DeffosNotRed Complaint

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

BYOND Key: Jackboot

Player Byond Key: DeffosNotRed

Reason for complaint:

This round just happened. I was a nuke op leader with 3 other agents. We were roleplaying that they were hired by the Jawdat family to empty the station of funds and resources. Long story short, our cover was blown and we ended up taking quite a few hostages at primary tool storage when it turns out we had hidden weapons, and didn't turn in all of them.

Things are going well, even if they're falling apart IC'ly, and I'm listing off demands to bring us money while repeatedly saying that I have hostages and will kill them only if we are bothered.

Cue Roscoe Richter, a security officer, suddenly running up to us and throwing a flashbang. Right after he threw it, he unloaded in me (Houssam Jawdat) with the SMG I had turned in to the security checkpoint. I said "What the fuck are you doing" in LOOC and said that I was ahelping the event, and once the stun had worn off from my flashbang I killed him and then used the other hostage as a meatshield to eliminate another officer who was attacking the other agents.

My complaint lies in that DeffosNotRed saw it suitable to completely ignore everything that a rational security guard would do, and try to play a hero without even informing security. There was no RP, nothing. He just ran up, threw a flashbang, then initiated a firefight when we had a bunch of hostages. It completely killed the RP, got all the agents killed/captured, and ended the entire round event, and we just called a crew transfer.

Rambo sec is still a problem. I have never seen a hostage situation resolved peacefully unless the hostages are kept away from the security department meant to protect them. DeffosNotRed knew full well what he was doing, and I'm irritated that he just decided to forgo RP and people's IC safety just to try and be a hero.

[LetzShake]

I have to be honest... isn't this what flashbangs are for?

While I agree this sounds badly executed, the concept, in itself doesn't seem wrong. I feel like too many people expect all hostage situations to end with negotiation and hostage-takers to get their demands (not saying you do, but this comes up, semi-often). In real life hostage situations most often end with an organized breach by a security team. He shouldn't have done it alone, he should've coordinated with other security officers. But I don't know if this is outright worthy of a complaint. It makes sense for a breach and attempted rescue to happen in this situation. Just not one that badly done.

[Tainavaa]

Hostage situations going wrong and ending up with the hostage takers being killed or otherwise neutralized is fine, but the offender did NOT do it in ANY believable way. He saw hostages, saw that there were armed nukes and the first thing he did was just throw a flashbang and start shooting wildly; he put a great number of lives at risk, and was the cause of a number of innocents getting injured and killed, including the detective.

The nuke killing the detective was a completely logical thing to do; he TOLD the station that if there were disturbances, he would be executed and that's what happened.

[TishinaStalker]

I have to be honest... isn't this what flashbangs are for?

 

Yes, it is, but to the extent of what the player did seemed like the worst use for it imaginable.

 

He shouldn't have done it alone, he should've coordinated with other security officers.

 

This is why the complaint is being filed. The situation was that three, armed nuclear operatives were in the port primary hallway with three or four hostages. That's /way/ too many civilians in the crossfire for that hallway. The officer went in, by himself, threw a flashbang in, and then started unloading an SMG into a downed operative that he could've cuffed and immediately dragged away, but instead risked letting the operative get up before getting annihilated. Rambo'ing is a serious issue with Security at times because they straight up use mechanics, and don't think IC'ly about the victims; in fact there have been situations where sec has /fired/ on hostages in order to rambo the hostage takers. The officer went in, by himself, to flashbang three operatives, while knowing well that he would not be able to dispatch all three efficiently, and that, that would lead to injuries and casualties, but this was ignored in favor of playing-to-win. This behavior thus makes it worthy of a complaint once the IC situation is explained.

[DeffosNotRed]

Alright, time for my side of the story.

Surprisingly, to me at least, Jacks recounting is more or less completely accurate, but incomplete. Rather than type out what happened again, I'll take his rightful account and fill in some blanks.

Sadly I don't have logs to submit, because Jack informed me he was ahelping and I assumed he would provide them.

 

Things are going well, even if they're falling apart IC'ly, and I'm listing off demands to bring us money while repeatedly saying that I have hostages and will kill them only if we are bothered.

