jinjin5000 Profile Joined May 2010 Korea (South) 871 Posts Last Edited: 2015-10-15 05:33:37 #1



Over the past weeks, we have seen rather disapproving posts for Cyclone- It has been critisized that it doesn't really have a role in terran army nor is it made much in ladder games. But I still think Cyclone have its place in Terran arsenal.







Numerically speaking, Cyclone should be a great unit. With lock on, it has 21 dps vs ground and 17 dps vs air, and after the Mag-Field accelerator, it recieves 28.6dps vs ground (42.8 dps vs armored) and 25.7dps vs air (42.8dps vs armored). It is very fast, being at 4.72 speed, and can keep up with hellions at reasonable pace. It also has 1 base armor and reasonable 160hp. An all-rounder.







But what makes this unit so bad?



I've been playing around with cyclone in LotV since the launch, and used it in almost every game as my ground G2A role and also to force engagement with my mech army. So here are 4 glaring flaws of cyclone that I noticed.



1) Overlapping roles on ground

Cyclone has great dp on ground- a characteristic shared by factory units. It is able to do outstanding 21dps off factory and 42.8dps vs armored after the cyclone upgrade.



However, it doesn't really deal with swarms well, with lockon each requiring a second or so of hang item before it locks on. Add with that on cooldown, and it makes a fairly unattractive unit to get as general add-on of your composition (unless you are specifically going for hellion/cyclone composition) - especially when there are better options, such as Thor and Siege tank- both of those that deal with ground fairly well..



Now, the Thor and Siege tank have crippling weakness in its mobility- which cyclone has. Which means its great to gain map control with but can't really be afforded to... Which brings to its second point.



2) Its enormous Cost

Cyclone is unit with expensive 150/150 price tag. It means its a fairly vital unit that can't be afforded to be in mass production nor be thrown away at whim. For a unit that was created in thought of map control and some harass, it is a huge investment to get and can't be afforded to be lost.







Not only that, other factory units that do similar job aren't all that much more expensive and does the same job- Siege tanks are 25 gas cheaper and Thor is 50 gas more expensive and does better in direct combat. Why make a weaker unit when you can get more splash damage in siege tank and singular damage/meat shield in thor?



On top of that 150/150 hefty price tag, Cyclone gets that hefty 3 population cost. That means that you can't really make a lot of cyclone before maxing out and really inflates your numbers the amount of units a mech player could afford to have in field- even with existence of mule hammers and scv throwing away (which can't really be afforded in my experience in LotV but still). Why would you get it when Tanks do better against ground at just 3 supply and cost less, and Vikings do much, much better role for just 75 gas and 2 supply?



Cyclone is one heck of indisposable unit.



3) Its mediocre role as Anti-air

Now here comes the major part of Cyclone: Factory Anti-Air.



David Kim was said to have Cyclone as a much longed for factory Anti-Air unit with additional functions. Combined with split mech upgrades on air and ground attack, Cyclone should finally dethrone the starport being required to provide Anti Air and allow mech to attack more freely as a ground composition.



But it doesn't do that despite the great numbers on its weapon. Surely 26/43 dps vs air must seal it? Why not?



Its becuase of its cost and it necessitating it to be exposed to enemy fire.



A) Attack Delay & Exposure

First volleys are huge thing in Starcraft and Cyclone takes a good second to close into target, as well as it needing to come into 7 range to lock on. Combine with the unit being generally very boxy and needing a very big space to operate in its full potential, just makes viking a superior anti-air choice to have. The amount of DPS lost with the first shots can often determine the outcome of battle, and Cyclone lacks that punch.

Also, with that lock on comes a critical weakness to cyclone. It exposes itself to majority of fire when it needs to target a unit for lock down (7 range). This problem combines with one below.



B) Number of Units

Secondly, there just aren't enough numbers. 150/150 unit that requires 3 supply severely limits the endgame number of how many cyclones you can afford to have on field. That, combined with it needing to be exposed to enemy fire makes it prime target for enemy to pick off, and losing a few definitely hurts...exponentially almost. Each individual 160hp, 3 supply, 150/150 cyclone dramatically reduces the damage output for every cyclone that is defeated just makes it unfavorable to use.



