ComradeCorbyn

TO: Oscar Easter, Security Officer, NSS Aurora FROM: CCIAAMS, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report -------------------- BODY: This is an automated message to inform you that an investigation has now been opened regarding your incident report, and assigned to agent Lawrence Windsor, (ComradeCorbyn). You may be contacted by the CCIAA for an interview, or you may contact them directly if you have any questions. DTG: 17-18:45-TAU CETI STANDARD-06-2461 SIGN: CCIAAMS

TO: Jaden Halliwell, Chief Medical Officer, NSS Aurora FROM: CCIAAMS, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report -------------------- BODY: This is an automated message to inform you that an investigation has now been opened regarding your incident report, and assigned to agent Lauren Verdell, (Resilynn). You may be contacted by the CCIAA for an interview, or you may contact them directly if you have any questions. DTG: 16-21:53-TAU CETI STANDARD-06-2461 SIGN: CCIAAMS

How does the C/Tpr look with the riot civil protection gear on? I already love all of these sprites. Gives a new 'environment' to Central Command, and a much more authoritative look.

Who cares about some boogeyman notes. I have a shitload of notes, yet it doesn't affect my gameplay whatsoever or anything else for that matter. Just avoid major fuckups and you'll be fine. The big problem is jobbans, bans, and other stuff.

TO: Vira Bolivar, Head of Security, NSS Aurora FROM: Lawrence Windsor, CCIAA, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: Notice of CCIA Investigation -------------------- BODY: The investigation of this incident has concluded, and appropriate action has been taken for affected individuals. This matter will now be considered resolved. -------------------- DTG: 09-16:44-TAU CETI STANDARD-06-2461 SIGN: L.W.

TO: Nick Volvalaad, Security Officer, NSS Aurora FROM: Lawrence Windsor, CCIAA, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: Notice of CCIA Investigation -------------------- BODY: The investigation of this incident has concluded, and appropriate action has been taken for affected individuals. This matter will now be considered resolved. -------------------- DTG: 09-16:44-TAU CETI STANDARD-06-2461 SIGN: L.W.

Clausewitz is quoted as saying, "war is a continuation of politics." First of all, fuck that, and second of all, I just needed a quote to start with. This will be a continuation of my "On [X]" series, going into detail on how real-life strategy and small unit tactics can be applied to the Aurora, whether it be the Security team or the Emergency Response Team. So, here you are. Either your a Head of Security, Lead Trooper, Mercenary, or god forbid Prefect. Wondering how to make your team of grunts and people with dents in their brains better. You've come to the right place. Learning military tactics, small scale units is important as well - but let's be honest, we're not really to the level where those 70-page manuals with text as small as a fucking spider a mile away apply. Let me preface these statements by saying that in most situations: don't be overkill and tactical. This is best when applied when there's a massive shootout or hostile borders. This is to maximize quality, not quantity - and the NSS Aurora is a research station, not some Sol Gov military vessel off floating. Don't expect many security officers to be happy when you institute some massive overhaul or change to the way they operate. First off, organization and strategy itself matter much more than tactics. Being robust has often been defined in many servers as having the right equipment, at the right time, with the right team, and the right mouse. Although that last one doesn't really apply to what I'm saying, know that your odds to win are higher than average before the battle by picking the right people for the team, and the right leaders. For instance, sending a team of three relatively skilled players, one team leader for small-unit leadership, two armed with carbines, one armed with a lethal laser rifle, maybe even a medic, all armed with .45 pistols, is a good example of picking the right people. Know what equipment you have beforehand, and know who is experienced in what. Make sure your people in said teams have good cohesion, working well and looking up to whoever you select to lead their fireteam. It's a wise decision to have multiple teams, each with either at least two people with good equipment or the entire team. Having multiple fireteams allows for manevours to occur, such as flanking, surprise attacks, and et cetera. These are usually what instantly turn the tide of the firefight on the Aurora. But to do these, you don't need to have two or more groups - you can also use deception as a tool, such as pretending you're in one place while you're in another. Although, this doesn't work well when you've got a keen AI. Secondly, fight the battles that you know you could win - not the ones where you know you would lose. I see more often than not a Security team who decided on engaging the hostiles, flaunting their laser rifles and carbines on lethal towards the enemy. Negotiate, talk, and roleplay. These are the fundamentals of a good security force, like them or not. Proper escalation is required regardless of the circumstances. It also goes on a tactical sense, while surprise attacks are still allowed in this doctrine - you just need to have a reason before. And, good players won't just attack and obey your commands like a chained dog, they'll want to know why and most of that time it is common sense - however, if you fail to uphold these fundamentals it's likely they won't go through with it. Plan and plan some more. This is a rough guide on combat and how to strategize for it, and more will be added with suggestions or just ideas from myself.

