Warrior General Games

The following is a compilation of offensive and defensive starters' levels for every team, as well as the rank for their respective conference. STARTERS only, no special teams. And yes, if you had a backup higher level than the starter, I made him the starter instead. Gives you a little more accurate measurement of talent:

#1 Kinshasa-419-E-#1

#2 Mozambique-365-L-#1

#3 Ethiopia-357-L-#2

#4 Valhalla-352-E-#2

#5 Johannesberg-334-L-#3

#5 Nigeria-334-L-#3

#5 Beltway-334-L-#3

#5 Ghana-334-E-#3

#9 Kigali-314-E-#4

#10 A.C.T.-311-L-#6

#11 Red Sea-304-L-#7

#12 Cape Verde-302-L-#8

#12 Sierra Leone-302-E-#5

#12 Cape Town-302-E-#5

#15 Katanga-298-L-#9

#16 Rwanda-297-E-#7

#17 Togo-293-E-#8

#18 Scottish-290-L-#10

#18 BoB-290-L-#10

#20 Zanzibar-289-E-#9

#20 Gold Coast-289-E-#9

#22 Rhein Main-278-L-#12

#23 Burundi-274-L-#13

#24 Oklahoma-260-L-#14

#25 Somalia-257-E-#11

#26 Senegal-254-E-#12

#27 R.I.P.-253-E-#13

#28 Nairobi-248-E-#14

#29 Tijuana-173-L-#15

#30 River City-150-L-#16

#31 Doinitin-134-E-#15

#32 Cairo-133-E-#16

go djibouti!

Makes me feel better being ranked #4 in levels but beating #1 and #2.

Obviously levels don't mean everything.

Originally posted by juicepod
Makes me feel better being ranked #4 in levels but beating #1 and #2.

Obviously levels don't mean everything.

Nope, they don't. Ethiopia is #3 in levels, but are 3-5. Gold Coast is #20, but are undefeated. Game planning and builds are much more important, imo.

Lol, the only reason I posted this is because I saw a guy in the Africa AA#1 forum say that the higher level team wins 90% of the time. The same guy said that the Elephant Conference had 3 or 4 teams that outleveled Nigeria by a couple levels on average, and couldn't understand why they were doing so well. I need to find those posts.

Originally posted by FrostyMcPenos
Originally posted by juicepod

Makes me feel better being ranked #4 in levels but beating #1 and #2.

Obviously levels don't mean everything.

Nope, they don't. Ethiopia is #3 in levels, but are 3-5. Gold Coast is #20, but are undefeated. Game planning and builds are much more important, imo.

well, this doesn't take into account the depth of a team either, which is super important.

Originally posted by kalkmanc
Originally posted by FrostyMcPenos

Originally posted by juicepod


Makes me feel better being ranked #4 in levels but beating #1 and #2.

Obviously levels don't mean everything.

Nope, they don't. Ethiopia is #3 in levels, but are 3-5. Gold Coast is #20, but are undefeated. Game planning and builds are much more important, imo.

well, this doesn't take into account the depth of a team either, which is super important.

No, it doesn't take into account depth. Which, I agree, is very important. However, I'm not going to spend another 4 hours figuring out the best way to get an accurate overall. This was pretty quick, and atleast gives you an idea of talent.

Go Dijbouti!!!

what needs to be done is determine the overall level of the team adding in the backups to see how the rankings are. too bad I don't have the time for that.

I know Gold Coast lost 2 high level players recently so their numbers are skewed.

Appreciate the work Frosty. I know that took some time.
It might be good to break down the team in divisions within the conferences according to the levels on the whole roster.
This would also kick up rivalries between teams within these divisions and jump start the shit talking (as opposed to rants and stupidity that breaks down the threads so far).
If anyone would be willing to find the total number of levels in teams on the record board 1-4, 5-8, and 9-12, I would do 13-16 (in Lion- you could do the same elephant, just don't have the time). We could get a total number of levels and either divide by number of players or break it into starters and backups and find a starting average level and a backup average level. From there, the top four totals are in a division, second four and so on. This would give us a true indication of not only how much levels do or don't matter, but also how teams of like stature do with the talent they have.
Tell me what you think. Anyone up for going through teams 1-4, 5-8, or 9-12?