 

Alright so here the Nuke Ops team has some hostages held at gunpoint at primary tool storage, and I get the message asking for backup over security comms. I check it out on the arrivals shuttle hallway security console and see the situation, then proceed over there by way of maint because the AI has bolted many of the main hall doors closed. On arriving at the scene, I see the two downed hostages with SMGs being aimed at them by three Nuke Ops. I'm not 'holding' a weapon and maintain my distance, looking at the scene through primary tool storage's glass windows, with both doors to the hall bolted. I verbally tell them to 'DROP THE WEAPONS' as, having identified the situation, I am attempting to ensure the safety of the hostages. I'm in some degree of personal danger, but that is the job of security, and I'm confident I can escape if they decide to open fire on me due to the reinforced windows between us before backup arrives. I call it in over the radio that they have hostages at primary tool storage, making this the second backup call other security officers should be responding to. At this point, I also pull out my PDA and summon Beepsky. Simply saying "We will kill if you try and stop us", doesn't mean they can be freely allowed to roam the station with lethal weapons, collecting ever more hostages, so I remain put.

Situation as seen by myself: The nuke ops team has an AI lording over them, a security officer on the scene and several more on the station, who I assume are also responding to the original call that brought me here. They are soon to be outnumbered. They cannot win or escape this in any meaningful way. Their only cards are a handful of hostages whom, we as security certainly have to retrieve without undue harm, but once those cards are spent the Nuke Ops are out of options and will be promptly taken down.

Why do I think this was the correct thing to do?

From the wiki; http://wiki.baystation12.net/index.php/Guide_to_Security#Standard_Procedure

"If someone calls for security an officer should respond. Having another officer use the camera potato to check the area is also recommended."

"If the scene is not clear: Identify nature of threat / If threat is unable to be handled by officers on scene: Request immediate assistance. Upon requesting assistance, await said assistance before proceeding. Ensure your safety before ensuring the safety of others on scene."

What happens next?

No other officers arrive before Beepsky does. One of the Nuke Ops begins firing his SMG without warning and no one is hurt that I know of. At this point the hostages are in immediate danger but I don't have the weapons to match their SMGs if I have to. Someone yells out over comms that 'They've opened fire!' and I second it on the security channel by instantly yelling 'CONTACT'. I run back to the arrivals shuttle security checkpoint, and pick up the confiscated SMG from earlier to ensure my personal safety on the scene, which I then return to. I stand back in the same location as before, behind the reinforced glass, a non-threatening distance away, making no aggressive moves but observing the situation so I can react if a hostage is threatened, or there is a realistic chance. No other officers, of which there are still a few unaccounted for, have yet shown up to this twice called in situation, even after confirmation of gunfire. I am now convinced no one is coming.

 

Cue Roscoe Richter, a security officer, suddenly running up to us and throwing a flashbang. Right after he threw it, he unloaded in me (Houssam Jawdat) with the SMG I had turned in to the security checkpoint. I said "What the fuck are you doing" in LOOC and said that I was ahelping the event, and once the stun had worn off from my flashbang I killed him and then used the other hostage as a meatshield to eliminate another officer who was attacking the other agents.

 

Again this is actually almost accurate, but incomplete.

Why did Roscoe end up in a gunfight with AN (read: one) armed Nuke Operative?

So, as I arrive back in primary tool storage, I see Jackboots character is now alone for some reason, with two cuffed hostages. One security officer, one detective. The Security officer is on his feet, and is slowly edging his way toward the primary tool storage door, which I am in. The AI at this point, had unbolted that very door, seemingly so the officer could escape. Jackboots is further down the hall now, with the detective hostage, and not in sight. At this point I seize my chance, opening the tool storage door in a very realistic and attainable attempt to extract one of the hostages alive and well, given that he was barely three or four tiles away from me.

Now having pounced on this situation in which the Nuke Ops had left one of their hostages, the only things keeping security from taking them down, safe (oops), Jackboots happens to turn around, presumably to collect the hostage he let get so very far away from him. Upon him spotting me, now that I am over committed but see he's alone, I throw a flash bang to incapacitate him. This doesn't take him down, but no hostages are standing in my line of fire either. Jackboots is armed with a C20 and so am I, it's a lethal situation in which anything could happen.

I pull the trigger, twice.

But then I stop. It would have been oh so easy to fire at him until he was dead but I intend only to wound, not to kill if at all possible. He's been shot and wasn't responding at all. Something is wrong. I then learned over LOOC that this was because he was busy angrily typing, annoyed that I had thrown a flash bang at a single, unsupported Nuke Op which to me, seemed like a perfectly reasonable escalation of events. I cannot escape the situation now that I've made a grab for the hostage that he took his eyes off, attempting to run may get both hostages killed, and more over, both hostages can reasonably be SAVED here. It's one on one with equal weaponry.

So, Jack informs me of his intent to AHelp this situation, and being the good sport (sucker) that I am, I respond over LOOC with "Go ahead", and promptly cease the fight in which he would have been critical or dead by now had I not paused to respond to his LOOC upset. I'm trying to defer to admin judgement because I'm concerned about the propriety of the situation and I don't want to be seen as a Rambo. I'm standing there, doing nothing.

