The same contingencies will apply to how many Infestors there are, how much energy they all have, how many units Terran and Protoss have, what kind of units they have, etc.
If it's an army of Thors, Fungal is not going to be as effective as it is against an army of Marines. If there are only 2 Infestors, an army of Marines isn't going to have too many problems. Plenty of Medivacs basically nullify all Fungal damage. 30 Infestors with no energy are no more useful than a rock is useful at being a mouse.
No, the micro-negating ability of Fungal Growth is independent of any contingencies.
Your analogy is contingent on how many siege tanks are sieged, thus determining how tank shots are fired, thus determining how many banelings will die, and thus determining how many units will not be able to be microed to safety. If there's only one siege tank, maybe a couple of banelings will die, but the rest are able to be microed away to safety.
Fungal Growth will always root a unit/group of units for 4 seconds. The fungalled unit(s) will not be able to move for 4 seconds, which is why we refer to it as negating micro
. This function is independent of how many Infestors you have, what kind of unit is being fungalled, and how many units are fungalled.
Damage effectiveness only applies to your erroneous analogy where your so-called "micro-negation" is contingent on how much damage is being applied to a group of units. The micro-negation we're discussing in this thread has nothing to do with damage effectiveness, and shouldn't even be brought up at all.
The only comparable micro-negating ability to Fungal Growth is Vortex, and to a lesser extent Force Field.
It was a single situation. Banelings clumping against Siege Tanks or Colossi. How is this so hard to understand? This one situation is similar to Marines versus Infestors.
An analogy is a comparison based on resemblance. Banelings running into a Siege Tank is different than Marines getting Fungalled by an Infestor. Your analogy is faulty.
How is this so hard to understand?