[Guide] How To Tell "Zerg" From "Not Zerg"

Yep, true zergs are not the same as organized numbers. Most threads I see ranting about "zergs" sound like they are actually experiencing the power of a fully organized platoon and throwing a hissy that they aren't part of such an animal. The actual Zerg is the mass of unorganized players that rely on their numbers and not organization.

While I appreciate the attempt to educate, and the use of formatting, that was still a train-wreck of a post.

The formatting, specifically the bullet lists, didn't seem to directly interrelate within their topics, IE the bullets didn't exclusively group similar tiers of subject matter together.
For links, try to put a couple of word example as the link rather than "this". Linked information should be auxiliary, not mandatory to follow to understand your point.
Contradiction: beware contradicting points, like in one you said that HA are the exclusive answer and then also said there are too many medics. If there is a reason for this contradiction, then the sentences might need to be combined. Additionally, some things seemed to contradict overall tenets, like zergs being mindless mob mentality masses yet they leave continents to pursue resources. In my experience, Zergs leave after they've hit a wall and the disperse, which would no longer make them a zerg.


There were a LOT of good points buried in there, which is a shame. Perhaps try grouping your bullet points by further subdivisions next time, or utilizing reverse grouping. For example:


******************

Then you, my young padawan, have already lost.

A good way to understand if its a mindless zerg is if you see 2 platoons moving to capture a base with only 1-12 enemies. Most good platoon leaders will split up their platoon to capture other bases.

Wow thanks professor! And way to stay on topic!

Best bet is to help Stew360 with his posts.

You want the Definition of the Words Zergs ? and how it apears as a concept in videogame ?

Read this »»» The term "Zerg Rush" or "zerging" has entered video gaming jargon to describe sacrificing economic development in favour of using many low-cost and weak units to rush and overwhelm an enemy by attrition or sheer numbers. The tactic is infamous, with most experienced RTS players being familiar with the tactic in a way or another


basically no matters is the Zergs is well organised or not a Definition of a Zergs is winning by Sheers numbers or attrition , their is No subtilitys or anything of that matters , if you use tons of units to basically swarm your opponents oppening the flood gates , it is call Zergins


Organised Zergs are even more a Zergs than the (( randoms )) who blindely become a zergs from the warp gates and then goes vanish few regions after that


In RTS games a Zergs , is driven by the player , who controles the mass of Zergling to acomplish a objective wich is detroying the ennemy ressources income and eventually the bases itself , the Zergling arent no brainers , they are driven by the player mind /point and click orders ...

In Planetside 2 A Zergs , is driven by the Leaders , who controles the mass ( of zergling players ) to acomplish a specific objective wich is capturing bases and reduce the ennemy ressources income , the ps2 Zerglinf arent totally no brainers , they are driven by the leaders mind / squad/platoon way points and VOIP orders ...

Is it the same thing , yes it is

A RANDOMS Zergs simply created itself naturally when player get out of a warpgate lock mostly and this ISNT a ZERGS that can be compare to starcraft definition of it , A TRUE ZERGS if you follow the starcraft origins ARE ORGANISED and PLAYERS DRIVEN Zergs , not no brainers randoms zergs

EDIT : In starcraft the thing that make a true Zergs infamous and efficient is how fast a players can get it done ..the faster the better

In planetside 2 the thing that make a true Zergs infamous and efficient is how fast the leaders can get their troups to regroup and crash on the regions they need the faster the better ( great exemple The enclave ) for anyones who know that clan know that BCP was the king of the Zergs For any matherson players we all know thats Vanu matherson as become a true Zergs driven by leaders

Zerging is the idea of overwhelming numbers. A Zergling rush from Star Craft was just to spawn a crap ton of zerglings and do a quick rush to wail on your opponent. It doesn't need a more complex and indepth analogy then that.

and from where did you take your (( personal definition )) ?

Your definition mean nothing and is not evenh related to the origin of this word , Zergs is actually a faction in starcraft

the origin of the word come with a tactic call Zergs rush

The term "Zerg Rush" or "zerging" has entered video gaming jargon to describe sacrificing economic development in favour of using many low-cost and weak units to rush and overwhelm an enemy by attrition or sheer numbers. The tactic is infamous, with most experienced RTS players being familiar with the tactic in a way or another ...



Thats said , a Zergs rush is controled by a players who as to quickly build a army or zergling , sacrificing hes economic developments in favor of building a army of smalls troops to quickly atack is opponents and hit in its ressources mostly first and then destroy this player by attrition and sheer numbers


So where in the wold did you even get that (( definition )) of zergs ? Where in the wold a Zerg as to be unorganised ? Do you think that in starcraft where micromanagement is KING the Zergling are unorganise ? No they are not they follow the order of the RTS /point and click players , As well a Ps2 zergs follow the Platoon way point squad waypoint and VOIP orders lol


There is no way that a zergs could be truely sucessfull whiout been organised


Do you think a zergrush in starcraft could work whiout having the RTS player to controle and guided them ? if he lets hes zergs going anywhere they gonna get destroy

these Zergs are totally organised



here a planetside 2 Zergs exemple

They changed PS2 so that we have Zerg vs Zerg. The plan (from Higby) is to control plays with reduced choices and funnel them in the direction the devs want them to go.

