|
On February 02 2015 07:50 vhapter wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2015 07:24 DemigodcelpH wrote:On February 02 2015 04:29 -Hammer- wrote:On February 02 2015 03:03 vhapter wrote:On February 01 2015 22:05 DemigodcelpH wrote:On January 31 2015 02:06 vhapter wrote:On January 30 2015 22:01 SatedSC2 wrote:On January 28 2015 05:48 -Hammer- wrote:On January 20 2015 05:01 Diamadoshikiller wrote:
I see all the replay and i have just one question.
Why pro-gamer not used your opening?
It seems really goooooddd.
In part of your replay, in reality it's your capacity to play mecha well , give you the win. But the opening requires the protoss to do robotic quickly! With that we can play without doubt. I'm not sure. I think some players feel it puts them behind, but I think it's better than any late exp plays out there. Would be interesting to see it used in the hands of a pro! Pros don't use it because it isn't viable when you're playing against people who know how to react... which is basically anyone with a brain who has seen it once. According to his claim, I should win no more than 10% of my games against this build, so why do I have a 100% win rate against it? The only thing I've seen my opponents "crush" with this build is their own economy. Because you don't. To be honest it sounds like you're desperately trying to make yourself feel good about yourself. Bring some replays if you're going to critique. Your pitiful ad hominem won't change my numbers. Instead, you should stop being delusional and ask yourself why Hammer hasn't properly replied to SatedSC2's detailed post on how he wrecks this strategy. Your hardon for this build cracks me up. If you don't think it works, why do you care so much? If you're not Terran, why do you care so much? You've been posting here for months, kind of sad. Let's play some practice games, you can post how easily you beat me after  Hammer.1928 He probably loses against it a lot and needs to validate himself by angrily posting in here and pretending he has a 90% winrate. It doesn't make sense for him to constantly come in here without any replays. In your dreams. Why would I ever need to post a replay anyway? What makes you believe I should be willing to go through hundreds of replays in search of something I hardly ever face, just to post a couple of replays that literally nobody is going to bother watching? That assumption is devoid of any logic whatsoever. I don't have to prove anything to you. If anything, Hammer is the one who has something to prove, since he's the one wrote the OP and claims that this strategy can be consistenly more successful than anything standard. Also, just for the record, I never said I have a 90% win-rate against this strategy - it's actually 100%. That number could obviously go down if I played someone much better than me, but that doesn't change the fact that Hammer's claim - that lower league players should be able to win 90% of their games consistenly - doesn't hold true at all against me.
Less talk more action..... he challenged you don't dodge.....
Hammer post the REP too we want to see how well this does against someone who knows its coming from the start to see the "correct" way to play Protoss lol
|
|
|
On February 03 2015 00:29 SatedSC2 wrote:
If you know it's coming from the start then you just open 2 Gate Robo and take the free-win. It's pointless to test a cheesy opening by playing people who know it is coming because that defeats the whole point of a cheese...
I agree it's like saying you will face a fake twilight blink into a dt proxy expand. You just build a turret at front of your expo and collect a freewin. This build might be strong because hard to scout at the moment where you have to choose a tech path. Imo this aggression is very hard to scout for a protoss especially if you use the build with 1-2 marines before. Hammer is basically going to sucide on this challenge no matter what.
This is true for most popular build as well. if you are 100% sure you are facing a type of build it is very easy to win as you can adapt and pick a greedy/cheesy opening that is a direct counter to the build you face so it's pointless.
Ladder wins is a good indicator of success of a build for ladder. This guide is not destined to MMA or Taeja it is destined for us ladder player.
I wouldn't call hammer build a "cheese" it's an early aggression like WM drop in TvP or a 3 reaper/hellion/banshee in TvZ if it doesn't suceed you are not dead but it has to get dommage done to be on par with your opponent. A cheese is a one trick pony, if you fail you will 99% loose vs an opponent with the same skill.
|
Since you guys want replays so much, here is a replay of a terran who lost more resources during the push than I did, not to mention the fact that his expansion is inevitably later than mine. In other words, the push failed to do enough damage. Whatever the terran does later can be also done with a more standard build that won't put you behind in both units lost and economy.
http://ggtracker.com/matches/5777909
On February 02 2015 23:57 Pirfiktshon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2015 07:50 vhapter wrote:On February 02 2015 07:24 DemigodcelpH wrote:On February 02 2015 04:29 -Hammer- wrote:On February 02 2015 03:03 vhapter wrote:On February 01 2015 22:05 DemigodcelpH wrote:On January 31 2015 02:06 vhapter wrote:On January 30 2015 22:01 SatedSC2 wrote:On January 28 2015 05:48 -Hammer- wrote:On January 20 2015 05:01 Diamadoshikiller wrote:
I see all the replay and i have just one question.
