Good debate and conversation. I should have my EA organize all of these comments. Don't know what I'd do without her lol but I'll try. The Ambush tactic is more so for those with sniper rifles (robe wearing warriors are highly susceptible). But in general make sure that after a solo captain attacks one of your warriors, that warrior can either attack back and kill or move away so others can shoot. The reason why I can't agree with this is I can kill solo captains with my non-solo warbands at similar rating level. I've done it many, many times in PVP. This is based on actual experience not theory. One thing we just need to ensure is that we don't punish the player who uses a efficient levelling pathway because the player who didn't has a hard time. For example, let's say Player A and B both have 4 warriors who just gained 2 levels. Player A puts both of those skill points in increasing attacks which then pumps up the rating significantly. Player B puts those 2 levels in WS. Now when they match up, player B will get the underdog bonus but still has a chance to win because he has a higher WS and better chance to hit. Should we punish player B because Player A made an unwise decision? This logic applies with starting out as a solo warband. I do this with all my new warbands because quickly levellling up one character is the most efficient way to create a pathway towards a full warband imo. Then I would slowly add members when a good one appears in the tavern. But even if one did appear early on, I'd probably have him hide in the background and let my captain get the kills to level up first. So if those players using a solo warband just add 2-7 more warriors and have them hide in the background, would that make it fair since technically they are no longer a solo warband right?