Author Topic: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)  (Read 15456 times)

Offline Dorgon 5000

  • Red Cape
  • **
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #30 on: July 22, 2010, 07:17:05 AM »
I'd also add that the diet inculdes eating larger species, be they humans or spriggats, who get trapped in the Bug Pit. I believe that that was the intention of Cerzak, when he first encountered the Main.
Then, on the old forums, there was the idea thatthe Shadowbug Queen eats folks with their armor on and whilst digesting it, deposits the metal particles on top of her exoskeleton to strengthen it, and that's where she gets her extra shield from- the older the Queen, the stronger the shield and the more surface area it occupies.

Well... There are some real insects which eat poisonous plants to become poisionous themselves. So that theory might be true.

Offline KZ

  • Global Moderator
  • White Cape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
    • View Profile
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #31 on: July 24, 2010, 07:13:11 AM »
Exactly why I postulated that in the first place, Dorgon 500. There are numerous processes in nature that allow deposition of certain organic or inorganic molecules in different places of an organism for numerous reasons, and methinks it's a neat touch to inlcude that for the Bug Queen. And it works well too- none of the Main's team can hit the queen anywhere, but the unprotected and unshielded part of her, so she was near invincible in that respect.

It would be interesting to see if Craig decides to expand slightly the Bug enemy set (possibly including the suggestions aired here and elsewhere?) and see if that still fits in with the proposed theories.
Welcome to the forums!
Read the rules, use proper grammar and punctuation, play the games, share your ideas and enjoy your stay!

Offline bugfartboy

  • White Cape
  • ***
  • Posts: 1728
    • View Profile
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #32 on: July 29, 2010, 05:45:29 PM »
So, if there really were more types of bugs that weren't seen during the Hero's trip to the bug pit, what other kinds of bugs might there be? How about scout bugs? Bugs that have been specially bred as lookouts? Bugs that have a small amount of health and small damage. High speed. Found on the outskirts of a colony.

Offline Dorgon 5000

  • Red Cape
  • **
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #33 on: July 30, 2010, 02:08:09 AM »
Good idea!

Offline lordnova

  • Mechanic
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #34 on: August 19, 2010, 11:44:13 AM »
well the bug queen is  theory is huge maybe there colonist is different then other maybe the the shadow bug is powerful but maybe there trying to change there own way :-\

Steelfist

  • Guest
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #35 on: December 28, 2010, 07:37:13 PM »
Nymphs couldn't be female and shadow bugs male; the species could have a much higher male birth rate, in order to create many expendable soldiers that could be supported by the few females.

Aha! Rereading this topic, it occured to me that I could be validated if nymphs were simply Bug queens in waiting; the bug queen dies, a nymph grows and becomes the new queen.

Offline SmartyPants

  • White Cape
  • ***
  • Posts: 1814
    • View Profile
    • -----
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #36 on: December 28, 2010, 08:04:45 PM »
Aha! Rereading this topic, it occured to me that I could be validated if nymphs were simply Bug queens in waiting; the bug queen dies, a nymph grows and becomes the new queen.
If every nymph could become a bug queen, then there would be bugs everywhere.  There is a reason that there are few ants and bees in a colony that can become queens.  If it was too simple to make colonies, then the insects will overpopulate and starve.

Steelfist

  • Guest
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #37 on: December 28, 2010, 08:41:02 PM »
They would be replacements, not intended to be for new colonies.

Offline SmartyPants

  • White Cape
  • ***
  • Posts: 1814
    • View Profile
    • -----
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #38 on: December 29, 2010, 09:27:20 PM »
They would be replacements, not intended to be for new colonies.
When bees need replacements, they feed pupa special hormones for the purpose of turning the pupa into a queens.  The way bees do it makes it where there isn't an abundance of queens.  Unlike your theory, nature wouldn't allow a bug colony to have a queen that gives birth to as much would-be queens as soldier/worker bugs.

Offline bugfartboy

  • White Cape
  • ***
  • Posts: 1728
    • View Profile
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #39 on: December 29, 2010, 09:49:29 PM »
Unless those would-be queens have another purpose that is only possible in would-be queens such as healing.

Offline SmartyPants

  • White Cape
  • ***
  • Posts: 1814
    • View Profile
    • -----
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #40 on: December 30, 2010, 09:35:29 AM »
Unless those would-be queens have another purpose that is only possible in would-be queens such as healing.
Again, having 50% of the bugs as would-be queens would put the colony at major risk of overpopulation and starvation.  You didn't address how your theory would cause an abundance of queens when we havn't see any bugs outside of the Deeper Downs.
Why are pushing your flawed theory so much, when you don't see a flaw in the generally accepted theory?

Offline bugfartboy

  • White Cape
  • ***
  • Posts: 1728
    • View Profile
Re: Bug Theory (the creatures; not errors)
« Reply #41 on: December 30, 2010, 09:36:17 AM »
I was just making a point, not trying to push a new theory.