Why pro-gamer not used your opening?
It seems really goooooddd.
In part of your replay, in reality it's your capacity to play mecha well , give you the win. But the opening requires the protoss to do robotic quickly! With that we can play without doubt. I'm not sure. I think some players feel it puts them behind, but I think it's better than any late exp plays out there. Would be interesting to see it used in the hands of a pro! Pros don't use it because it isn't viable when you're playing against people who know how to react... which is basically anyone with a brain who has seen it once. According to his claim, I should win no more than 10% of my games against this build, so why do I have a 100% win rate against it? The only thing I've seen my opponents "crush" with this build is their own economy. Because you don't. To be honest it sounds like you're desperately trying to make yourself feel good about yourself. Bring some replays if you're going to critique. Your pitiful ad hominem won't change my numbers. Instead, you should stop being delusional and ask yourself why Hammer hasn't properly replied to SatedSC2's detailed post on how he wrecks this strategy. Your hardon for this build cracks me up. If you don't think it works, why do you care so much? If you're not Terran, why do you care so much? You've been posting here for months, kind of sad. Let's play some practice games, you can post how easily you beat me after Hammer.1928 He probably loses against it a lot and needs to validate himself by angrily posting in here and pretending he has a 90% winrate. It doesn't make sense for him to constantly come in here without any replays. In your dreams. Why would I ever need to post a replay anyway? What makes you believe I should be willing to go through hundreds of replays in search of something I hardly ever face, just to post a couple of replays that literally nobody is going to bother watching? That assumption is devoid of any logic whatsoever. I don't have to prove anything to you. If anything, Hammer is the one who has something to prove, since he's the one wrote the OP and claims that this strategy can be consistenly more successful than anything standard. Also, just for the record, I never said I have a 90% win-rate against this strategy - it's actually 100%. That number could obviously go down if I played someone much better than me, but that doesn't change the fact that Hammer's claim - that lower league players should be able to win 90% of their games consistenly - doesn't hold true at all against me. Less talk more action..... he challenged you don't dodge..... Hammer post the REP too we want to see how well this does against someone who knows its coming from the start to see the "correct" way to play Protoss lol
Learn some proper grammar before you try to bait other people. This is painful to read.
|
Less talk more action..... he challenged you don't dodge.....
Hammer post the REP too we want to see how well this does against someone who knows its coming from the start to see the "correct" way to play Protoss lol
Learn some proper grammar before you try to bait other people. This is painful to read.
Someone has a tight anus.....Still more trash talk and no action... you have to play Hammer to prove your point...
|
On February 03 2015 05:44 Pirfiktshon wrote:Show nested quote +Less talk more action..... he challenged you don't dodge.....
Hammer post the REP too we want to see how well this does against someone who knows its coming from the start to see the "correct" way to play Protoss lol
Learn some proper grammar before you try to bait other people. This is painful to read. Someone has a tight anus.....Still more trash talk and no action... you have to play Hammer to prove your point...
Are you blind or did you decided to pretend you didn't see the replay - where I get both a faster expansion and lose less resources than my opponent during the marauder widow push - I just posted?
|
Are you blind or did you decided to pretend you didn't see the replay - where I get both a faster expansion and lose less resources than my opponent during the marauder widow push - I just posted?
LOL did you see what I just posted I don't care about some no name it HAS to be Hammer or Nothing ......
|
|
|
On February 03 2015 08:11 Pirfiktshon wrote:Show nested quote +Are you blind or did you decided to pretend you didn't see the replay - where I get both a faster expansion and lose less resources than my opponent during the marauder widow push - I just posted? LOL did you see what I just posted I don't care about some no name it HAS to be Hammer or Nothing ......
I don't care about your Hammer complex either, illiterate boy. My criticism is backed up by evidence - if you don't like it, go "test" it against him youself. That's your problem, not mine.
