Zerg - And what that means?

[Crator]

What's to remedy? It's just how it is, in people's mind. I'm reading this entire thread like it should be in the wiki. :P One could take all the info here with all the point of views and the Zerg wiki would be pretty complete....

[BuzzCutPsycho]

If you don't like it you could always play BF3 or the upcoming Black Ops 2. Just don't get upset if you get killed 2v1, okay?

[Wahooo]

Originally Posted by WildVS

So what do you to counter this? Come to forums and whine?

Originally Posted by WildVS

I'm just basically trying to understand how we go about remedying this? Are we just going to whine ad-nauseum but oh wait I got it, if you don't like it there's always 32v32 or less, matchplay type games? I play solo mostly or occasionally join squads of re-secure specialists as that is how I play. I do love the challenge of re-secures against superior numbers. But you guys whining are just fueling the fire. Seriously. It's been this way since 2003. Like I said get used to it or just leave because there isn't enough cheese in the world for all this whine.

Fix it and people will find something else to whine about.
If I get a kill its skill
If it kills me its cheap
If I win it is superior tactics
If they win it is HAX/Zerg/Cheap/Luck/Lag

Meh. It is the way of the Interwebz.

[IMMentat]

You do realise I was generalising yes?
My post was long enough without going into the meat, bone and muscle description of what happens within the zerg/blob/army swarm.

#edit#
Just noticed 2 paghes since my post, but meh, the piont stands.

The use of a simple label for a complex system was bound to cause confusion and backlash.

[Toppopia]

Originally Posted by Wahooo

Fix it and people will find something else to whine about.
If I get a kill its skill
If it kills me its cheap
If I win it is superior tactics
If they win it is HAX/Zerg/Cheap/Luck/Lag

Meh. It is the way of the Interwebz.

And you forgot the paradox of "I use a weapon, it sucks. Enemy uses same weapon against me, kicks my butt."

I really hate that paradox...

[jepaul]

So we have this so far from this thread.

-- A zerg is a large group of unorganized players moving as a group to capture point after point regardless of what is going on elsewhere.
-- A zerg is an outfit that moves in large groups and doesn't use vehicles or classes to compliment whatever it is they might be doing.
-- A zerg can be any number of players, organized or not, if the group they are attacking have significantly less players than the attacking group. What constitutes significantly less is simply a matter of opinion and varies greatly but is usually based on winning vs losing.
-- A zerg can be any number of people, organized or not, that takes and holds a point, with even numbers or not, and the defenders look for a reason why if the attacking group seems to be unorganized.
-- A zerg is wherever the main focus is of the enemy and the majority of the enemies players are there. Organized, even numbers, or not.
-- A zerg is any outfit, that when moving, organized or not, routinely have more players than the outfit or outfits they are attacking. This group is still called a zerg even in battles where they don't have overwhelming numbers simply because they have at times had overwhelming numbers.

So, albeit I might be more confused now than ever, but a zerg, or zerg outfit, can be anywhere, at anytime, with any number of players?

So, in my opinion, a zerg can be anyone, at anytime, regardless of their intent if the enemy is simply looking for an excuse to why they lost?

[SKYeXile]

Originally Posted by WildVS

That's pretty offensive to a lot of players don't you think?

Nah, probably only about 31% of players.

[Trafalgar]

Originally Posted by WildVS

I think you hit it right on the head. Best thing I can figure for some types is to have this instanced cowboy type street fight where people go 1v1 to determine who has the most leet skills.

I think they've added that to CoD:MW3.

[Sabot]

The term originates from Star Craft, where zerging was a tactic used to very early destroy the enemys production by simply overwhelming him with units that were practicly useless in small numbers. It has then been adpoted into the whole gaming community to describe just that... quantity over quality.

In PS1 specificly I guess the ones zerging was the remainder of the factions players who didn't use any "finer" means of beating an opponent than baning their heads against the front lines... people doing max crashes, gen drops, back hacks, actively searching for enemy spawn points etc. was still part of the zerg, but they weren't zerging, so to speak.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by jepaul

So I read, and agree with the posts, about zerg outfits this, zerg outfits that.

