Warrior General Games

Originally posted by juicepod

Despite being much more heavily represented, Canada Pro, USA Pro and AAA didnt put as many teams forward as their numbers would have suggested.

USA Pro put the most teams forward.
12 teams from USA Pro were in the first round
10 teams from Canada Pro
7 Teams from USA AAA

The next closest was SA Pro, EE Pro and WE Pro putting 5 forward a piece. The numbers don't lie and those regions put many more teams forward then the rest of the field.



Psshh that is only because a vast majority of the teams invited to this tournament were from those 3 regions. You add a ton of teams from another region and you will see them putting the most teams forward... lol

Several regions were given ZERO respect in this tournament so yes, the numbers DO lie.

WTF?

OMG!

Originally posted by Sulfadias0


Psshh that is only because a vast majority of the teams invited to this tournament were from those 3 regions. You add a ton of teams from another region and you will see them putting the most teams forward... lol

Several regions were given ZERO respect in this tournament so yes, the numbers DO lie.




Not outright disputing you because I admittedly have done no research, but can you provide examples? I thought the only regions ignored were those that were quite a bit lower leveled than the ones included...

This is going to sound rude I am sure, but no way in heck does a team that is significantly lower leveled than us stay within 40 points, much less beat us.

Originally posted by CTap
Originally posted by Sulfadias0



Psshh that is only because a vast majority of the teams invited to this tournament were from those 3 regions. You add a ton of teams from another region and you will see them putting the most teams forward... lol

Several regions were given ZERO respect in this tournament so yes, the numbers DO lie.




Not outright disputing you because I admittedly have done no research, but can you provide examples? I thought the only regions ignored were those that were quite a bit lower leveled than the ones included...

This is going to sound rude I am sure, but no way in heck does a team that is significantly lower leveled than us stay within 40 points, much less beat us.



I believe you are misunderstanding his statement. By "ZERO respect" he is not saying "ZERO representation."

I know that Oceania got no respect when SI started naming teams for this tourney. The Caninites were then on a 35+ game winning streak and even outleveled some of the teams that SI already had mentioned as worthy (I am not saying that level is greater than build and game planning, as I think we have already disproved that in this tournament). Anyway, several Caninites players and myself posted in the thread multiple times asking for a shot at making the cut, but yet were not added to the list. Some other Oceania teams/players came in and spoke on our behalf (as well as on the behalf of several other Oceania teams). It wasn't until then that an Oceania team was even added to the list.

In all fairness, SI did bump us up his ranking once we were added, but only one other Oceania team even made the original field of 64 (a replacement team was later added).

What if theoretically you had a tourney of 1 million and 64 teams with 1 million USA pro teams? Then the percentage would be like 99.9+% failure rate and that would skew the image of the USA Pro and make them look bad.

Alternatively, what if they only invited us into the tourney, then the failure rate up until this point would be 0% for USA Pro.

If you wanted to actually judge one conference to another, then there would need to be a completely different method needed to do that. Any analysis as to who is the best conference or how to rank the conferences by using the results on this tournament is not an accurate way to measure that.

Originally posted by The Strategy Expert
What if theoretically you had a tourney of 1 million and 64 teams with 1 million USA pro teams? Then the percentage would be like 99.9+% failure rate and that would skew the image of the USA Pro and make them look bad.

Alternatively, what if they only invited us into the tourney, then the failure rate up until this point would be 0% for USA Pro.

If you wanted to actually judge one conference to another, then there would need to be a completely different method needed to do that. Any analysis as to who is the best conference or how to rank the conferences by using the results on this tournament is not an accurate way to measure that.

Agreed. Probably the best way to handle it is to take the top 16 teams in each league and have them face another league's top 16 but of course you'd need to give those teams a reason to care so they actually GP and try.

Originally posted by lukin83


I believe you are misunderstanding his statement. By "ZERO respect" he is not saying "ZERO representation."

I know that Oceania got no respect when SI started naming teams for this tourney. The Caninites were then on a 35+ game winning streak and even outleveled some of the teams that SI already had mentioned as worthy (I am not saying that level is greater than build and game planning, as I think we have already disproved that in this tournament). Anyway, several Caninites players and myself posted in the thread multiple times asking for a shot at making the cut, but yet were not added to the list. Some other Oceania teams/players came in and spoke on our behalf (as well as on the behalf of several other Oceania teams). It wasn't until then that an Oceania team was even added to the list.