Also, Hammer is a no name just like everyone else in this thread. People know him for his guide as much as other players know me for helping them in the Protoss Help Me thread.
|
On February 03 2015 08:44 vhapter wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2015 08:11 Pirfiktshon wrote:Are you blind or did you decided to pretend you didn't see the replay - where I get both a faster expansion and lose less resources than my opponent during the marauder widow push - I just posted? LOL did you see what I just posted I don't care about some no name it HAS to be Hammer or Nothing ...... I don't care about your Hammer complex either, illiterate boy. My criticism is backed up by evidence - if you don't like it, go "test" it against him youself. That's your problem, not mine. Also, Hammer is a no name just like everyone else in this thread. People know him for his guide as much as other players know me for helping them in the Protoss Help Me thread.
You're so salty, it's really funny. You still haven't messaged me to play? Waiting...
|
What's funny? I've given you much more legitimate feedback than any of the people who come here to say they liked the strategy. What's funny is the fact that you reply to everyone who doesn't have any criticism, but you refuse to take my feedback seriously.
Feedback on guides:
A guide is always evolving as the game is being more and more understood and as people find counter strategies. As the author it is your job to keep the guide up to date. If other players find weaknesses or suggest changes to the build, it is your job to alter it accordingly. If you disagree, fall back to Rule No 1: Post a replay or some other form of proof that the criticism isn’t valid.
Rule No 1: Everything you say must be supported by evidence.
I've already found a weakness - the very fact that the opener only put my opponent behind. Considering how many games you've played, it should be easy to find one where your opponent opens with a msc expand into robo, doesn't mess up his build or unit positioning, and still loses more resources than you. Not accomplishing that would be a failure as your expansion goes up much later.
Providing counterproof is your burden, not mine. Instead of asking for a grudge match, you should be thankful that someone not only gave you legitimate feedback, but even went through the trouble to look for a replay. And your claim that this build is enough to have a consistent 90% win rate in lower leagues is still unsupported.
|
I've already found a weakness - the very fact that the opener only put my opponent behind. Considering how many games you've played, it should be easy to find one where your opponent opens with a msc expand into robo, doesn't mess up his build or unit positioning, and still loses more resources than you. Not accomplishing that would be a failure as your expansion goes up much later.
Providing counterproof is your burden, not mine. Instead of asking for a grudge match, you should be thankful that someone not only gave you legitimate feedback, but even went through the trouble to look for a replay. And your claim that this build is enough to have a consistent 90% win rate in lower leagues is still unsupported.
You found theoretical weakness... you wouldn't tell maru his build is weak and needs to refine it because some diamond player that was using it lost would you? Either play him and post rep or stop posting here and crawl back under your bridge troll....
|
Oh man I just watched that rep... that guy was plat and the other thing is he had you beat and didn't realize it.... 2 times at LEAST! 2 times..... Not to mention he didn't even use the most up to date build. Honestly if that was me you wouldn' thave gotten past the 8 minute mark without me all over your base.... let alone hammer hahaha You should crawl back in your whole because that rep was laughable as a demonstration of possible weakness....
