the Swarm Host), and some attempts were made in LotV, although the nature of the games there usually smashed it fast, with occasional success, especially since the Thor buffs. In addition, plenty of players, at decent level, if not top world, have been playing these kind of styles for years across expansions, metas, and mappools, in high level ladder or online cups
Even bio play often relies heavily in tanks, since the start of sc2, and even more in modern meta - wether it is tank pushes to deny third in TvP or in recent years lategame tank additions, about anything in TvT, and bio/tank was almost always a thing in any year you look at in TvZ. And on quite a few occasions (especially in WoL, and a few years ago in LotV) quite a few of these ended up playing nearly like "BW mech but with marines instead of vultures"....
And even without the tank, defensive, highly positional playstyles have been a thing several times - in particular, the liberator/mine/turret transition out of bio in TvZ that was very common a few years ago, or early LotV mass liberator transition - Artosis did write a pretty good blog post back then about the matter of defensive, BW-style "mech" play with bio as a core.
On August 30 2023 05:31 SHODAN wrote: the current test mod version of the cyclone looks busted, but I'd rather them go all-out with big design changes. maybe this is what it takes to incentivize a redesign of protoss and completely shake up the game. I prefer the experimental approach. I've lived through brood lord / infestor, stupidly strong hellbats, and the great book of protoss bullshit. I'm happy for the game to be unstable for a few months while they continue to experiment. exciting times we're living in!
Changing for the sake of change, without a good idea of what is supposed to be accomplished, with a bunch of obvious negative repercussions, in a way similar to what was previously tried and completely failed to accomplish its objective, instead devolving into mono-unit spam, is not experimental, it's just making stupid changes for the sake of saying something was changed
It's not like they're changing a forgotten unit that isn't considered viable or meme-tier or even weak - it is a cornerstone of many openings in every matchup, is used as the core of a strategy that isn't popular but still sees occasional use, and has several niche roles to feel, and a similar change was already tried before, and it ended poorly, with the unit ending in a much healthier state after being changed again after that
And the unit being busted means that - It won't change any of the core issue of the strat, instead simply masking it behind a busted unit, which is terrible design - It will make PvT even worse than it currently is (i can't believe i'm on the protoss' side there), particularly since the redesigned mech/cyclone has to compete with a bio play that is already advantageous versus protoss, if pros are to use it... and if it's not that good after balancing, then it simply won't be used at pro level, and as you said, who cares about anyone below top tier? all the while eliminating the current uses of the cyclone, which has several robust niches - It will probably bring a nerf to the unit that swings the other way, meaning that all the stuff the unit accomplished pre-changed would be lost for nothing in that case as well, while also making the intended strategy weaker. - And all of that even assumes that the balance council reacts swiftly and in a way that makes sense to anything derailing the game - they don't exactly have that kind of track record yet. In fact they're already looking an awful lot like the old school Blizzard balance way - yearly patch that includes a lot of not-particulary-useful-or-desired-or-relevant stuff without much in the way of explainations...
i like the philosophy behind why they are making these changes. i hope the changes get balanced so that Protoss can win more events. I'm a Terran main who has been cheering Terran players for 20 years. Last year I was rooting for Protoss players to win something big.
EPT
