Scout Service for RnD/mining (edited) (This doesn't touch sec slots anymore)

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Theyre not walking armories. I understand the firepower. They have starting equipment of epistol and they can have other weapons stored away. Their main focus is what you suggested; mining and RnD.

[Nantei]

8 hours ago, Marlon Phoenix said:

Theyre not walking armories. I understand the firepower. They have starting equipment of epistol and they can have other weapons stored away. Their main focus is what you suggested; mining and RnD.

Unless I am going insane, it was laser rifle until this post. Which is pretty damn strong. A self-recharging energy pistol or a ballistic weapon would make more sense than standard e-pistols. If they are survivalists, they probably would not want a weapon that requires trekking back to reload. Could even give them machetes or something. But I would similarly like to mention an E-Pistol is already much stronger than a .45 with rubbers. 

I really do feel like this could be awesome as an Expedition/Mining rework. But I can't see this replacing the escalation of Security itself. if I were going to try and implement this, I would suggest instead reducing other slots and supplementing Security rather than replacing. Or even just another head slot that is Scout Leader. Making Security have to call in special people who may not even be there to deal with threats is... not going to be very fun in practice. I feel this would only hurt the Security x Antag dynamic more, and make officers even worse about escalating. 

I feel it's very difficult to create an away team styled thing like this without seriously uprooting the current dynamic in a very negative way. So while I love the concept, I don't know that it is currently workable. Maybe what we need instead is just a redesign to Mining's purpose on the station. But that isn't the point of this thread, so I digress.

I also find it a bit hard to believe NT would rely entirely on Tau Ceti to defend their stations against serious threats, simply because it doesn't historically line up with their actions. Why would they even make ERT Troopers to start with if they were comfortable letting the Tau Military defend them? Because they aren't.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

6 minutes ago, Nantei said:

Unless I am going insane, it was laser rifle until this post. Which is pretty damn strong. A self-recharging energy pistol or a ballistic weapon would make more sense than standard e-pistols. If they are survivalists, they probably would not want a weapon that requires trekking back to reload.

I understood the argument that the rifle is too strong, even if they are expected to encounter carp and the like. A self-recharging weapon for themselves would be nice, and it could also let us alter its damage output to fall in line with what's acceptable to kill hostile carps but not be overpowered if they are attacked by antagonists.

Just attaching them to the existing command hierarchy is a possibility that would be neat; I was very interested in seeing the power dynamics between sec and the crew adjusted. As an isolated new department I suppose it would be fine. If we don't want to see another command slot, then having the RD command them would be interesting.

[Mogelix]

nanotrasen has biesel by the balls why would they let government officers do the heavy lifting. if we add this, logically nt cant have or maybe even wouldn't need erts, deathsquads or nukes, or all that. biesel is all about corporations with little government oversight, or more like corporations overseeing governments. lorewise bad, mechanically this is just overcomplication and needless bureaucracy. you say antagonistic sec is a bad thing but then outline all the ways it can be a good thing icly. if you want co-operative sec, enforce rp and realistic characters better, sec can be likeable and realistic if theyre not played by gruff soldiermans or immediately socially blacklisted and grudged. they will become antagonistic as needed in response to antagonist actions. be a better manipulator, dont force them to bend to your strange ideal of splitting co-operative sec and antagonistic sec, also, relevant.

I agree with blaine and shodans points here too. also, can we avoid becoming this? i really enjoy this servers simplicity.

overall this is a -1 big no no

Edited September 3, 2019 by Mogelix

[Mogelix]

nanotrasen has biesel by the balls why would they let government officers do the heavy lifting. if we add this, logically nt cant have or maybe even wouldn't need erts, deathsquads or nukes, or all that. biesel is all about corporations with little oversight, or more like corporations overseeing governments. lorewise bad, mechanically this is just overcomplication and needless bureaucracy. you say antagonistic sec is a bad thing but then outline all the ways it can be a good thing icly. i agree with blaine and shodan here too. also, can we avoid becoming this? i really enjoy this servers simplicity.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Avoiding baystations out of control hierarchies of crew jobs is important to me.

Having park rangers attached to RnD and mining is not as complicated because by nature the jobs reject that kind of beuacracy.

If the reboot of sec is too much how do you feel on scouts in isolation attached to RnD?

Scouts are not meant to do heavy lifting. Ive said several times that the RoE over their interaction with antags follows the same rule as any other department. They arent officers.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Marlon Phoenix

[Bear]

Id love to see the scouts added

[Rushodan]

Okay, had a think about this and I actually thought of a way that it could be interesting, at least from the points raised. Will leave @Marlon Phoenix to give their thoughts on this feedback.