TO: Vira Bolivar, Head of Security, NSS Aurora FROM: AMS, CCIAAMS, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report -------------------- BODY: This is an automated message to inform you that your incident report has been received and placed in a queue for the CCIA Division to review. If necessary, you will be contacted by a CCIA Agent when an investigation begins. DTG: 06-13:39-TAU CETI STANDARD-06-2461 SIGN: CCIAAMS

TO: Suzuul Guwan, Miner, NSS Aurora FROM: AMS, CCIAAMS, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report -------------------- BODY: This is an automated message to inform you that your incident report has been received and placed in a queue for the CCIA Division to review. If necessary, you will be contacted by a CCIA Agent when an investigation begins. DTG: 05-19:47-TAU CETI STANDARD-06-2461 SIGN: CCIAAMS

TO: Robert Bretscher, Scientist, NSS Aurora FROM: AMS, CCIAAMS, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report -------------------- BODY: This is an automated message to inform you that your incident report has been received and placed in a queue for the CCIA Division to review. If necessary, you will be contacted by a CCIA Agent when an investigation begins. DTG: 05-18:55-TAU CETI STANDARD-06-2461 SIGN: CCIAAMS

it's a conspiracy and discord is in on it

As I said in the Yonni staff complaint thread my story, I won’t repeat it. However I can confirm the fact that TCFL’s arrive had been due to the request of Horacio Knapenberger’s gimmick and we even waited on them in AOOC to get a radio to contact us. Now, as for your tirade I do not know what got you hand over arm about this yet it still is worrying that you immediately claim that we wanted to fight. If it wasn’t for the aggressive AI who bolted us in and not just opened the doors for us, damage to the walls and windows would’ve been easily avoided in the first place allowing for talking with the crew and a steady escalation - instead all of security, including yourself, came to the Bridge with weapons, as the Captain demanded things that were simply not possible with TCFL equipment as is.

I was the Prefect. And let’s begin. We started the round with 20 minutes to spare after we prepped up, so naturally we all went AFK awhile to return and someone suggested that TCFL gets involved as an antagonist to spur more role play after the death of the primary antagonist. Multiple traitors and members of the TCFL agreed and it was a helped. And, it made sense due to the nature of the TCFL as a mostly undisciplined force looking for the thrill of battle. We boarded the station and we waited for entry, although nobody answered so we destroyed the windows in order to make our way to the air locks to be seen and our complaints addressed. It was at this time the AI saw us and bolted everything around us, and then security first showed up with weapons drawn, visible from my scope. Bad start. They holstered and soon practically the entirety of security was at the bridge, including most heads of staff. Odd why the entirety of Security would respond. None the less, we talked and the Captain tried to have only one of us leave the group and head off for some menial task. I rejected, mostly due to the fact and equipment of the TCFL making desperation impossible - especially with only three people, and with what seems like the station not at all trusting us. It only got worse from there and we continued to argue, I made some funny quips, and finally my Prefect, a hothead, has it and placed a C4 as a sign that would injure nobody yet show that I wasn’t just bullshitting. Afterwards, the AI had the bright idea to close the lockdown on me and trap me from my team. I got pretty PO’d at this, and in reply shot a warning shot to prevent them from capturing me alone. I sprinted away once I C4’d the lockdown and we left through maintenance to try and outmanevour them and escape while they presumed we were still there. However, we encountered the Captain alone with another guard and we believed we could take him hostage there. We were wrong, and a firefight ensued causing multiple wounded and one death. Oddly enough, Carmichael was killed in this engagement as well mostly due to a pepper spray grenade by his own team. I permitted a cease fire over radio and allowed for wounded to be treated on both sides. I knew I was about to die due to lung damage, heart damaged, and shrapnel in the chest. I ordered to take the Captain hostage while we were treated by their medical department so we weren’t taken captive while undergoing surgery. The captain fled and we were ultimately too wounded to fight back. I disconnected due to poor internet at this time, and thus why I’m writing this on my phone. EDIT: I believe you were also the one who made quite inflammatory comments in DChat, just an interesting observance.

