1. wK - Solid tactics. Solid teamwork, solid coordination. Each time I've lead TMW against them or played against them in a scrim, they have a strategy that I really haven't seen from any other team. They have their archers on the flanks, all of which are extremely good shots, with enough sense to move up to support any melee fight. The cavalry is extraordinarily responsive and able to defend their archers if need be - though they rarely need be, as they are themselves busy destroying the other team's archer lineup. The infantry, which although I believe is the weakest part of the team, is still extremely solid and is able to survive if not wreck the enemy team. It's a great force of cohesion, and there's no obvious way of beating them. They wreck.
2. GA - Very capable players. They play to enforce crossfires, and against traditional NA strategies of pushing hard, it's devastating, as seen by their match vs. BkS. Their archers are very good at what they do, and their infantry is able to tear even top-tier NA players apart. Despite the ****ty ping disadvantage, they play very competitively and very powerfully. Their strategic disadvantage lies in the fact their archers are split up far from the team, which is usually acceptable, but is very damaging if the enemy team has capable cav. I would say GA's weak spot lies in their greatest advantage - splitting up devastates weak teams with poor coordination, but against a similarly coordinated team that knows how to exploit the disadvantage of splitting up, it will hurt.
3. TMW - The team plays with the coordination of wK with the tactics of GA. It has powerful infantry and archers who know how to support each other. Communication is strong and constant, and the calling is solid. Players have played with each other so long they instinctively know what they're doing, and are able to play multiple roles competently. However, the lack of powerful cav forces TMW to over-rely on their archers and forces infantry fights to be too lengthy, which are oftentimes exploited by enemy cavalry. Occasionally impulsive players lead to a split up team, which can be devastating.
4. Balions - Phenomenal coordination, phenomenal leading. Strangely enough, the flaws I've seen in Balion's play are based around their traditional strength - weak individual prowess. Despite being an ancient clan, with a great leader and some of the best team coordination I've seen, each player seems to fall quickly. Despite having phenomenal cav, extended fights are not ended as fast as they should, allowing archers of other teams to punish the Balions. Overall an extremely powerful team, but they play much in the traditional NA style, and they will need to adapt to either GA's or wK's style of play in order to attain higher positions. A stronger infantry roster would also be of great benefit.
5. BkS - They used to have the perfect combination of very good coordination and extreme individual skill, but after not playing for long periods of time they have lost the former and don't have enough of the latter to make up for the former. Rhade needs to get the way the metagame works now in his head as a caller. Over time, BkS will rebuild and reappear as among the top NA teams, but currently they're going to see serious opposition from mid-tier teams and won't be able to get back in shape fast enough to appear in the top four of UNAC. They've got powerful infantry, good archers, and excellent cavalry - but the beautiful individual puzzle pieces don't fit together to make a picture.
6. Wappaw - They are rapidly recovering from the competitive slump that I believe occurred after BIT (due to lack of enjoyment from ruleset + inability to play much Random Plains) and becoming a powerful team. Their coordination is coming back quickly, enhanced by the ability of their cav to disrupt the enemy team's coordination. The calling is competent, and ranged play is excellent. Unfortunately, their weak infantry roster (with the exception of Pizza) is going to hinder them for quite some time, and their cav and ranged is not good enough to make up for that hole.
7. KoA - I've always called them the black hole of Warband skill, sucking in amazing talent and never producing many results. Their players are great. Their coordination is great. When I lead three KoA players in NASTe, I'm fully confident we wouldn't have attained anything close to second place without those KoAs. Unfortunately, they have a very archaic style of play, oftentimes camping and wandering into crossfires instead of setting up positions of their own and attaining the map control that's even more crucial with the new ruleset. If KoA is to perform, they're going to have to be innovative and clever, and stop doing the same thing that hasn't worked for them for the last couple of tournaments.
8. WMT - Very strong players, and I humbly say an experienced caller. However, the team was made to develop coordination of players, and as expected that's something we very much lack. Despite great individual skill, the players don't have the awareness capabilities that comes with time of playing Warband, and that tears the team apart. The archers aren't aware of where to put themselves, the cav aren't aware of how to support effectively, and the infantry can't do much more than bunch up and go. With time, the team will certainly get better, but as of now the coordination isn't there.
9. DoF - I've undervalued them constantly, and that's probably because they lacked every part of a good team - they had terrible lack of coordination, little individual skill, ancient calling techniques, and rarely practiced. However, with their recent return to the competitive scene and constant practices with TMW and Rebels, they've successfully built up every part that used to be weak and are constantly getting better. Their coordination is now competent, the strategies aren't bad, and individual skill is stronger as more competent players join the roster. However, they still suffer from some very novice players that threaten to bring the entire team down - something DoF will have to work on if they intend to increase in ranking.
10. SF - Good coordination, strong players, but lack of awareness and primitive calling techniques. On open maps they are very vulnerable and extraordinarily easy to out-maneuver, because they play them like closed maps and bunch up and move around. Also, lack of proficient cav or archers is a serious setback, as strong infantry alone cannot carry any team.
11. KM - Decent players, particularly with Ordyn, and evidently decent communication. From what I've seen, their archers can also definitely hold their own. Everything else, however, is lacking.
12. Rebels - Lackluster everything here. They've got some good players, but they honestly just can't get their act together. The timings are off, the support is nonexistant, and the infantry plays like they're pubbing. They have hidden talent, and I would have thought Snoop and Courtney would be able to exploit it along with using Mok as a support to hold up the team as everyone else catches up, but it hasn't happened.
13. GKR - I don't really see a will to play in this team. If you don't want to play well, you're not going to play well. I echo Rhade's sentiment here that they need to play together.