|
|
|
On February 03 2015 18:31 SatedSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2015 13:39 Pirfiktshon wrote:
Oh man I just watched that rep... that guy was plat and the other thing is he had you beat and didn't realize it.... 2 times at LEAST! 2 times..... Not to mention he didn't even use the most up to date build. Honestly if that was me you wouldn' thave gotten past the 8 minute mark without me all over your base.... let alone hammer hahaha You should crawl back in your whole because that rep was laughable as a demonstration of possible weakness.... Sigh. You're acting as if proof that this build is quite easy to counter wasn't already posted. This was almost a year ago: Show nested quote +On April 08 2014 02:50 SatedSC2 wrote:On April 08 2014 01:30 -Hammer- wrote:On April 07 2014 17:53 SatedSC2 wrote:
This isn't a good/stable opening because it's very easy to deflect the initial pressure and then crush through the timing-attack once you know the proper response. I have nothing against cheese builds, and this will definitely work very well against people who haven't seen it before or who don't manage to scout that it's coming, but acting as if this is a good/stable opening is disingenuous. Are you writing this based on experience or theory? I have used this build many times, and as previously mentioned, even if direct damage is not accomplished, indirect damage to Protoss economy is. Protoss needs to use chrono on army, engage at a time they would rather be focusing on macro, and so on. My numbers speak for themselves, your feedback is just conjecture. Experience. I've made several posts in this thread that explain why you're wrong to assume that the "indirect damage" you deal makes up for how non-economic this opening is. I've even made a post detailing what is 100% the correct response, and that response does not involve the Protoss chronoboosting anything other than Probes. I've played against this build on more than one occasion and the only time I lost was the very first time I faced it, which is also the only time I didn't respond using the response I detailed in this thread. Below is a screenshot to prove that I've both faced and beaten this build, although I unfortunately no longer have the replay. This game was played on the NA server - which isn't my normal server - and was against an unranked opponent who has previously placed in the Masters league. There are others, but I can't be bothered searching through my NA match history to find them; I also find it interesting how I've only ever seen this opening being used on NA... ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ah1s1Nj.jpg) My response in this game was exactly the response that I've posted in this thread. I opened with a 1 Gate FE (13 Gate, 14 Gas, 15 Pylon, 18 Zealot, 20 Cybernetics Core, 22 Cut Probes, 22 Nexus, 22 MSC) and followed that up with a quick Forge. This is a variation of the standard 1 Gate FE that I learnt from  TAiLS, but I don't see any reason why my response wouldn't work if the Protoss went for a more standard 1 Gate FE and followed that up with a quick Forge. As soon as the Forge finished, I threw down two Cannons at my natural and a third Cannon in my main mineral line. This might seem like a large number of Cannons, but this particular opening normally gets a Cannon in each mineral line anyway since it has no other way of deflecting Widow Mine drops. This essentially means that this Terran did a whopping 150 minerals of "indirect damage" to me. Through a combination of the Cannons and Photon Overcharge, I took absolutely no damage from the initial pressure even though I was chronoboosting Probes the whole damn time. If I remember correctly, I then went on to do an 8 Gate +2 Armour Chargelot/Archon timing-attack to win the game, which would make sense given that's the exact all-in TAiLS was refining when I copied this build off him. It's also a timing-attack that hits before your "mid-game" Widow Mine drop (based on the screenshots in the OP), which I find hilarious because it means that I managed to hit a full-strength timing-attack before your build was even half-way done... EDIT: As much as I love cheesy builds and timing-attacks, pretending that a combination of the two represents solid-play is completely ludicrous. Hammer completely dodged offering an explanation for how his build could deal with the response outlined in my post so I don't expect him to do so now. Not that I have anything against this build because I happen to know a lot about using bullshit builds to get wins on the ladder. Because of this, I feel like I can tell whether or not a build is legitimately "good" or just something that works because nobody sees it enough to know the proper response. I don't doubt that Hammer has a high win-rate with this build, but I have a high win-rate #PrayingToInCa and you don't see me pretending that it is a be-all-end-all standard build that will win all the damn time. SC2 isn't that simple. Gimmicky builds wouldn't work if everyone used them and that's why they don't, so something working on ladder doesn't mean it's a "good" build. It's just that gimmick/cheese happens to be fucking amazing in SC2 when the opponent doesn't scout it or doesn't respond perfectly. This argument is stupid. If you think that Hammer's build is anything other than a gimmicky ladder build that gets a high win-rate because it doesn't make sense then you're wholly incorrect. I should know because my Double-Triple-Double doesn't make sense either and people using it have gotten an 80% win-rate with it, but it's not a "good" build. It's a stupid build that happens to work. EDIT: Just to be perfectly clear: High Win-Rates ≠ "Good" Builds
On the build
While I agree with some of your points, your build with 3 cannons is a little bit weird and uncommon (never seen in EU server ever). The question is would you go for this weird 3 cannon build everytime you see someone build marines instead of reaper from terran. I feel that the legitimacy of an aggressive build depends on 3 factors :
1) is it easy to scout
2) is it strong vs standard openings
3) is it robust vs opponent common aggressions.
4) Bonus : can you transition into midgame/lategame without being too far behind
For point 1 it seems to me while I was testing hammer build that the build could be either hammer build or mine drop and if protoss even didn't scout the gas it could be a 1 rax fe as well or reaper expand because protoss often back their probe after scouting gas to avoid being blocked in terran base.
So far I didn't encountered anyone strongly reacting to this. They often thinks it's 1 rax fe or reaper fe . Overall i find this build hard to scout.
