I nominate Drunk Tarkin. I don't want this to be a forum circle jerk, I think you need an inebriated moff on the committee.

I second this Nomination

I nominate Lyraeus to the committee.

I vote for 5 members.

Second Lyaeusr. vote 5 members.

Biggs would be a great addition to the committee. 7 members sounds about right.

Thank you. First order of business - should I alone become supreme arbiter of armada rules? No? Anyone? Nothing? I move to disband the council.

Thank you. First order of business - should I alone become supreme arbiter of armada rules? No? Anyone? Nothing? I move to disband the council.

This is exactly how I pictured it in my head.....

I nominate Moodswing and UnDeadGuy

Someone should nominate admiral Neilson

Lyraeus, and I vote for 5 members

Someone should nominate admiral Neilson

I almost did, but I find greater merit in Biggs' mustache.

Lyraeus, and I vote for 5 members

I'll second Lyraeus, and also vote for 5 members.

I feel obligated to point out that there are several members who are official beta testers on this forum.

I offer no nomination or second at this time, but I do make the following request: members of the council should be independent of the normal testing process, so as to remain unbiased in their deliberations.

/funny enough, just finished a whole podcast series on the fall of the a Roman Republic and the decline of the Tribuna of the Plebs

5 council members sounds good. I lack the insight to suggest any nominations or seconds, though I do like the sound of supreme leader Drunk Tarkin.

I nominate the enitre IFF crew, member limit should be the IFF crew, and we should have weekly podcasts that include unofficial FAQ business.

I also nominate the guy above me on the thread to head the committee to helm the distribution of information and handling of questions regarding the operations and rules of the unofficial FAQ committee.

I nominate that Armada is dead and a council is irrelevant.

I feel obligated to point out that there are several members who are official beta testers on this forum.

Good, then they should be pre-disqualified from the council for not catching the issues before print. /elbow I'm just bustin!

Unofficial Committe size should be 101.

I feel obligated to point out that there are several members who are official beta testers on this forum.

Good, then they should be pre-disqualified from the council for not catching the issues before print. /elbow I'm just bustin!

Unofficial Committe size should be 101.

LOL yeah. More importantly, I think it will help keep things a bit more effective to have players discussing the actual direct wording of the cards as presented, and not as they may necessarily intended to work.

"discussing the actual direct wording of the cards"

This is the real problem I see in a lot of the discussions.... Maybe we need the RRG and a dictionary we all agree on...

Five members

"discussing the actual direct wording of the cards"

This is the real problem I see in a lot of the discussions.... Maybe we need the RRG and a dictionary we all agree on...

More often it's a style guide we need, really.

Drasnighta is all the committee you could possibly need.

On a negative note, I take the HOUSE MD approach to rules interpretation...meaning, I narrow down what's right by sorting out all the ridiculous interpretations and using logic applied to what's remaining.

Rule Interpreter #1: I think Lupus shot from an ISD does X damage.

Me: I think you're an idiot. No.

=)

Drasnighta is all the committee you could possibly need.

He's like the Leia Organa of the rules sub-forum.

Drasnighta is all the committee you could possibly need.

He's like the Leia Organa of the rules sub-forum.

"Garm Bel Iblis is far too minor an Upgrade to serve as a demonstration, your highness. Instead, we will test this new weapon on the Rules Reference Guide directly.

But don't worry, we will deal with your commander soon enough."