But what is a zerg? I understand the definition so no need to explain.

But in PS what is a zerg?

Is it 30 people? Is it 50? Is it 100?

If the goal of the game is to take territory and win wouldn't a "zerg", or superior numbers, be the best way to do that?

I ask because there seems to be such animosity towards "zergs". So I ask, what is a zerg, and what exactly is wrong with it?

If a group of 200 have fun playing together and they are able to manage those numbers are the groups that complain about them simply complaining because they can't compete against a "zerg"?

So the questions is. How many people in PS2 constitute a zerg?

This is the perfect exemple of Zerg players they want High TTK and they want to relies on Numbers and huge team instead of relying on Skills and true team work ennemies spotting etc.. they just want to ran over people like a steamroller ! these technics are noobs friendly and required No skills Proove here »»»» http://yfrog.com/mtwlfdp
THATS WHATS HE SAID READ CAREFULLY :


There's no point in playing with a large group if they're going to get destroyed by 3 guys sitting in a base. This game is about LARGE SCALE COMBAT, not 3 players sitting and killing an entire outfit because they happen to be good at the game. It shouldn't be about small groups of people winning against huge groups.

If I take a hundred guys to fight ten, I should not expect to lose, EVER. I might take some casualties if those ten guys have prepared and planned very well, but I should still win.

Hotstarthefaggot en réponse à : Hotstarthefaggot(Afficher le commentaire) il y a 3 jours

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is whats i reply
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
its seams your lack of skills is obvious if your afraid to loose agains 3 of us if your clan mates are garbage enough to loose in a low ttk 10 vs 3 you deserve to get destroy !

stew360 en réponse à : Hotstarthefaggot il y a 15 heures dans la liste de lecture Uploaded videos

[Sabot]

Originally Posted by Stew

This is the perfect exemple of Zerg players they want High TTK and they want to relies on Numbers and huge team instead of relying on Skills and true team work ennemies spotting etc.. they just want to ran over people like a steamroller ! these technics are noobs friendly and required No skills Proove here »»»» http://yfrog.com/mtwlfdp
THATS WHATS HE SAID READ CAREFULLY :


There's no point in playing with a large group if they're going to get destroyed by 3 guys sitting in a base. This game is about LARGE SCALE COMBAT, not 3 players sitting and killing an entire outfit because they happen to be good at the game. It shouldn't be about small groups of people winning against huge groups.

If I take a hundred guys to fight ten, I should not expect to lose, EVER. I might take some casualties if those ten guys have prepared and planned very well, but I should still win.

Hotstarthefaggot en réponse à : Hotstarthefaggot(Afficher le commentaire) il y a 3 jours

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is whats i reply
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
its seams your lack of skills is obvious if your afraid to loose agains 3 of us if your clan mates are garbage enough to loose in a low ttk 10 vs 3 you deserve to get destroy !

stew360 en réponse à : Hotstarthefaggot il y a 15 heures dans la liste de lecture Uploaded videos


Planetside 2 TTK ( Time To Kill ) why its better medium Low than High - YouTube

No... also, what?

You can't balance TTK in an uneven fight with regards to number of people, m'kay? Also.. headshots... find cover and L2Aim... the TTK will be really effing low.

Now stop hijacking threads, and stay on topic.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Sabot

No... also, what?

You can't balance TTK in an uneven fight with regards to number of people, m'kay? Also.. headshots... find cover and L2Aim... the TTK will be really effing low.

Now stop hijacking threads, and stay on topic.

Iam on topic perfectly on topic ! High ttk is in the Zerg clan mentality they want it they figth for it and ive proove it rigth their »»»»»

THE ZERG WORDS
__________________________________________________ ________

There's no point in playing with a large group if they're going to get destroyed by 3 guys sitting in a base. This game is about LARGE SCALE COMBAT, not 3 players sitting and killing an entire outfit because they happen to be good at the game. It shouldn't be about small groups of people winning against huge groups.

If I take a hundred guys to fight ten, I should not expect to lose, EVER. I might take some casualties if those ten guys have prepared and planned very well, but I should still win.

