Okay, I tried the XCOM game with someone yesterday, and we agreed fr another game today, here's the breakdown of the situation. I know it will sound crazy, but nothing short of an official answer will solve this problem; so bear with me.

We decide on an invasion plan, start the game on easy, split the roles with me as the Central Officer and the Head Scientist and him as the Commander and Squad Leader.

Turn goes, we deploy our pawns and tokens, taking careful track of our remaining credits. And here comes the problem part.

Near the end of the first turn turn, with 2 credits remaining, I deploy a satellite to deal with UFOs in orbit, and assign a scientist to a research project. He asks me to take away the scientist so either I deploy 1 more satellite (which I could do through the Operation center asset IIRC), or remove the scientist (which I could do with the Operation Center). So, we've got weak enemies, kickass techs being on the line (3 scientists on Xenobiology, 2 Elerium, and one on Alloy Cannon, turn one), and I explain my reasoning to have deployed 6 scientists during turn one (We would have a huge tech lead and we'll be getting money and tech like there's no tomorrow with Elerium and Xenbiology). At the time we were at the "End Timed phase" phase on the app. He tells me he refuses to continue playing until I remove the scientist, citing that he "controls the budget" and as the commander has the right to refuse me making a legal play, and says he will not continue the game until I remove one scientist.

Rules-wise, was putting 6 scientists on turn 1 on 3 different research projects when the app asked me to do so a valid play, or was he right in saying that the Commander role has final veto power on every decision done during the timed phase?

I'm not asking whether my priorities were optimal, I'm asking if I made a valid play, so please no debate over whether rushing early tech when you have 5 great techs on turn one (Xenobiolgy, Elerium, Alloy Cannon, Hyperwave Communications and Satellite Tracking plus another 1 point tech) is optimal play, just asking if it's legal play, or if the commander can veto any decision during the timed phase.

Also, nothing short of an official answer will close the debate.

Thank you for your attention.

Also, yes, I do have a pretty photographic memory, that's how I remember so much about the game.

If the manual explicitly states that the Commander has the right to veto every singe choice then the other player is correct. In any other case, such as for instance that one simply might be able to draw that conclusion, then no, your play was legit.

This is the general rule when it comes to FFG's rulebooks: If it says you can do X, you can do X. If it does NOT say you can do X then you cannot unless a specific game element such as a tech card or ability explicitly says you can.

It's not an official response since one never get those in these forums, but I would say that the rulebook in itself (coupled with any available FAQ and/or Errata) is as official a source as I can direct you towards.

Well the rules don't mention any veto powers at all and he claims that they don't mention he doesn't have them either because it's not mentioned he doesn't have them.

Okay, thanks anyways.

Well as I said, if the rulebook doesn't explicitly say that the Commander has any kind of Veto power then he hasn't. The other player should just deal with it and move along imho.

As for official answers, those can usually be obtained here: https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/contact/rules/

One should be prepared for a hefty wait, though, as the good people at FFG are a busy bunch. Answers to rules questions CAN take several weeks to come back.

Maybe he could point out to you where in the rules it says the Central Officer doesn't have veto power? Purely as a practical matter, Central can stop a player from placing (more) units (legally) by tapping "Done" on the placement step...

It's not an official response, but it should at least encourage him to re-evaluate his arguments.

And it is clear from the rules that it's not up to the Commander to decide when the game can continue - it's the Central Officer who controls the app, and thereby controls the flow of the game, so his refusing to allow the game to continue is not in line with the rules.

If you want an official source, check out this official game preview from FFG: https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2014/12/8/something-has-to-give/ specifically the section titled "build toward victory":

Quote

When you play as the Commander, it is your job to track the budget and manage the emergency funds. However, there’s a catch: You don’t actually have the authority to shut down your teammates’ expenditures.

Throughout the game, your teammates will assign units to various tasks based on what they think is the best way to respond to the alien threat, and based on what they believe they can contribute. Each of those units counts against your budget, but your teammates are the ones making the decisions about how many units they assign, and where they assign them – not you.

[image]

This is one of the unique challenges of the Commander’s position within the fully co-operative structure of XCOM: The Board Game . You’re responsible for tracking the budget, but in order to make your efforts meaningful, you need to encourage the cooperation of your teammates.

That makes it entirely explicit that the intention is for control of the budget to be a purely advisory role so far as other players are concerned.

Technically the Commander can stop the game by refusing to audit the budget

Quote

When the app instructs the Commander to audit the budget, he or she spends one credit

if they don't they game freezes or if you don't like that they could just spend any excess credits on sky rangers and deploy all of them away ( defeated by panic)

As already said, there is no VETO right (for anyone).

It is a cooperative game. The players could, and in fact it is encouraged (IIRC) somewhere in the game documentation, discuss about their decisions. There is no rule about that, however.

It's kind of like in real-life: there can (and will) be situations when you might disagree. You need to handle these situations one way or another. If you can not co-operate, well... though :-). You can always do like Eric Cartman, and say: "*w you guys, I'm going home". Personally I don't think that is the best way to deal with these situations, however. If someone does, one can only hope that someone takes over Erics role, or the Aliens might as well win.