Board Thread:Speculation House/@comment-10390252-20141218201832/@comment-3257939-20150110001430

Like LiveandSound said, defining how strong a character is based on amounts of enemies killed is not the correct way to do it. Sure, Coco might look so badass and strong but that's just because her weapon is designed for that kind of thing. Maybe she was able to do a lot of damage to the Grimm with kicks and her purse but that's because that purse weighs enough to increase damage and Coco herself is good at kicking.

Let's put an example: Coco vs Ruby. Most likely winner: Ruby. Why?

Crescent Rose vs Coco's purse. A sniper is strong against a gatling gun. The last one needs to shoot a lot in order to actually hit a single enemy since the weapon is designed for massive waves of enemies while the sniper is designed to take down one single enemy. And the fact that Ruby semblance makes her a hard target to hit gives her the upper hand. In a real duel, Ruby can take those advantages and defeat Coco without much trouble.

We might not know everything about Coco and neither her semblance but that goes for every single character. We saw that Blake didn't actually improve in her fighting but because the circumstances were at her favor, she won. Like how Adam was never going to defeat that Spider Droid if it wasn't for his semblance and the laser from the Spider Droid. The odds were at Adam's favor in that fight and that's why he won. Another: Ruby vs Cinder. Ruby couldn't fight at her fullest because of the heels. Many of the fights in RWBY have depended on a single fact that made the difference.

To summarize: It's incorrect to think that Adam is the most likely winner basing on the fact that he has taken more enemies down, is older or a villain.