My one point of criticism regarding that is it feels to me that a protoss preping for a mine drop is also in good shape to defend Hammer build.
2) is it strong vs standard opening.
This build is very strong vs the standard 1 stalker 1 MsC expo that I see 70% of the time so in that regard it seems to me that it is a good build.
3) I faced multiple time oracle proxy and what can I say is that it allows to react in time to put turrets in mineral lines or at least have a WM in it. Regarding blink allin, I never faced it so couldn't tell but WM and marauder seems good compo vs that at least in diamond.
What I like with this build is that it has a well thought follow up with multiple stage of aggression throughout the game. Also it uses mech which is very fun and unusual. Overall after testing multiple weird gimmick terrans builds, this build is very good for ladder and tons of fun BECAUSE it has a follow up. Also the micro at the begining is really enjoyable and demand skill to be perfectly mastered.
On the derail of the thread
I understand why Sated is upset because indeed Hammer doesn't response at all to criticisim in this thread which is very dishonest when you are building a strategy guide. The attitude is overall very childish and doesn't serve his purpose.
Too bad because Terrans definitively need some well thought alternative builds because standard bio play one day everyday is what makes this game boring.
|
Yeah I stated my thoughts on the build twice so far in this thread too in a very fair and civilized manner and I don't think I got any thoughts from the OP on them.
|
|
|
On February 03 2015 08:28 SatedSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2015 08:11 Pirfiktshon wrote:Are you blind or did you decided to pretend you didn't see the replay - where I get both a faster expansion and lose less resources than my opponent during the marauder widow push - I just posted? LOL did you see what I just posted I don't care about some no name it HAS to be Hammer or Nothing ...... Be right back, stitching my sides back together after this joker just split them.
This is cute coming from a masters protoss.
|
On February 03 2015 20:27 Jakamakala wrote:
Yeah I stated my thoughts on the build twice so far in this thread too in a very fair and civilized manner and I don't think I got any thoughts from the OP on them.
He ignores basically any post that don't start by " your build is so great". I suggest you try that before any criticism 
On February 03 2015 20:42 SatedSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2015 19:25 klup wrote:On February 03 2015 18:31 SatedSC2 wrote:On February 03 2015 13:39 Pirfiktshon wrote:
Oh man I just watched that rep... that guy was plat and the other thing is he had you beat and didn't realize it.... 2 times at LEAST! 2 times..... Not to mention he didn't even use the most up to date build. Honestly if that was me you wouldn' thave gotten past the 8 minute mark without me all over your base.... let alone hammer hahaha You should crawl back in your whole because that rep was laughable as a demonstration of possible weakness.... Sigh. You're acting as if proof that this build is quite easy to counter wasn't already posted. This was almost a year ago: On April 08 2014 02:50 SatedSC2 wrote:On April 08 2014 01:30 -Hammer- wrote:On April 07 2014 17:53 SatedSC2 wrote:
This isn't a good/stable opening because it's very easy to deflect the initial pressure and then crush through the timing-attack once you know the proper response. I have nothing against cheese builds, and this will definitely work very well against people who haven't seen it before or who don't manage to scout that it's coming, but acting as if this is a good/stable opening is disingenuous. Are you writing this based on experience or theory? I have used this build many times, and as previously mentioned, even if direct damage is not accomplished, indirect damage to Protoss economy is. Protoss needs to use chrono on army, engage at a time they would rather be focusing on macro, and so on. My numbers speak for themselves, your feedback is just conjecture. Experience. I've made several posts in this thread that explain why you're wrong to assume that the "indirect damage" you deal makes up for how non-economic this opening is. I've even made a post detailing what is 100% the correct response, and that response does not involve the Protoss chronoboosting anything other than Probes. I've played against this build on more than one occasion and the only time I lost was the very first time I faced it, which is also the only time I didn't respond using the response I detailed in this thread. Below is a screenshot to prove that I've both faced and beaten this build, although I unfortunately no longer have the replay. This game was played on the NA server - which isn't my normal server - and was against an unranked opponent who has previously placed in the Masters league. There are others, but I can't be bothered searching through my NA match history to find them; I also find it interesting how I've only ever seen this opening being used on NA... My response in this game was exactly the response that I've posted in this thread. I