Swann's Cyclones: Range bug and more

Co-op Missions Discussion
1

So, recently it has come to light that the range upgrade for Swann’s cyclones, Targeting Optics, is actually bugged.

The Bug

Targeting Optics states that it “increases lock on range by 3”. Whether this means cast range, leash range, or both is ambiguous, but in fact what it actually does is increases cast range and NOT leash range. This alone would not be a bug, just a case of another poor tooltip.

However, it increases the range indicator for the leash range by 3, thus making it appear to increase leash range by 3, but instead your cyclone will lose the target well before reaching the edge of the range visual. So this upgrade actually makes it a lot harder to micro cyclones because instead of having an indicator to tell you how far you can reach, you instead have to eyeball it knowing the indicator is a lie. Worse yet, the range indicator for the cast range does NOT increase, even though the cast range has in fact increased, so this upgrade makes BOTH range indicators incorrect.

HP Breakpoints

But while we’re on the topic, let’s discuss some other problems with cyclones. For example, the fact that reducing cyclone base hp by -20hp would be a significant BUFF to Swann’s cyclones. Why? Well with Swann’s level 15 talent cyclones go from 200 hp to 240 hp, which is critical because Amon’s BCs will cast yamato on any unit with 225 hp or greater. This means that cyclones become significantly LESS effective against terran upon reaching level 15. For those who are wondering, yes the same applies to Science Vessels.

If Swann’s cyclones had 20 less base hp, that would be 180 hp + 36 hp for level 15 resulting in 216 hp, safe from Yamato (unless you defensive matrix). Same could be done to science vessels, which would make Swann’s life a lot easier against Terran.

Slow-op

And now for the move speed problem, because for some reason having fast units in co-op is banned. Corrected from real time to co-op time, 1v1 cyclones have 3.37 movespeed, compared to the 2.81 of Swann’s. A few units that 1v1 cyclones can kite and Swann can’t include:

  • Stalkers
  • Roaches
  • Hydralisks
  • Ultralisks
  • Dark Templar

And more, but these are just a few examples. Because we can’t have the cyclone, a mobile skirmishing unit, be… mobile. That just wouldn’t make sense.

I Can’t See!

And one last thing to complain about: vision! Swann’s terrible at getting it for his cyclones. And sure, it’s probably never going to happen that Swann steals scan from Raynor (though Mengsk did steal drop pods…) But right now Swann doesn’t have any units with especially large vision range to spot for his cyclones, especially not when you want to be microing cyclones rather than the spotting unit. Wraiths kinda work… until Amon makes detectors. Your best option becomes flying factories. I don’t know what the best solution is here, but there’s got to be something.

And Armour Too

The troubles for Cyclones don’t end there, because their lockon is actually affected by armour, unlike 1v1 cyclones. This means that they actually get worse as the mission progresses and gets armour upgrades, while also dramatically reducing their effectiveness against high armour map objectives, something they should specialize in killing. Worse yet, while in 1v1 Magfield increases the damage of lockon by 100%, in co-op magfield increases the attack speed of lockon by 100%, which both means slightly less bursty/less responsive damage but also means that cyclones are even worse impacted by this significant vulnerability to armour. A vulnerability they shouldn’t even have in the first place.

~

Anyways, that’s my complaints for cyclones outlined. At very least, can we get a bugfix? Because this pattern of underused units being bugged out is getting old.

13 Likes
2

Really good spot on the range bug, it’s amazing that that hasn’t been common knowledge for years. I know Cyclones aren’t popular, but they have a few fans out there who I’d expect would’ve spotted it.

The ‘coolest’ vision idea that’s always floated is them being able to keep a little spot of vision on any unit they’ve locked onto. What do folk think of that? The synergy with the Drill is obvious, but is it a good mechanic? Excessive? It doesn’t ask any gameplay of the player to keep vision, or allow any counterplay, whereas using a spotter would.

1 Like
3

I like the idea of drastically increasing the leash range (to ~30) but still needing vision. Then have the range upgrade increase lockon range And vision range.

And have the mag field accelerator upgrade increase move speed as well.

3 Likes
4

I have had it with Cyclones constantly being shafted by significant inconveniences. The sad thing is, on the rare situations things line up, cyclones do amazing damage with their upgraded lock-on. The issue is of course being able to properly play to their strengths, as they need such niche circumstances to operate at full strength.

The best part is, you can just slap some extended functionality onto cyclone upgrades! Add vision to Targeting Optics, add move speed to Mag-Field Accelerator. It’s so simple.

3 Likes
5

Why can’t we just buff their base speed again?

