Just now, thecolourred said:

then you better have a squadron token to bring your squadron activations up to 4, so you can spend 2 to place, and 2 to activate.

I know this. I am asking him since you did not ask it.

1 hour ago, Wes Janson said:

I havn't said anything about this RLB thing until now. Where is the debate? Place squadrons with squadron command, activate with command while no move possible, shoot if able to do so.

I am more excited about veteran gunners being able to use their accuracies before re-rolling the remainder of the dice.

They always could

1 minute ago, Tirion said:

They always could

Yup, it is a FAQ, it is just clarifying what the cards can do not giving then new abilities that were not there.

1 minute ago, Tirion said:

They always could

Probably but I never really used the card before so it sorta dawned on me after reading this.

Need more Billy Joel in here.

Gink reaaaally didnt start this fire

7 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Need more Billy Joel in here.

Gink reaaaally didnt start this fire

You guys wanted me back. Not sure if it is what you all thought of but it is me.

19 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

You guys wanted me back. Not sure if it is what you all thought of but it is me.

1. Definitely want @Lyraeusback.

Welcome back.

2. Definitely can be respectful while arguing anything about Armada.

3. Definitely all y'all go to the FAQing Rules forum and get outta @Ardaedhel's thread.

So I'm just not gonna use RLB's.

11 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:

So I'm just not gonna use RLB's.

Chicken

8 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Chicken

Hahahahaha.

For those that have been doing the whole RLB discussion , I thank you as a still new member. Without such knowledgeable people here to lay things out from mutiple perspectives is wonderful.

I'm happy to see members invested in the game and only want whats best foe the community.

This means you guys care, and able to dicsuss it so in depth that it really does help people like me make my own opinion.

3 minutes ago, Karneck said:

Hahahahaha.

For those that have been doing the whole RLB discussion , I thank you as a still new member. Without such knowledgeable people here to lay things out from mutiple perspectives is wonderful.

I'm happy to see members invested in the game and only want whats best foe the community.

This means you guys care, and able to dicsuss it so in depth that it really does help people like me make my own opinion.

we shouldn't have to do that though. FFG needs to step up and tell us " we messed up the wording, here are examples of how it's supposed to work".

I'm not sure this is good for the game overall that we need to argue so much. And it leaves me with a bad impression from FFG.

I understand that, but there are games where no one steps up to at least make an attempt at it, or don't even dicuss it at all.

So I'd still prefer this kind of discussion over nothing, and of course FFG never making mistakes over that.

2 minutes ago, Karneck said:

I understand that, but there are games where no one steps up to at least make an attempt at it, or don't even dicuss it at all.

So I'd still prefer this kind of discussion over nothing, and of course FFG never making mistakes over that.

Sure, but we have a big tournament coming up. There's a certain lack of professionnalism associated with leaving us blind here.

It means that we need clear cut rulings that don't let ffg change their mind on how they work.

Right now, RLB is almost harmless if used by the Interpretation side. However, it means that future squadron abilities have to be carefully done. If they do more synergistic squadrons, you can suddenly see situations that become very silly.

1 hour ago, Lyraeus said:

It means that we need clear cut rulings that don't let ffg change their mind on how they work.

Right now, RLB is almost harmless if used by the Interpretation side. However, it means that future squadron abilities have to be carefully done. If they do more synergistic squadrons, you can suddenly see situations that become very silly.

Are you sure about your last sentence? It is kind of harmless by the "rules" side. The other side makes RLB a much bigger dangerous upgrade by letting you activate the 4 squads you place down.

Just for everyones sanity. If you are expecting an errata soon.

Dont.

If you think the FAQ represents one possible interpretation of the card as written, then it is merely an FAQ for you.

If you think the FAQ contradicts all possible interpretations of the card as written, then it is an errata for you.

Are we still on this? I thought the FAQ stated that you can activate the squads you place

7 minutes ago, Visovics said:

Are we still on this? I thought the FAQ stated that you can activate the squads you place

I brought it back to remind those who are demanding an errata, that we wont get one for at least 8 months. Whether we need one or not, I am not sure I can remain sane whilst discussing it for 8 months straight.

Why do we need an errata (rules change)? Have I missed something big with RLB?

I thought this one has been put to bed......

3 hours ago, Ginkapo said:

Whether we need one or not, I am not sure I can remain sane whilst discussing it for 8 months straight.

Yoda was not able.

1 hour ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Yoda wasn't be able.

I cant decide is this is grammatically correct english or not.

On 4/21/2017 at 9:44 PM, Ardaedhel said:

Guys please don't get my sweet rotating-titled soapbox thread locked. I'm having so much fun changing the title as my mood suits...

As if you had....moodswings?

42 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

I cant decide is this is grammatically correct english or not.

Oops!