you have to twist the rulebook pretty far to argue that it creates an exception to the usual attack sequence.

Really? So if you only had the rulebook and no pilot skill, you'd say you couldn't make two primary attacks? Or if you just had the pilot skill and no reference to two attacks in the rulebook?

If the pilot didn't have an ability the rules would not say up to two. If I had only the pilot ability I would have no doubt I could attack once then pay to attack a second time.

If the pilot didn't have an ability the rules would not say up to two.

You don't know that. The rules allow huge ships extra attacks for secondary weapons; they could quite plausibly allow huge ships.to make two primary attacks without the need for pilot abilities.

If I had only the pilot ability I would have no doubt I could attack once then pay to attack a second time.

... and if the huge ship rules said you could make two primary attacks instead of one already, the pilot ability would plausibly let you make a third?

But the rules does not say you can attack twice. It says up to 2 attacks.

And if it has said twice, then the pilot ability would have said the dame.

I think Rawling explained it clearer than I could.

You and Sabier both acknowledge that it's clear what the rules mean.

False. I said "I know what the rules are meant to say", but I never said it was clear, because what they are meant to say and what they say is different. The reason I know what the rules are meant to say is because I spent time looking through the forums and FFG articles, and I saw what the general consensus was (specially that FFG article makes clear what they were trying to write). If you follow each statement written in the rules as a logical one, you come to the conclusion that the Raider can make up to 3 primary weapon attacks.

Logic and common sense often come to different conclusions. I think rules should be, and are intended to be, written and read in the language of logic, not in the language of common sense.

If I had only the pilot ability I would have no doubt I could attack once then pay to attack a second time.

Precisely. If.

If you follow each statement written in the rules as a logical one, you come to the conclusion that the Raider can make up to 3 primary weapon attacks.

Logic and common sense often come to different conclusions. I think rules should be, and are intended to be, written and read in the language of logic, not in the language of common sense.

Wrong. You came to that conclusion. A whole lot of us came to the conclusion that the rules text reflected the ability of the pilot card. Which is the logical conclusion since the main rules allow 1 attack and the pilot allows an optional second. We didn't use common sense to come to that conclusion, we used logic.

You came to that conclusion.

I did not come to that conclusion. I came to the conclusion that I could perform three attacks (two for free and one paying 2 energy), then my opponent said I couldn't and we discussed it for a while. Later, a 3rd player (more experienced) said I couldn't either and I accepted the voice of the majority because of "fly casual". Later on I read FFG's article about the Raider and I realised of what the people who wrote the rules were intending to write, and how they intended the Raider to work. This doesn't change in any manner what the rules actually say.

A whole lot of us came to the conclusion that [...]

Justifying a claim with this sentence sounds a lot like appealing to "common sense".

Which is the logical conclusion since the main rules allow 1 attack and the pilot allows an optional second.

The main rules allow 1 attack, true. Then you have Han Solo, and Gunner, and the BTL-A4 Y-wing title, and a long et cetera of rules that override what the main rules say and allow multiple attacks. One of those things is the rulebook that comes with the Raider. As Rawling said earlier, if the Raider card didn't have any text I suspect we would all happily accept that the Raider can perform two primary attacks for free, as per the Raider rulebook. I hope at least we agree that the Raider rulebook, without looking at the Raider card, allows the Raider to perform 2 primary weapon attacks. Then, the Raider card comes in and allows you to perform an extra primary weapon attack, overriding the limit of 2 to a maximum of 3. In the rules hierarchy, the Raider rulebook overrides the main rulebook to allow two attaks, and then the Raider card overrides every rulebook adding an extra attack.

I hope at least we agree that the Raider rulebook, without looking at the Raider card, allows the Raider to perform 2 primary weapon attacks. Then, the Raider card comes in and allows you to perform an extra primary weapon attack, overriding the limit of 2 to a maximum of 3. In the rules hierarchy, the Raider rulebook overrides the main rulebook to allow two attaks, and then the Raider card overrides every rulebook adding an extra attack.

No that is where we do not agree. The Raider Rule Book states what you can do with the raider when you take the pilot ability into account. Since there is only one Raider fore section the ability is always there, unlike regular pilots, where only some have abilities, this can be explained in the rules book.

The Raider Rule Book states what you can do with the raider when you take the pilot ability into account.

Where does this information come from?