Since I have been given the option of either studying for exams or write a menial guide, I have chosen the latter. And, this isn't focused on Security either and is not whatsoever based on real life. This is a video game. First off: no torture whatsoever. Just don't. It's not even nice for roleplay, it's abusive at best and at worst makes the person want to cryogenically freeze themselves in the interview chair. Let's begin with why you're doing this in the first place. I've found out that whether you're a criminal detective working for a low-tier wage with Nanotrasen ISD, or you're some bigwig CCIA trying to interview a squirmy witness - it doesn't matter. I've found out that using this strategy in most, if not all interviews on the Aurora, usually result in more knowledge then you would've gained just using "here, just tell me everything you know." Human nature is a big part of this. Whether we try to suppress it in our characters, it's still there undeniably. All good roleplayers and bad roleplayers alike show it - some more then others - but it's easy to pick up on after a while. A grizzled roleplayer can succumb to well-placed, well-worded questions and give up what they're doing while still maintaining roleplay in the balance, after all, we are HRP. Interviewing is just that, maintaining the balance of roleplay while also trying to gain knowledge out from either the prospective suspect, witness, or other. And, interviewing really depends on who you interview. If your witness is talkative, then let them control the flow until they mess up and make an error you can exploit to get more information or a witness who barely talks who you have to carrel into talking. And a little meta I've noticed, there are two types of interviewers: one who effectively controls the interview, and those who ride the flow of the interviewee. While both options are fine, a mix is what is recommended. Preamble concluded, now onto the meat. 1.) Study. Study, study, study. Study the case, study any previous evidence or testimonies, and make sure that you know what you're doing before you do it. This is relatively easy, and plus you're on the internet. Just have it on a tab beside you or alt-tab to it. If you don't have anything to study, then you better make them think you do. Use logic and common sense if you don't. 2.) Now with that out of the way, let's begin with the environment. Whether it's in a conference room or in a dimly lit interviewing room in the brig, the environment starts off the scene for the interviewee and the tone. One of the first things they see is whether your prepared or not, whether this might be through paperwork, previous witness testimonies, and a briefcase on your side it's still a present thing they immediately see. This is one of the lesser things that people focus on, yet it is still as important - although, less so - then other things. Also apart of this is whether or not you look organized and showing cohesion as a team. As a witness, I would be more afraid of the security team (or for that matter, any team) that is effectively communicating with each other than those who fight each other with fists in maintenance or the holodeck when the Head of Security (or any boss) isn't looking. Look professional, and look smart. Another instance could be CCIA, as an Agent talking and communicating with your trooper escort is a great example as well. 3.) When you begin the interview, at least with the universal recorder the regular crew has access to, I find it always nice, to begin with, a statement from you. "This is [name x], interviewing [name c] at [time] on [location]." Or, adding anybody in observance and or assisting you to interview included. That's just the basic formula. 4.) After you have all the preliminary matters squared away, start by allowing them their freedom to speak. Allow them to share their testimony of events regarding [x] or [y], and have them go on and on. This usually entails a timeline of what occurred when, and how. This varies from person to person, but this is most important in witnesses or victims - not in suspects. With suspects, they've likely either prepared for this or they try to give the most undetailed version of events to avoid suspicion and saying something that could catch them in a negative glimpse. After all, the truth always reveals itself. 5.) Now is the time to intervene. Whether they said something wrong, they concluded their statement of events or something that you need to nitpick further into and exploit to gain more leverage, information, or whatever other purposes. If the case is they said something that goes against previous testimony or evidence, question them but do not reveal why. Once they have shown their answer, then reveal the veil and tell them what they said was incorrect - but do not allegate they were lying. If they continue to refuse, then go down that path. In other passive cases, begin with questioning over the timeline of events and get specifics and details rather than generalizations of occurrences. This should take up most of the time of the interview, trying to get more knowledge by the specific focused question. Know why you're asking before you do. And, as a reminder, do not get hostile or inflamed with your interviewee. Keep calm and rational. 6.) With most of the interview over, it's time for the conclusion. I usually say something along the lines of "I believe we have gone over everything, is there anything you want to add, state, or discuss before we conclude?" Then, if nothing is said or they do say something and is addressed, finish with saying the interview is terminated to let them know it's over and stop recording. Boom. You did it, your interview's done and now what? If you've finished your interview, do your paperwork. The interview form in the request console is perfect for this, and make sure to have them sign it before allowing them to waltz away. Make sure to apply your interview well, either in other interviews with suspects or using it against them as evidence to brig them - or in the rare, yet funny, case of a tribunal. Imagine that. Properly doing your paperwork is step one, just in case the pesky Internal Affairs Agent strikes demanding to know why this prisoner is interned and trying to see the elusive case report and all available evidence - like we have an investigation team.

TO: Nick Volvalaad, Security Officer, NSS Aurora FROM: CCIAAMS, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report -------------------- BODY: This is an automated message to inform you that an investigation has now been opened regarding your incident report, and assigned to agent Lawrence Windsor, (ComradeCorbyn). You may be contacted by the CCIAA for an interview, or you may contact them directly if you have any questions. DTG: 02-13:16-TAU CETI STANDARD-06-2461 SIGN: CCIAAMS