In all fairness, SI did bump us up his ranking once we were added, but only one other Oceania team even made the original field of 64 (a replacement team was later added).

So he meant "very little respect" not "ZERO respect". Honestly I was not privy to the selection process, as we had no intentions of entering. I just took his "zero respect" to mean no representation. If a league had any representatives, I would say it had some measure of respect, little as that might be. Semantics? Perhaps... but SI was trying to get what he personally considered to be close to the top 64 teams in GLB into this thing. So any team being invited was respected, I would say.

Thus, yes, to me zero respect, especially in caps like he put it, would only mean truly ZERO representation. Even taking only a league champ meant he considered at least one team from the league to be among the potentially top 64 teams in ALL of GLB... which should be considered a nice compliment (again, understanding this was based merely on his own opinion of said teams).

Originally posted by CTap
Originally posted by lukin83



I believe you are misunderstanding his statement. By "ZERO respect" he is not saying "ZERO representation."

I know that Oceania got no respect when SI started naming teams for this tourney. The Caninites were then on a 35+ game winning streak and even outleveled some of the teams that SI already had mentioned as worthy (I am not saying that level is greater than build and game planning, as I think we have already disproved that in this tournament). Anyway, several Caninites players and myself posted in the thread multiple times asking for a shot at making the cut, but yet were not added to the list. Some other Oceania teams/players came in and spoke on our behalf (as well as on the behalf of several other Oceania teams). It wasn't until then that an Oceania team was even added to the list.

In all fairness, SI did bump us up his ranking once we were added, but only one other Oceania team even made the original field of 64 (a replacement team was later added).

So he meant "very little respect" not "ZERO respect". Honestly I was not privy to the selection process, as we had no intentions of entering. I just took his "zero respect" to mean no representation. If a league had any representatives, I would say it had some measure of respect, little as that might be. Semantics? Perhaps... but SI was trying to get what he personally considered to be close to the top 64 teams in GLB into this thing. So any team being invited was respected, I would say.

Thus, yes, to me zero respect, especially in caps like he put it, would only mean truly ZERO representation. Even taking only a league champ meant he considered at least one team from the league to be among the potentially top 64 teams in ALL of GLB... which should be considered a nice compliment (again, understanding this was based merely on his own opinion of said teams).

That is just how I interpreted it. Being from Oceania, I know that we are often overlooked because we are not in a "prominent" region. The OP in question has a player in Oceania (on a very good team) and GMs a SE Asia team, which leads me to believe that he was dramatically saying that these other regions get a lack of respect in comparison to USA and Canada.

I believe that Africa was the only region not represented, but that was to be expected.

Originally posted by jrry32

Agreed. Probably the best way to handle it is to take the top 16 teams in each league and have them face another league's top 16 but of course you'd need to give those teams a reason to care so they actually GP and try.

Sounds like a fun idea, until that happens though I'm just going to stick with my assumption that the USA Pro East is the top conference since it seems like the obvious answer at the moment.

Originally posted by The Strategy Expert
Originally posted by jrry32


Agreed. Probably the best way to handle it is to take the top 16 teams in each league and have them face another league's top 16 but of course you'd need to give those teams a reason to care so they actually GP and try.

Sounds like a fun idea, until that happens though I'm just going to stick with my assumption that the USA Pro East is the top conference since it seems like the obvious answer at the moment.

USA Pro West dusted the east last season in week 16

Originally posted by lukin83
Originally posted by CTap

Originally posted by lukin83




I believe you are misunderstanding his statement. By "ZERO respect" he is not saying "ZERO representation."

I know that Oceania got no respect when SI started naming teams for this tourney. The Caninites were then on a 35+ game winning streak and even outleveled some of the teams that SI already had mentioned as worthy (I am not saying that level is greater than build and game planning, as I think we have already disproved that in this tournament). Anyway, several Caninites players and myself posted in the thread multiple times asking for a shot at making the cut, but yet were not added to the list. Some other Oceania teams/players came in and spoke on our behalf (as well as on the behalf of several other Oceania teams). It wasn't until then that an Oceania team was even added to the list.

In all fairness, SI did bump us up his ranking once we were added, but only one other Oceania team even made the original field of 64 (a replacement team was later added).