Leave security as it is, I personally believe it is in a good spot right now and honestly I really don't want any change, be it nerfs or buffs. I feel if sec was made weaker antags would steamroll them, but if made stronger antags wouldn't have much of a change. This screams good balance.

With scouts and a brief discussion brought up with @Nantei they could be useful if they were balanced based around fighting simple mobs and being less effective in terms of fighting crew. Stun weapons such as tasers would not be issued to them and they wouldn't be issued cuffs or anything to restrain either. Due to their expectations to fight off carp and things in zero atmosphere conditions, why not have them issued with specialized KAs. Almost useless on station, not good/useful at all for mining but kicks mean ass in space for carp and cave dweller dispatch. They could be given scout voidsuits, which are pretty much repainted security voidsuits with jetpacks to get around the different z-levels easily.

If regulations are broken in space, they could co-ordinate with security to help show them where the perpetrator is and what they were doing but under no means are to attempt the arrest themselves. Why?

Because I would place them under the control of the RD/Captain. They are a part of the research department, not security and therefore are not expected to perform security operations. The RD now has two people who they can take away from the station for expeditions, if no expedition does happen they are able to assist research on digs and other operations on the asteroid with dangerous wildlife without adding to the strength of the security force. For expeditions, security could of course issue out a rifle or two to the scouts to deal with the stronger forces faced on the away missions.

Why is this a good thing? Scouts now have a purpose without expeditions, if there are no scouts it doesn't harm the overall balance of antags/security and it doesn't affect security's ability to operate un-gimped. For rev rounds, there is now a force which the RD can use to fight a tyrannical security, it would just require a bit of work from the RnD side of things to get them more capable weapons.

Finally, if the scouts are traitors in an autotraitor round then security still have voidsuits and the means to chase them down. A lot of people that have traitor ticked on are in the security department, people who play security tend to enjoy conflict. I can't even imagine a round where if the officers are reduced to two, for example and they both get traitor...well who exactly can stop them just ganking the HoS and having access to all sorts of weapons? 

To wrap this up, changing the suggestion to be like this has the following positives:
No extra command member - it isn't required in my opinion.
No major balance adjustments.
Extra incentive to play RD - the least common head of staff atm.
Ease of kicking off an expedition. All the RD would need to do is perhaps get a paramedic on board and get a weapon or two from the armory.
Encourage departments to work a little more closely together.
No major mapping work - the scouts only really need two lockers in a small prep room, perhaps in some unused corner of research.

[Mogelix]

I would love one or two science EVA strong guys too but Jackboot seems too prefer a all or nothing weakening and splitting up security literally into mall cops and gruff soldier mans who bring out da big gunz, complicating the stations structure needlessly, so I can't support this.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

A coincidence that i just chatted with Rushodan on discord about this.

I would be fine with the jobs simply being added to the station without a change in command dynamics. The Scout Leader falling under the authority of the RD would be fine with me. As long as they are government contractors from the Colonial Authority.

I edited the OP.

Edited September 4, 2019 by Marlon Phoenix

[AmoryBlaine]

How about we don't try to make Expeditions into a Science exclusive thing.
How about we not have all of Sec make new characters so they can play soldier boy.
Why exactly would the NSS Aurora require third-party exterior security when a) we have the Icarus and b) A security team already present.
Why would we make a role specifically for fucking around EVA and doing expeditions?
What is the point of this other than to further limit security involvement outside patrols and dealing with antagonists, while complicating the antagonist-station dynamic for the worst?

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Security should not be all encompassing of all other departments and possible roles. Let RnD have some initiative. Security does a LOT.

You won't be forced to make a scout character and this lite version of the suggestion isn't that complicated.

Being contractors limits their authority over the crew.

Edited September 4, 2019 by Marlon Phoenix

[Nantei]

Outsourcing away stuff to a third party actually makes a lot of sense. Science employees are expensive, other employees are usually too busy, Expeditions are naturally dangerous so we save money there too, shuttle costs, etc. Meanwhile NT basically owns Biesel and can probably get a pretty damn good deal where the property found is theirs due to its close proximity to the Aurora or something.

Also this means expeditions get some actual use, and I think the flavor of this is awesome. 