6

Dangers of Amon cyclones inheriting base unit buffs, because we can’t have nice things in Starcraft. Look what happened to Battlecruisers!

7

Except doesn’t Amon already research magfield accelerators?

EDIT: Yeah just double checked with a replay, he not only gets magfield but when they buffed Swann’s magfield they also buffed Amon’s magfield. So a bit late.

Second Edit: For anyone wondering, Amon gets magfield to double the damage of his lock-on around 10 minutes. He got it in 10:06 in the replay I have, not sure if it’s always that particular second or not.

8

Commander upgrades are different from Amons upgrades

But commander units are usually the same as Amons units

9

This is the only part of this that I strongly disagree with, just because I’d rather not nerf units to tiptoe around enemy AI. Making units worse in this way is a slippery slope. I’d say the real problem here is Amon’s Yamato Cannon. The Wiki says that for some reason, Amon’s Battlecruisers have a yamato cooldown of 1.5 seconds… There is no reason why that cooldown should be this short. It should be at least 60 seconds, like Raynor’s; otherwise they can just spam yamato on your army all day long. The fact that a difference of 40 health points is the difference between a unit being fine and getting totally wrecked does not speak to me that the fault lies with that unit, only that the current implementation of Amon’s yamato is blatantly and disgustingly unbalanced. The only way this would be balanced is if it dealt a fraction of the damage, which it does not.

Thankfully this doesn’t matter, because Swann’s Hellbats already have more life than Amon’s Hellbats. The same with Vorazun’s Dark Templar having more shields. And Raynor’s yamato has a cooldown of 60 seconds, while Amon’s yamato has a cooldown of 1.5.

10

The problem is that even if Amon’s BCs yamato slower, cyclones have to get within yamato range to lock-on in the first place, so then we just get cyclones being virtually the only unit that has real problems. Well, and Sky Fury, but at least Sky Fury can survive a yamato and even dodge it at 3 stars.

11

I personally do not make cyclons because they do the same damage as tanks. With Hercules sieged tanks can move just like cyclons. Plus tanks have Immortality Protocol.

They need to make cyclons more fancy to make it more popular. As of now builds with tanks with Immortality Protocol and goliath, all purpose unit, are better than cylons.

12

Alright, so it’s just been confirmed that co-op cyclone lockon is reduced by armour; it is NOT spell damage, unlike 1v1. I’ll add it to the original post.

13

Biggest issue with lock on in my opinion is that it gets reduced by armor. each shot of 25 damage gets reduced by 1 point of armor, and so Armor becomes very detrimental to this.

It gets worse with the damage upgrade, which just doubles the amount of shots in the same duration, so against a 3/3 Battlecruiser, that 1000 damage becomes 760 damage and each shot deals 19 damage. As i was typing this, Wirebender had informed people of it, but I figured I migh as well share my findings.

Side note, magnetic missiles from warhound are also affected like this.

1 Like
14

Honestly, I would prefer my Cyclones to get targeted by Yamatos over my Science Vessels, and the extra health is more handy in general combat situations. Granted, in a perfect world, they would give EMP Shockwave to SVs to allow Swann some sort of counterplay to spellcasters/BCs, but alas.

I thought that Sky Furies Dodge chance couldn’t proc versus instances of spell damage, such as Psi Storms, Yamato, or Green Hybrid Plasma? At least, I’ve never seen my Furies ever dodge a fireball sent their way.

1 Like
15

Maybe if lock-on had an upgrade that disables enemy spellcasters, like Nova’s Goliaths.

They could rename Mag-Field Accelerator and have it also disable enemy abilities, in addition to increasing damage.

16

Honestly, I had hoped during Swann’s P1 revamp that the drill laser would disable energy casting abilities for enemies hit by the laser or its splash, giving a form of counterplay by microing the laser on clumps of BCs or Vipers. Alas, that didn’t happen.

17

I like how Alarak now has 3 builds. Mech, Ascendants, Air build. Very distinct builds.
With Swann however - cyclons do not stand out at all. For AA Goliath and Wraith are better. For ground - tanks are better.

They could make cyclone very good at something unique, perhaps mobility and vision. But we have fast Wraith and long range tanks already, so cyclone can be long range vision unit?

18

I’ve watched my Sky Fury dodge plasma blast and seen them start spinning like crazy in parasitic bomb, so it does work.

1 Like
19

This is what I’d do:
– Fix Targeting Optics so that it increases both cast range and leash range by 3. Additional functionality: While active, Lock On increases Cyclone vision radius to leash range.
– Cyclone base movement speed increased.
– Lock On is no longer affected by armor.

20

By the way, just to be clear, I really like this idea and have thought of it myself, but there are many many things to talk about with Swann right now.