(quote)
"Actually, if we are to have truth in advertising here, then I would suggest that in addition to the "low life" levels of violence we include...what, exactly? The "high life" levels of violence perpetrated against humanity by the Nobels and Oppenheimers, the generals and political rulers of the world?"

Uhhh, perhaps as an intellectual exercise in a "What if" change history kind of game.....we are talking about digital gaming now remember.... but I fail to see how process of designing and crafting weapons of mass destruction would be translated into an "action game" that would have any hope of finding a market worth the invesment. Sounds more like a "role playing" game if it were ever to be actually turened into a product.
We're talking "real world" Pop-culture marketing here, now,... still on the same page so far are we?

the actually gaming appicatipon of weapons of mass destruction are less in-the-trenches down & dirty in what I call "blast & slash ,gut & trash" games , but mass warfare is still mass warfare and there just ain' t no "high-life" to be associated with it. Your playful trian of thought misses the whole point of what I was getting at by suggesting the "LL" rating.
It has to do with pointing out the level of stimulation to the brainstem that these games feed upon and reward with cheap thrills....like porn ; sex & violence crossing over far too easily when artificially stimulated.

The closest thing to perhaps a more "sophisticated " rating would mean "Martial Arts" which would give the already existing rating of "MA" a whole new meaning.
Perhaps the rating "AoF" for "Art of War" comes to mind
which , quite frankly ,*most* competitive sports are all about.
We simply don't have the losers put to death anymore. ;-)
It's simply more profitable that way.

Game over. ;-)