Overall, the slower start-up, it needing to be relatively exposed to fire, and lack of numbers to protect against it being exposed hurts this unit a lot in main engagements.



Against units like Broodlords, Carriers, Battlecrsuiers and liberators where Cyclone would be primarily used against as AA, Being exposed to fire while dealing none is a crippling weakness to Cyclone.



Carriers/Battlecruisers/lberators have easy means to pick off single target (Carrier's DPS with interceptors and Yamato cannon, Liberator punishing ground units that come near) and Broodlord's 11.5 range pathing block with broodlings prevents cyclones from simply getting into 7 range to damage the broodlord. All while Cyclone needs to stand almost under the opposing unit to deal damage.







All these just points to bursty-damage Viking (with all that overkill) just a superior unit to use for anti-air.



------



Ideally, I could see what Cyclones were designed for- Its an ideal mech support unit where it uses its versatility to complement mech army in AA, base raider role with hellion (with its mobility and it being great in lower number skirmishes), and force engagements to happen with lock-on while backing off to safety to safe siege fields of Siege tanks and liberators.



Obviously, lock-on is a big "wow" factor of the unit, but I simply can't really see this unit being balanced with such a spell. just the idea of lock on being able to kite a unit in enormous range needs a big downside to use such as its downtime, and I don't think Cyclone could be balanced to be a vital part of Terran arsenal with this as it provides too much room for "OPness" or uselessness.



I would like for it to be cheaper, more disposable factory unit that can compliment the hellion well on base raiding, and have its AA more streamlined and have it to be more "niche" like the other compatriots of factory are- instead of it being all-rounder as of now.



Here is what I suggest

Reduce its supply cost to 2



Reduce its big 150/150 cost to maybe match viking's in 150/75



Reduce its speed so its slightly slower or as fast as stalker



Remove Lock-on and give it mediocre ground damage,giving it flat damage



Give it long range Anti-Air attack that has low damage point





So...basically a SC2 Goliath without the goliath name...Sorry.