[AmoryBlaine]

How does security encompass engineer? How does security encompass cargo or service? Does an officer applying gauze mean they're encompassing medical, because other than moving people to medical, that's about the extent of their capabilities that might infringe on medical's turf? And on the flipside- what happened to having departments interact with each other? Or does that just not include Security's role in expeditions?

No, you're not forced. You're enticed. You're given access to a role that doesn't ask you to deal with any of the minor issues that officers are required to deal with, given easier access to weapons- and per your new idea easy access to ammunition, while not even given the fall back of handcuffs or a cell to enforce non-lethal engagement. You're effectively being given free-reign to shoot anyone you 'have' to because there's no real reliable means for you to deal with a threat non-lethally for a lengthy period of time without directly putting your own life on the line, emboldening you to

Yeah, you aren't Security. You're just guys with guns who aren't expected to do Sec's round to round job. So what happens when Code Red rolls around and whatever threat is in the round kicks into gear? Are you expecting these lethal-engagement focused non-security elements to just, not react? Are you expecting them to be separate of the crew emotionally and not invested in the security of their co-workers? I can think of a good few reasons for these 'no authority' scouts to step in and start shooting things on station and probably even take control of the situation.

[VUX]

If we ever needed an illustration as to why security needs to be split and reduced, here it is.


This is basically the rule rather than the exception; security is absolutely full and every other department has like, two or three people max in it.

Additionally, the way security is currently designed encourages the bad behavior we so often see among security mains (shoot first, ask questions later; lack of RP through utter silence during processing; secret club mentality; performing executions). All security players eventually develop the behaviors of bad security, without exception. The only true, permanent solution is to recontextualize security as people mostly concerned with internal issues (rename them to security guards, take away their lethal weapons) and to take half their slots and turn it into a new organization that deals with external issues (carp, cave dwellers, mercenaries, and so on), that does have lethal weapons, and does not have non-lethal weapons. The solution is to remove the capability of the people who are playing security to perform those bad behaviors. The scouts accomplish this by being entirely unrelated to the law enforcement part, and the security guards accomplish this by being entirely unrelated to the combat part.

Scouts are expected to participate when code red rolls around. I dunno what to say other than, yes, you're correct, but they don't have the authority to take control. Security, as it stands, does (on account of they're required to enforce law, so when code red rolls around and the guns come out, even though they have shifted gears to a pure combat role, they are still required to enforce law).

Edited September 4, 2019 by VUX

[AmoryBlaine]

1 hour ago, VUX said:

Scouts are expected to participate when code red rolls around. I dunno what to say other than, yes, you're correct, but they don't have the authority to take control.

Do you lack the foresight to recognize that giving a bunch of guys guns with none of the responsibility or equipment afforded to Security is going to create a much worse environment?

What of the manifest, exactly? "People play this role, it's popular and always has been." and your answer is to splinter Security while creating a much more enticing version that lacks the responsibility of the former?

1 hour ago, VUX said:

Additionally, the way security is currently designed encourages the bad behavior we so often see among security mains (shoot first, ask questions later; lack of RP through utter silence during processing; secret club mentality; performing executions). All security players eventually develop the behaviors of bad security, without exception.

Elaborate on this. In what way is security currently designed to encourage bad behavior. Could you name some security mains that shoot first, ask questions later? Could you name some security mains that lack RP, giving silence through processing? Could you name some security mains performing executions?

If this is all security mains, why are not making player complaints? What is the basis of any of what you just said?

1 hour ago, VUX said:

The only true, permanent solution is to recontextualize security as people mostly concerned with internal issues (rename them to security guards, take away their lethal weapons) and to take half their slots and turn it into a new organization that deals with external issues (carp, cave dwellers, mercenaries, and so on), that does have lethal weapons, and does not have non-lethal weapons. The solution is to remove the capability of the people who are playing security to perform those bad behaviors. The scouts accomplish this by being entirely unrelated to the law enforcement part, and the security guards accomplish this by being entirely unrelated to the combat part.

"If we cut security in half, funnel all the guns to non-security, non-NT jarheads working under Research without a means to make proper arrests or detainments, without access to non-lethals, with unlimited ammunition for recharging energy weapons, without any of the responsibility of sec- this will deal with the issue of security players shooting antagonists."

I really shouldn't have to explain why this makes no sense from your own warped perception as to why Sec is currently bad.

If you take away all the security aspects of security, and leave them with their guns, remove their affiliation from NT, and refocus them as being a third party, armed. They are going to dominate. They have all the more reason to shoot first, and ask questions later, and carry out executions. I already outlined this. Your other worry about lack of RP during processing won't change as scouts won't be detaining you. That's not their job.

