england are rated 92..

Discussion in 'Rugby Video Games & Apps' started by mark_shaw, Feb 28, 2005.

  1. mark_shaw

    mark_shaw Guest

    if england are rated 92, does this mean they have jst used the old team members
     
  2. Forum Ad Advertisement

  3. sanzar

    sanzar Guest

    You'd think so, as the current squad wouldn't be above 65! [​IMG]
     
  4. mark_shaw

    mark_shaw Guest

    haha hard, i mean nzwas ranked number 1 by nov 2004! is that when the game was finalsised
     
  5. -JJ-

    -JJ- Guest

    They have updated and accurate squads, it just appears the stats aren't as up to date.
     
  6. mark_shaw

    mark_shaw Guest

    well thats jst f***n pointless
     
  7. Los Lover

    Los Lover Guest

    Yeah...it's good and bad.

    But I'd like to accentuate the positive by looking at it being fun to play England w/ the Blacks as you know you're beating a better team (according to the game). I will reserve the biggest, sickest, meanest hits and 100 metre tries from out of the ingoal especially for this encounter.

    hehe [​IMG]
     
  8. 187

    187 Guest

    I'm just gonna adjust the stats as soon as i get the game before i even play it... but will the overall stats change as well on the team select screen? not like bloody Rugby 2004 how the stats were basically cut n paste!
     
  9. Los Lover

    Los Lover Guest

    I doubt it...but that's just gut instinct.
     
  10. maddog79

    maddog79 Guest

    England being 92 is the biggest load of crud news i have heard! They SUCK! Australia or NZL would DESTORY ASS! Against them. They just lost to Ireland in the 6 Nations! wtf!
     
  11. Springbok

    Springbok Guest

    As far as I can see the Stats of the teams doesn’t influence the actual game all that much! In all the video bits I’ve seen it looked that rugby won the match, instead of the overwhelming differences in the team rankings.

    Take the Wallabies vs. Uruguay match…although the Wallabies are rated far better Locks could only manage to scrape through. So the rankings don’t bother me.

    As long as the game is great!
     
  12. Wally

    Wally Guest

    It wasn't Lox I don't think. They were blokes from Gamebiz who seriously did not have an idea what to do. Rob Cubine would be my guess.
     
  13. Springbok

    Springbok Guest

    Be that as it may...I still think the Game would be decided on Good/Bad decisions...and not really on stats. Stats will play a part...for sure!!! But I don't think it would decide the outcome of the games. OR I HOPE NOT!!! [​IMG]
     
  14. candybum

    candybum Guest

    thats jus tragic !!
     
  15. The Kiddie

    The Kiddie Guest

    I've been syaing for two years now that the best way to represent a teams ability is to link it to the IRB rankings. It wouldn't be hard to have an update each month from the IRB site:

    http://www.irb.com/WR/

    That way no one can complain!
     
Enjoyed this thread? Register to post your reply - click here!

Share This Page