Call it whatever you want we have massive group vs massive group in not so massive areas. Live with the results. I blame SOE for listening to the end users wanting easy mode everything.

The important caveat is that the OP was not insane and had some good points. Stew is Stew, and 'der aint nothin' you can do about Stew.

Stew... This is the definition in the context of planetside 2 used by most of the players...
In SC it means another thing, of course.

Good day sir.

Thank you, I'm actually struggling with formatting, since I myself can't read unformatted walls of text and try to use formatting in my own posts, which I do agree is far from perfect.

Also, I love how you use flattery to make your education sound like an advice rather than "telling what to do", despite the "trainwreck" notion. You're either an ex-military staff, teacher/professor, psychologist or pickup artist. My best bet would be that you're an ex-military teacher/professor of psychology that visits bars alot. Either that or you're a politician.

But more on topic:

There are indeed certain outfits (Miller) that I would love to call zergs, but to be fair I can't. My favorite example is BTRD. As much as I want to define them as "zerg", they really aren't, since despite their somewhat mediocre skill, they still try to behave strategically, utilizing (or trying to utilize) tactics and teamwork.

How to tell ZERG from NOT ZERG;

ZERG: Nothing to kill, see or do, XP per hour gets cut in half or more, is very boring, is very laggy, low fps

NON-ZERG: Lots to kill, see and do, XP per hour at normal or high rate, good fights, better latency, higher fps.

Now that lattice has concentrated the Zerg even more, much gametime is spent twiddling my thumbs at bases now, rather than the old choice of pickign a fight away from teh Zerg.

No actually i proove that those who try to justified to ( not been a zergs ) while they are just because they pretent to be organised is silly to me ...

There is only one legitimate way to define a Zergs and its base on this word history , I dont know who in the wold as ( crafted a false definition of it ) to fit whatever silly needs ...

A zergs dont mean unorganised , A zergs dont only mean a huge numbers of players , A Zergs rush is a infamous BUT CHEAP tactics , you can call it legitimate but still remain cheap , i doubt anyones could watch start craft competitive if everyones was using Zergs rush tactics all the time lol ....

Zergs rush in ps2 or in SC mean the exact same thing the origine of the word make its meaning ... thats it

There are no Zerg, only Balls.

Non zergs will use the numbers of players need or required to get a specific situation done , they wont overload any area with multiples plattoons and insanes numbers of players just to be sure to ( win )

The lattice or even the servers pops isnt the true problems , players and there tactics and coordination limitation is ...

Peoples simply use the easy way to get thing done all the time , exept few nice smallers outfits

All i see so far on matherson for the most part is BCP The Enclave type of thing getting larges numbers of players crash on a bases leave it their , crush on another one steam rolling their way to victory ...

Empty answers and evading questions seem to be the running trend in this forums. People don't take time to explain anymore.

There are only two things that matter. Zerg or not zerg (whatever these words mean semantically) is irrelephant.
1) Do you get the job done? and
2) How well did you get the job done?

Its like debating which of the following is a vegetable: a tomayto or a tomahto

Yeah its boring.
With the lattice I don't have much choice.
But then before lattice, like on Amerish still, zerg still is the most popular tactic.
its just that on Amerish, I can be fighting 3-4 annoyng guys podding in at a back base trying to take it from me, so its a private little war that is far mor interesting (and sometimes frustrating lol) but more rewarding in the end than the zerg can ever be.

I dont get that on lattice continents, because small pockets of enemies and mini squad vs squad are simply not there anymore.

Here I'll give you a quick break down. The term "zerg" comes from StarCraft, Zerg where creachers that where fast and cheap to build but also very weak. Players used a tactic, which involved making a horde of them that overwhelmed their enemy so much so that they couldn't kill them fast enough, called a Zerg Rush (Google it, Google has their own browser game for it).

The term in PS2 has been falsely used to describe a large force in general when it should actually be used to describe a large force that vastly outnumbers their enemy.

Example: If you see, in the region population, something like; Enemies detected 48+, Allies detected 12-24; than your team is facing a zerg. If you see; Enemies detected 48+, Allies detected 48+ AND the pie chart is around 50% that IS NOT a zerg because your team is not vastly outnumbered.

Granted it is a tactic, but a very poor one. In this game it is best to capture a base with the least amount of players possible so you can spread every one to more bases.

Non TR example lest I sound like I'm playing favorites



Thats 3 to 1 odds. At bare minimum that is 48 TR against 144 VS. They could cut their numbers by half, still outnumber the defenders, and move them to another hex. A non zerg would say "Hey guys do we really need 100 more people then they have? How about we move them somewhere else?".

If you have a huge number advantage over me you're a zerg. Hacking turrets or reviving people doesnt change that at all