1 hour ago, VUX said:

Scouts are expected to participate when code red rolls around. I dunno what to say other than, yes, you're correct, but they don't have the authority to take control. Security, as it stands, does (on account of they're required to enforce law, so when code red rolls around and the guns come out, even though they have shifted gears to a pure combat role, they are still required to enforce law).

Just because you say "You don't have the authority to take control." doesn't mean a group of armed men with no real investment in the chain of command, in an emergency situation are going to not take control.

If anything, the way you're approaching this makes me think you intend to back up this outlook is by trying to make it an OOC issue, so you can ahelp every time the armed men that you wanted to replace the security team abuse their power because they alone have the capacity to do so with no other priorities- in direct contrast with security who exist to secure the station and its personnel.

 

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

If you think a bunch of park rangers with pistols and a solar powered rifle acting as agents of a civilian government contracted to work on a major space station in their own country will suddenly go rogue and seize the station as nonantags then i am at a loss for how anything anyone could ever say would satisfy you. 

[IAmCrystalClear]

The suggestion as a whole is a brilliant concept. I myself can see Azka operating as a scout, while other members of security would transition into the guard roles.

There are obvious flaws, such as that of the military RP aspect, but they are easily avoided by several things. They are park rangers and colonial explorers, and if lead by a squad leader who is under authority of the RD, they are simply tools for xenoarchs and other science staff to utilise for protection on various outings. By keeping their loadout simple, we can avoid them having access to weapons that can be considered "military". Replacing the 15-shot wall-charged laser rifle into a 5-shot crank-loaded rifle prevents the scouts from engaging in active warfare but still gives them the strength to defend their homes and crew.

The key issue with the the scouts is also their key strength; firepower. The Scouts shouldn't particularly possess major firepower, the should be superior in their mobility. Also, reducing the number of non-lethal tools they have access to would, ironically, reduce their involvement with attempting to be "the law": shooting the chef with a blaster rifle for stabbing a customer would lose you your job. My suggestion for this is giving the scouts a variety of tools that are niche, and clearly designed for hunting: A machete or knife for utility and close-range self-defence, a e-pistol for code green, a cranked, low-power rifle for expeditions and defence, and binoculars for general utility. I'd also suggest their voidsuits/armours have little defence, but let the wearer stay mobile and fast.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

37 minutes ago, IAmCrystalClear said:

The suggestion as a whole is a brilliant concept. I myself can see Azka operating as a scout, while other members of security would transition into the guard roles.

There are obvious flaws, such as that of the military RP aspect, but they are easily avoided by several things. They are park rangers and colonial explorers, and if lead by a squad leader who is under authority of the RD, they are simply tools for xenoarchs and other science staff to utilise for protection on various outings. By keeping their loadout simple, we can avoid them having access to weapons that can be considered "military". Replacing the 15-shot wall-charged laser rifle into a 5-shot crank-loaded rifle prevents the scouts from engaging in active warfare but still gives them the strength to defend their homes and crew.

The key issue with the the scouts is also their key strength; firepower. The Scouts shouldn't particularly possess major firepower, the should be superior in their mobility. Also, reducing the number of non-lethal tools they have access to would, ironically, reduce their involvement with attempting to be "the law": shooting the chef with a blaster rifle for stabbing a customer would lose you your job. My suggestion for this is giving the scouts a variety of tools that are niche, and clearly designed for hunting: A machete or knife for utility and close-range self-defence, a e-pistol for code green, a cranked, low-power rifle for expeditions and defence, and binoculars for general utility. I'd also suggest their voidsuits/armours have little defence, but let the wearer stay mobile and fast.

Sick. Love this contribution. I super agree with all your points posted. Their lack of arrest perms, authority under the RD, wiki guidelines, lack of stuns, etc, will really go a long way to take the wind out of any sails of SecRP or MilRP. Hunting knives in their boots would be sick and their voidsuits don't need much armor.

[IAmCrystalClear]

The mentality for the gear levels of scouts should be more-so a "fall back and regroup" than "stand and fight". They need to require strong coordination to pull off difficult hit-and-run tactics, and should be forced to scatter and flee when outgunned. Their primary role would be to clear hostile fauna and flora from the station and provide light defences to staff on away missions, this is what their gear should be tailored towards.