opened with a 1 Gate FE (13 Gate, 14 Gas, 15 Pylon, 18 Zealot, 20 Cybernetics Core, 22 Cut Probes, 22 Nexus, 22 MSC) and followed that up with a quick Forge. This is a variation of the standard 1 Gate FE that I learnt from TAiLS, but I don't see any reason why my response wouldn't work if the Protoss went for a more standard 1 Gate FE and followed that up with a quick Forge. As soon as the Forge finished, I threw down two Cannons at my natural and a third Cannon in my main mineral line. This might seem like a large number of Cannons, but this particular opening normally gets a Cannon in each mineral line anyway since it has no other way of deflecting Widow Mine drops. This essentially means that this Terran did a whopping 150 minerals of "indirect damage" to me. Through a combination of the Cannons and Photon Overcharge, I took absolutely no damage from the initial pressure even though I was chronoboosting Probes the whole damn time. If I remember correctly, I then went on to do an 8 Gate +2 Armour Chargelot/Archon timing-attack to win the game, which would make sense given that's the exact all-in TAiLS was refining when I copied this build off him. It's also a timing-attack that hits before your "mid-game" Widow Mine drop (based on the screenshots in the OP), which I find hilarious because it means that I managed to hit a full-strength timing-attack before your build was even half-way done... EDIT: As much as I love cheesy builds and timing-attacks, pretending that a combination of the two represents solid-play is completely ludicrous. Hammer completely dodged offering an explanation for how his build could deal with the response outlined in my post so I don't expect him to do so now. Not that I have anything against this build because I happen to know a lot about using bullshit builds to get wins on the ladder. Because of this, I feel like I can tell whether or not a build is legitimately "good" or just something that works because nobody sees it enough to know the proper response. I don't doubt that Hammer has a high win-rate with this build, but I have a high win-rate #PrayingToInCa and you don't see me pretending that it is a be-all-end-all standard build that will win all the damn time. SC2 isn't that simple. Gimmicky builds wouldn't work if everyone used them and that's why they don't, so something working on ladder doesn't mean it's a "good" build. It's just that gimmick/cheese happens to be fucking amazing in SC2 when the opponent doesn't scout it or doesn't respond perfectly. This argument is stupid. If you think that Hammer's build is anything other than a gimmicky ladder build that gets a high win-rate because it doesn't make sense then you're wholly incorrect. I should know because my Double-Triple-Double doesn't make sense either and people using it have gotten an 80% win-rate with it, but it's not a "good" build. It's a stupid build that happens to work. EDIT: Just to be perfectly clear: High Win-Rates ≠ "Good" Builds On the build
While I agree with some of your points, your build with 3 cannons is a little bit weird and uncommon (never seen in EU server ever). The question is would you go for this weird 3 cannon build everytime you see someone build marines instead of reaper from terran. As you'll see from my screenshot, the Cannon response was based on Terran opening Factory and Tech Lab, which was the original version of this build. That version of the build is incredibly easy to scout since there is literally nothing to stop me from scouting the Factory and Tech Lab. 3 Cannons is definitely weird and uncommon but you wouldn't normally get 3 Cannons with that opening, you would usually only get 1 Cannon in your main mineral line and maybe 1 Cannon at your natural: It was an opening I saw TAiLS using on his stream to open Chargelot/Archon with fast upgrades (a style that is obviously dead thanks to the Widow Mine buff) and I modified it to work against Hammer's opening after losing to Hammer's opening the first time I saw it. I've never lost to it since. If the Terran opens with 2 Marines before switching into Marauders then this build becomes even easier to hold. Although I will admit that I've never personally played against it, it's quite obvious that really fast Marauder/Mine is a different proposition to Marine/Mine. You can't go for the extreme counter I outined above because you don't have any reason to do so but, based on the fact that 2 Rax Proxy Factory is holdable with a standard 1 Gate FE*, I'm sure the Marine modification to Hammer's build would be equally holdable since it essentially becomes a watered down version of Lillekanin's build. *I have a replay of this hold being incredibly easy when done correctly, even without a Robotics Facility since you can just zone out the Widow Mines from being useful, but I've also fucked it up pretty hard before and so I'm not saying it is trivial...
Yep I just saw that you were talking about the old direct tech lab build. The marine opening is for me necessary for this build not being scouted. There is absolutely no reason a protoss don't smell the fish if he sees a techlab building on the rax.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