PS- I know boosting could screw the whole thing up, but its where you start (in this case, the middle of the season) not who boosts and who doesn't since everyone has that choice. That is a personal or team issue.

Originally posted by felixtovar
Appreciate the work Frosty. I know that took some time.
It might be good to break down the team in divisions within the conferences according to the levels on the whole roster.
This would also kick up rivalries between teams within these divisions and jump start the shit talking (as opposed to rants and stupidity that breaks down the threads so far).
If anyone would be willing to find the total number of levels in teams on the record board 1-4, 5-8, and 9-12, I would do 13-16 (in Lion- you could do the same elephant, just don't have the time). We could get a total number of levels and either divide by number of players or break it into starters and backups and find a starting average level and a backup average level. From there, the top four totals are in a division, second four and so on. This would give us a true indication of not only how much levels do or don't matter, but also how teams of like stature do with the talent they have.
Tell me what you think. Anyone up for going through teams 1-4, 5-8, or 9-12?

PS- I know boosting could screw the whole thing up, but its where you start (in this case, the middle of the season) not who boosts and who doesn't since everyone has that choice. That is a personal or team issue.


That's all the work I wanna do on this topic until the playoffs, prob. The point of the post was to prove that it's not what level you are that counts (I guess it does to a point, but you know what I mean), but more game planning and player builds. If you want to elaborate on this, be my guest. Besides, Mozambique already has a bit of a rivalry with Johannesberg . See you fellas in the playoffs!

On a side note, I actually really like the divisions idea.

Ok because i could care less about the elephan conference and the lion took me long enough here is the ranking and level by offense and then by defense. These numbers include the entire offensive & defensive roster(backups & cpu players included) to determine the overall level of each side of the ball. Since backups play almost as much as starters they have to be factored in.

Offense
Marvins -- 13.4
Impalas -- 13.23
Bandits -- 13.09
Nighmare -- 13
Orcas -- 12.91
Executioners -- 12.51
Sea Wave -- 12.48
Head Hunters -- 12.39
Brothers -- 11.75
Sharks -- 11.6
Hutu -- 11.11
Diamonds -- 11.04
Fire -- 9.86
Rhein -- 9.52
Riot -- 7.7
Thunder Cats -- 6.14

Defense

Impalas -- 13.83
Nighmare -- 13.15
Head Hunters -- 13.13
Bandits -- 12.86
Sea Wave -- 12.74
Marvins -- 12.625
Orcas -- 11.91
Sharks -- 11.76
Brothers -- 11.62
Diamonds -- 11.11
Executioners -- 10.64
Hutu -- 10.33
Fire -- 9.39
Rhein -- 8.18
Thunder Cats -- 7.67
Riot -- 6.55

Sorry GLB doens't let you format to make it look all pretty

Good job Robb. Wow, that was really quick. I did not expect such a quick reply.

Doing the math on this, the top four teams according to cumulative O and D rankings, in order, are:
1. Impalas
2. Nightmares
3. Marvins
4. Bandits
The second four are:
5. Headhunters
6. Sea Wave
7. Orcas
8. Brothers
Next four:
9. Sharks
10. Executioners
11. Diamonds
12. Hutu
Last four:
13. Fire
14. Rhein
15. Riot
16. Thunder

As for divisions, I think these should be it (unless we want to shift team around). This order should give you some indication level-wise where you should fit into the conference standings. If you are higher or lower than where you are on this list, you are an either overachieving (good gameplanner/good player builds) or underachieving (poor planning/bad player builds).

Looks like the best gameplanners (I haven't look at who they've actually played) are the Diamonds and the Brothers so far.

thx, only took me like 20 minutes