Imagine a cross between Colonial-Era Explorers and the British Home Guard. Equipped to hold their ground against a greater foe and keep civilians safe, be that out in the abandoned ruins of a derelict Sol Cruiser, in the ash-covered caverns outside the mining airlocks, or the halls of command.

 

The scouts would be the minutemen of the Aurora, a fast acting defence force to repel attacks at a moments notice. In lore, the fact they are contracted by Biesel Gov actually really assists this: the Scouts are the Minutemen, while the TCFL are the main forces. I'd love to see the Scouts designed in this aspect, carrying Legion colours and emblems, perhaps even being a detachment of the force entirely.

[November]

Some questions I would ask:

What will scouts do in the absence of an RD/xenoarch?

Who will direct/lead the scouts in the absence of an RD and/or Scout Leader?

 

Some limitations I would recommend:

Scouts cannot wield weapons anywhere on the station without special permission.

Scouts as part of a non-corporate force are never able to create warrants, process criminals, or investigate cases.

Scouts can be 'conscripted' to Security during a Code Red after some submission/fax/joint decision by Heads of Staff/Captain. This is not something to do actively, and is essentially a step between Security acting normally on a Code Red and calling the ERT.

 

I don't really have the experience with Sec to say whether my ideas are any good, but maybe they're something that can help settle and separate this idea from standard Sec operations.

[IAmCrystalClear]

2 minutes ago, November said:

Scouts cannot wield weapons anywhere on the station without special permission.

This is a given.

 

3 minutes ago, November said:

Scouts as part of a non-corporate force are never able to create warrants, process criminals, or investigate cases.

As part of the initial post by Booty, this is already the case.

 

4 minutes ago, November said:

Scouts can be 'conscripted' to Security during a Code Red after some submission/fax/joint decision by Heads of Staff/Captain.

Scouts are a type of security. They're just differently suited. It's been explained that Scouts are for dealing with external crisis, while Security is for dealing with internal.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

7 minutes ago, November said:

Some questions I would ask:

What will scouts do in the absence of an RD/xenoarch?

Who will direct/lead the scouts in the absence of an RD and/or Scout Leader?

I outlined a lot of their responsibilities that are now within the original document spoiler.

They can still help mining find deposits and generally do other fun EVA stuff like try to find the other Z-levels. There's a lot of options. Personally I would love finding the derelict and encouraging people to colonize it or strip mine it for resources.

Without an RD or Scout leader I guess they'd do whatever they want. Typically whatever head is relevant to whatever they wanna do is who they answer to. As a HoP I tend to get EVERYONE coming to me if they don't have a head.

[November]

1 minute ago, Marlon Phoenix said:

I outlined a lot of their responsibilities that are now within the original document spoiler.

They can still help mining find deposits and generally do other fun EVA stuff like try to find the other Z-levels. There's a lot of options. Personally I would love finding the derelict and encouraging people to colonize it or strip mine it for resources.

Without an RD or Scout leader I guess they'd do whatever they want. Typically whatever head is relevant to whatever they wanna do is who they answer to. As a HoP I tend to get EVERYONE coming to me if they don't have a head.

Sure, these were just a few things I wanted to draw out and solidify. Capitalising on the surveying aspect of the role is certainly what I would like to see most. They may need special radio access to effectively communicate this (a comm with access to their own channel, science, and supply maybe?).

The HoS and Service Director changes, I don't really have an informed opinion on. It seems like a lot, but that said I'd welcome more direct oversight of Cargo from a corporate/paperwork point of view.

Overall I like the ideas, but I'm not entirely certain they're good for rp/gameplay overall. It's certainly new and interesting, so maybe a gradual rollout (add the scouts, Sec changes later) like I've sort of seen you put forward would be a good compromise and test.

[AmoryBlaine]

3 hours ago, Marlon Phoenix said:

If you think a bunch of park rangers with pistols and a solar powered rifle acting as agents of a civilian government contracted to work on a major space station in their own country will suddenly go rogue and seize the station as nonantags then i am at a loss for how anything anyone could ever say would satisfy you. 

What happened to "HoS and Sec are so powerful they can control the station and threaten the Captain, strong arming him to do what they want."? What do you think happens when you take away the constraint of having the priority of non-lethal engagement, and employment with the company? You want Security torn in half because Sec currently is too "all encompassing"- which you still have not elaborated on- and capable of strong-arming the station into submission, yet you think it's irrational for me to rightly predict that your armed third party is going to have a lot more capacity to end up in a position of power in the average Code Red of a round given their immediate access to weapons and EVA capacity. Tell me, how exactly are you going to limit this group from being directly supplied from RnD with better quality weapons as soon as possible? They have more reason to have these with them while doing their job than Security does. If they have shit equipment, how are you expecting them to actually do anything but deal with carp. If that's all these guys are for, why are you not just giving miners a low capacity energy weapon? I'll talk more about this below.