Hotstarthefaggot en réponse à : Hotstarthefaggot(Afficher le commentaire) il y a 3 jours
__________________________________________________ ____________
MY WORDS
__________________________________________________ ____________
its seams your lack of skills is obvious if your afraid to loose agains 3 of us if your clan mates are garbage enough to loose in a low ttk 10 vs 3 you deserve to get destroy !

stew360 en réponse à : Hotstarthefaggot il y a 15 heures dans la liste de lecture Uploaded videos

With a high ttk the Zerg will be impossible to stop even if your Twice or 3 times as good as they are Numbers will always win and this should never happen !

Iam on topics ive show the ZERG MENTALITY and whats they want this game to become Noobs friendly and not skilled based they want number to win over anything

[Sabot]

I don't follow you logic... how can a higher TTK with headshots be noob fiendly? It doesn't matter if you're in the zerg or not, you still have to aim better than avarage in a game with a TTK of 12-13, than in one with TTK of 3-4.

To me it seems you are the one that is afraid of losing to superior numbers, as you want them to die instantly from your Jackhammer or spraying of the Gauss Rifle. If you'd actually have to use cover and aim for the head to be effective against a superior force, that'd be a show skill.. not a "who fires first" scenario.

I don't even know what you think a low TTK is? Is it 2-3 bullets? 5-6? 9-10? A 9-10 bullet TTK might be absolutely fine, I don't know I haven't played the game... But I do know that 2-4 TTK is not skill, it's just about whoever sees who first, and it effectively makes headshots useless.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Sabot

I don't follow you logic... how can a higher TTK with headshots be noob fiendly? It doesn't matter if you're in the zerg or not, you still have to aim better than avarage in a game with a TTK of 12-13, than in one with TTK of 3-4.

To me it seems you are the one that is afraid of losing to superior numbers, as you want them to die instantly from your Jackhammer or spraying of the Gauss Rifle. If you'd actually have to use cover and aim for the head to be effective against a superior force, that'd be a show skill.. not a "who fires first" scenario.

I don't even know what you think a low TTK is? Is it 2-3 bullets? 5-6? 9-10? A 9-10 bullet TTK might be absolutely fine, I don't know I haven't played the game... But I do know that 2-4 TTK is not skill, it's just about whoever sees who first, and it effectively makes headshots useless.

I explain it in my video if you can make like 10 % damage in 3 sec and your outnumber these guys will shot at you even if you make 20 % damage on one of them it dosent matter because they will each make a 10 % damage and kill you winthin a 3 sec and you will not even able to kill one of them at least with a low ttk your able to kill 1 or 2 of them until the rest of them can get you if they can

Also you cant stop them to flank you or jump at you because their is not nough punisement in your fire so they will all run at you jump on you and empty their magazine in your face

Also iam all for decent hitbox thats mean different part of the body make different damage Legs HIP chest and head each having a specifics damage ration so the most acurate players and fast will win over numbers also squad who use communication instead of just Zerging !

Also if you start a figth with High ttk more time it take to kills more chance thats youll see another guys joining the figth before you even kill the first one and since it take to much to kills it will be exponential everytime you ad one players the Time to kills them will grow exponentially !


ZERG WANT THIS
1guys = 12 seconds ?
2 guys = 24 seconds ?
4 guys = 48 seconds ?
8 guys = 1 minutes 60 seconds ?

and so on
Headshot like a pro( HEAD SHOT AS TO BE 2 HIT IN THE HEAD )
Low ttk anti zerg
1 guys = 3 seconds
2 guys = 6 seconds
4 guys = 12 seconds
8 guys = 24 seconds
Or medium low ttk like i want



ANTI ZERG ITS ALL IN HITBOX AND MEDIUM LOW TTK

and so on

[xnorb]

No matter if high TTK or low TTK, higher numbers will always win.

Low TTK simply allows noob-spraying whilst high TTK needs more aiming skills
and enables more aggressive gameplay.

No clue what you want here, but if 100 guys encounter 10, there is absolutely
no way the 10 will win. If you beat 100 guys with only 9 comrades around,
then you were encountered by a horde of 3-year olds and dogs accidently
touching random keys on the keyboard while PS2 was running.