So he meant "very little respect" not "ZERO respect". Honestly I was not privy to the selection process, as we had no intentions of entering. I just took his "zero respect" to mean no representation. If a league had any representatives, I would say it had some measure of respect, little as that might be. Semantics? Perhaps... but SI was trying to get what he personally considered to be close to the top 64 teams in GLB into this thing. So any team being invited was respected, I would say.

Thus, yes, to me zero respect, especially in caps like he put it, would only mean truly ZERO representation. Even taking only a league champ meant he considered at least one team from the league to be among the potentially top 64 teams in ALL of GLB... which should be considered a nice compliment (again, understanding this was based merely on his own opinion of said teams).

That is just how I interpreted it. Being from Oceania, I know that we are often overlooked because we are not in a "prominent" region. The OP in question has a player in Oceania (on a very good team) and GMs a SE Asia team, which leads me to believe that he was dramatically saying that these other regions get a lack of respect in comparison to USA and Canada.

I believe that Africa was the only region not represented, but that was to be expected.

OK I didn't read all the posts yet, but this seems a little off to me. First of all, alot of teams were complaining about their ranking and stuff when I hadn't even started ranking yet. I started with the leagues I was most familiar with (USA and Canada) and then moved on to the others. I obviously didn't reject your team because in my FIRST official rankings, I had you at #25:

http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=618172

If you are talking about me "rejecting" you for my first overall top 30 teams list, then that is only because you hadn't played anyone good. A team with 150 straight wins in BBB wasn't going to qualify either.

Based on level alone, you aren't top 30. And you aren't in a top 10 league. Without being in a "good" league, then there is no way to judge your builds or tactics.

Now we at least havesome non-league games to judge you on and it seems you are certainly worthy of that #25 ranking (or better).

It wasn't disrespect to your team at all. It was very un-biased in my opinion and you can even look at the rankings my level if you don't believe me.

Let's not pull the disrespect card. You didn't get in because of someone arguing with me. You got in because you deserved to be in. It just took me some time to do all the research on all the leagues I wasn't familiar with.

I probably had 40 teams tell me that I disrespected their team by where they were ranked or how they were left. There is an excellent team in Canada Pro who just got done beating our asses (OOTP Ballers) who got pissed off and quit because they weren't invited in the original 64. Even though no one nominated them and I wasn't familiar with any Canada AAA teams. They got overlooked and they are now in my conference in my League. So I don't think it was just League.

Anyways, I'm glad I discovered your excellent team and you were able to join us.

SI how do you judge leagues? You can't judge off level so saying Oceania Pro is not a top 10 league is bogus unless you can back it up. Build > Level(Krazy Monkeys and Caninites proved this)

Originally posted by jrry32
SI how do you judge leagues? You can't judge off level so saying Oceania Pro is not a top 10 league is bogus unless you can back it up. Build > Level(Krazy Monkeys and Caninites proved this)

If I can't judge on level, then you tell me how you are supposed to differentiate a 16-0 team from USA BBB vs a 16-0 team from Oceania Pro vs a 16-0 team from Western Europe AAA that have never played outside their conference.

All of them tell me that they would win because their tactics and builds are the best and their 16-0 record proves it.

And you can only invite 1 of those 3 teams Jrry. Which one do you put in your tournament?

After seeing the teams play each other, I sort of agree with CTap or whoever said that you can't judge a league by its lower teams.

However, even teams that are doing very well in USA Pro like the Bullets didn't even beat a 6-6 WELP team. Dump Trucks beat the Bullies, but couldn't beat a 6-6 CPL team.

My conclusions after watching all of this is that LEVELS VERY MUCH MATTER. A boosted 6-6 team can beat a unboosted 16-0 team from another league 50% of the time.

Also, the 2nd tier of higher leveled players are built much better than the original guys because they didn't have to play and could just power build better. The 3rd group of players are going to be even better.

So right now, besides the top 4 teams or so from USA Pro, there is very little difference between the teams in this tournament. I said that from the beginning and I think it still holds true.

If you go back and look though, the higher leveled teams won about 70% of the time. The lower leveled teams might be able to pull and upset or 2, but you can only win so many in a row when you have a 30% chance of winning.

I stick by my selection process and I still say that a high level team like the Cartel or a boosted DDL will win this.