 

3 hours ago, IAmCrystalClear said:

Also, reducing the number of non-lethal tools they have access to would, ironically, reduce their involvement with attempting to be "the law": shooting the chef with a blaster rifle for stabbing a customer would lose you your job.

What about. "The chef was stabbing a customer to death in front of me- I didn't have access to any non-lethals, or even handcuffs. In order to save them, I had no choice but to shoot the chef, who then ran off." Or what about if the Chef doesn't leave, and attacks them? Again- are you just expecting these scouts to do nothing when things start happening? They're suppose to just hang out until Sec says "okay, you can join us because we aren't using any non-lethals now, but please stay EVA so that the caro don't get in, thanks."

 

1 hour ago, IAmCrystalClear said:

Scouts are a type of security. They're just differently suited. It's been explained that Scouts are for dealing with external crisis, while Security is for dealing with internal.

If these guys are here to deal with carp, we should get rid of these guys and just give miners access to a low capacity energy weapon. If your use of "external crisis" is in reference to them dealing with mercs or raiders, I find it funny that there's an expectation of this new team to be lightly equipped. And if they aren't lightly equipped this circles back to my other point of this encouraging shitters to swap over to the responsibility free security alternative.

 

2 hours ago, IAmCrystalClear said:

The mentality for the gear levels of scouts should be more-so a "fall back and regroup" than "stand and fight". They need to require strong coordination to pull off difficult hit-and-run tactics, and should be forced to scatter and flee when outgunned. Their primary role would be to clear hostile fauna and flora from the station and provide light defences to staff on away missions, this is what their gear should be tailored towards.

Oh, so you DON'T expect them to deal with actual threats to the station- but want them to have a gear mentality that is "fall back and regroup"? What for? Where to? Then what? Get the bigger guns, and throw that doctrine out the window because you've backed yourself into a corner- but luckily this corner had a overclocked prototype rifle in it? Where does security fall into this? Are you expecting Security to do what during all of this- are they the bigger guns? Is all of this just really hoping that any exterior threat walks to the station and engages these scouts prior to boarding? That they either get in a shoot out or are escorted aboard? Did we forget that mercs and raiders typically board the station quietly or peacefully? Are these scouts suppose to come aboard when this happens? Meta the shuttle and camp it once it's landed?

 

Expeditions. See, what this does is get rid of the very good and open "Who would like to go on an expedition?" question for Security. And in my mind, I'm now thinking- at what point does someone make an equally bad idea to also kick out medical players- or engineering players. Let's just make it a Research and Development only adventure, with all the departments required shrunk down and stuffed into Science at the round start. Why exactly, would you bring light defences on away missions anyways, if you're not even sure what you're going to encounter? Why would their armor then be light? Does that not directly contradict the idea of being a support role in that scenario? You don't have Security present to keep with your doctrine of falling back, so I'll assume that this version of falling back is just leaving the away site. I guess to get bigger guns.

 

1 hour ago, November said:

Scouts can be 'conscripted' to Security during a Code Red after some submission/fax/joint decision by Heads of Staff/Captain. This is not something to do actively, and is essentially a step between Security acting normally on a Code Red and calling the ERT.

During a Code Red scenario you're going to write up a fax saying it is okay for the other people with guns to use their guns. Do you think they're going to wait for you to do this? The IC regulations and rules do not govern the escalation of situations throughout a round. Lacking authorization from Sec hasn't stopped anyone from gearing up. Take out the middle man of having to actually acquire said gear and it goes even worse.

 

2 hours ago, IAmCrystalClear said:

The scouts would be the minutemen of the Aurora, a fast acting defence force to repel attacks at a moments notice.

What do you think the existence of the security team is for? They aren't here to deal with heavy intrusions. Why do you think we have ERTs and TCFL. Why do you think we leave after an hour or so of most intrusions? The Security team is not the army. They are the fast acting defense force. What does adding a new defense force but limiting it to shitty weapons- or on the flip side, laser rifles and zero access to non-lethals- add to the average round experience? Whatever way you try to cut this, it makes no sense- unless you want to try and limit who gets to go on expeditions, or just dislike Security.