Thanks for reading my analysis and post your thoughts below! Hi, I am a mech Terran player in LotV playing at masters level with 500+ games played and want to suggest few things to fix the cyclone as well as analyze it- having played with cyclones in almost every game I playedOver the past weeks, we have seen rather disapproving posts for Cyclone- It has been critisized that it doesn't really have a role in terran army nor is it made much in ladder games. But I still think Cyclone have its place in Terran arsenal.Numerically speaking, Cyclone should be a great unit. With lock on, it has 21 dps vs ground and 17 dps vs air, and after the Mag-Field accelerator, it recieves 28.6dps vs ground (42.8 dps vs armored) and 25.7dps vs air (42.8dps vs armored). It is very fast, being at 4.72 speed, and can keep up with hellions at reasonable pace. It also has 1 base armor and reasonable 160hp. An all-rounder.But what makes this unit so bad?I've been playing around with cyclone in LotV since the launch, and used it in almost every game as my ground G2A role and also to force engagement with my mech army. So here are 4 glaring flaws of cyclone that I noticed.Cyclone has great dp on ground- a characteristic shared by factory units. It is able to do outstanding 21dps off factory and 42.8dps vs armored after the cyclone upgrade.However, it doesn't really deal with swarms well, with lockon each requiring a second or so of hang item before it locks on. Add with that on cooldown, and it makes a fairly unattractive unit to get as general add-on of your composition (unless you are specifically going for hellion/cyclone composition) - especially when there are better options, such as Thor and Siege tank- both of those that deal with ground fairly well..Now, the Thor and Siege tank have crippling weakness in its mobility- which cyclone has. Which means its great to gain map control with but can't really be afforded to... Which brings to its second point.Cyclone is unit with expensive 150/150 price tag. It means its a fairly vital unit that can't be afforded to be in mass production nor be thrown away at whim. For a unit that was created in thought of map control and some harass, it is a huge investment to get and can't be afforded to be lost.Not only that, other factory units that do similar job aren't all that much more expensive and does the same job- Siege tanks are 25 gas cheaper and Thor is 50 gas more expensive and does better in direct combat. Why make a weaker unit when you can get more splash damage in siege tank and singular damage/meat shield in thor?On top of that 150/150 hefty price tag, Cyclone gets that hefty 3 population cost. That means that you can't really make a lot of cyclone before maxing out and really inflates your numbers the amount of units a mech player could afford to have in field- even with existence of mule hammers and scv throwing away (which can't really be afforded in my experience in LotV but still). Why would you get it when Tanks do better against ground at just 3 supply and cost less, and Vikings do much, much better role for just 75 gas and 2 supply?Cyclone is one heck of indisposable unit.David Kim was said to have Cyclone as a much longed for factory Anti-Air unit with additional functions. Combined with split mech upgrades on air and ground attack, Cyclone should finally dethrone the starport being required to provide Anti Air and allow mech to attack more freely as a ground composition.But it doesn't do that despite the great numbers on its weapon. Surely 26/43 dps vs air must seal it? Why not?Its becuase of its cost and it necessitating it to be exposed to enemy fire.First volleys are huge thing in Starcraft and Cyclone takes a good second to close into target, as well as it needing to come into 7 range to lock on. Combine with the unit being generally very boxy and needing a very big space to operate in its full potential, just makes viking a superior anti-air choice to have. The amount of DPS lost with the first shots can often determine the outcome of battle, and Cyclone lacks that punch.Also, with that lock on comes a critical weakness to cyclone. It exposes itself to majority of fire when it needs to target a unit for lock down (7 range). This problem combines with one below.Secondly, there just aren't enough numbers. 150/150 unit that requires 3 supply severely limits the endgame number of how many cyclones you can afford to have on field. That, combined with it needing to be exposed to enemy fire makes it prime target for enemy to pick off, and losing a few definitely hurts...exponentially almost. Each individual 160hp, 3 supply, 150/150 cyclone dramatically reduces the damage output for every cyclone that is defeated just makes it unfavorable to use.Overall, the slower start-up, it needing to be relatively exposed to fire, and lack of numbers to protect against it being exposed hurts this unit a lot in main engagements.Against units like Broodlords, Carriers, Battlecrsuiers and liberators where Cyclone would be primarily used against as AA, Being exposed to fire while dealing none is a crippling weakness to Cyclone.Carriers/Battlecruisers/lberators have easy means to pick off single target (Carrier's DPS with interceptors and Yamato cannon, Liberator punishing ground units that come near) and Broodlord's 11.5 range pathing block with broodlings prevents cyclones from simply getting into 7 range to damage the broodlord. All while Cyclone needs to stand almost under the opposing unit to deal damage.All these just points to bursty-damage Viking (with all that overkill) just a superior unit to use for anti-air.------Ideally, I could see what Cyclones were designed for- Its an ideal mech support unit where it uses its versatility to complement mech army in AA, base raider role with hellion (with its mobility and it being great in lower number skirmishes), and force engagements to happen with lock-on while backing off to safety to safe siege fields of Siege tanks and liberators.Obviously, lock-on is a big "wow" factor of the unit, but I simply can't really see this unit being balanced with such a spell. just the idea of lock on being able to kite a unit in enormous range needs a big downside to use such as its downtime, and I don't think Cyclone could be balanced to be a vital part of Terran arsenal with this as it provides too much room for "OPness" or uselessness.I would like for it to be cheaper, more disposable factory unit that can compliment the hellion well on base raiding, and have its AA more streamlined and have it to be more "niche" like the other compatriots of factory are- instead of it being all-rounder as of now.Here is what I suggestSo...basically a SC2 Goliath without the goliath name...Sorry.Thanks for reading my analysis and post your thoughts below! "Best Mind Shuttle Best Mind Shuttle" -Telecom, 2010-present, I hate Telecom