Until a few seconds later Jack decides to abuse my courtesy by pushing the detective in between us and pulling out an energy sword, hitting him repeatedly. I'm stunned by this dick move of invoking admins, then using that to try and get his way. I have no choice now but to go at him, without any of the initiative I willingly gave up so that Jack could call an admin. I run up desperately trying to pull the detective to safety from what I can only describe as Jacks hissy fit, but I'm hit for my efforts and killed.

 

DeffosNotRed knew full well what he was doing, and I'm irritated that he just decided to forgo RP and people's IC safety just to try and be a hero.

 

I did indeed know full well what I was doing, but the irony is, that you do not seem to know full well what I was doing. If anyone has a right to be annoyed, it's me. You let the hostage out of your sight, I attempted to save him. You came back, you saw me during the rescue attempt, it became a fight which you lost. All of this seems perfectly valid and reasonable to me so far. Then YOU turn to LOOC and the admins to get your way, which I very graciously oblige by not continuing the fight. You then abuse this to attack a helpless player, rather than me, and if that wasn't bad enough, you kill me when I attempt to save that player from your fit.

Not ONLY all of this, but now I have to face accusations from players about actually being everything I was not. A rambo and a hero because of your skewed perception. Passing judgement without trial and evidence...I don't really know what to say to that. At no point did you 'ask' what had happened, you simply raged when things didn't go your way.

To you it may have seemed sudden and unexpected. That's kind of why it worked.

Everything that happened after your LOOC, was caused 'by' that LOOC, so don't judge me for any of that. I was giving you a break.

P.S.

...this was ignored in favor of playing-to-win.

I am surprised to see you here TishinaStalker, laying down how it happened without asking for clarity.

I seem to remember we just had a chat about that in game, in which you used needlessly abusive language.

Let me be very clear about one thing and one thing only.

Everybody knows what I did, no one but me knows why.

Don't invent my motivations for me when you should be asking, like a normal human being.

I have very serious doubts about your ability to moderate anything when you immediately fly to conclusions like this, given the very definition of the word 'moderate'.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Deffos, I returned the hostile intent, because I fully believed that - with a history of facing people who gank and don't actually stop ganking when you ask them - you would keep doing your rambo. You never told me in LOOC that you stopped, you just stood there. But I was pretty angry, and retaliated. You fired lethal bullets at me after a /flashbang/ instead of a stunstick or taser. I had zero reason to believe you were doing anything except a complete murderbone.

And I wasn't alone, Apophis and the other op were just down the hall in my sight dealing with other hostages. You attacking me caused a gunfight to ensue, and a bunch of people died.

[Valkrae]

From what I can tell from Deffos post, and the other evidence posted, Deffos acted well within the SOP, and the bounds of acceptable character constraints.

Maybe he didn't see the other OPs, and caused a gunfight by complete accident. This all seems like it was blown out of proportion, very quickly.

Deffos seems to have thoroughly thought his side out, and seems to have done everything in his power to rescue the hostages. Yes, what he did may have been considered as murderbone, but the immediate ganking with an energy sword directly afterwards, after he had apparently stopped, could be considered the same.

[TishinaStalker]

Maybe he didn't see the other OPs, and caused a gunfight by complete accident. This all seems like it was blown out of proportion, very quickly.

 

I'm sorry, Valk, but as the Warden of that round, I can assure you all of sec knew that all three operatives were in the port primary hallway because the hostage takers were talking to us via sec channel, the AI announced it over the sec channel, and one of the hostages was a sec officer that was begging security to not do something that would get them killed. They were all bolted into that hall by the AI.

 

Deffos seems to have thoroughly thought his side out, and seems to have done everything in his power to rescue the hostages. Yes, what he did may have been considered as murderbone, but the immediate ganking with an energy sword directly afterwards, after he had apparently stopped, could be considered the same.

 

As for this though, to be fair (and I apologize for playing devil's advocate), Houssam originally didn't do something that deserved such a lethal response from an officer that had ready access to equipment to keep him down/restrained without lethal action. Houssam, on the other hand, did not. In the time it would take Houssam to strip the officer of a sec belt, and then reorganize his stuff to acquire cuffs or a stunbaton, the officer would've gotten back up to retaliate once more (most surely with a disarm to push Houssam down). It seems to me like the officer had all of the non-lethal options, but the operative had none of them.

Edit: I'd also like to apologize to Deffos if it seems that I might have "something against him", as I had to contact him post-mortem to make sure he understood that staff are not to be insulted. I apologized for having come off as aggressive in that moment, but I just want him to know that I'm not saying this due to being angry at him or anything.

[DeffosNotRed]

Edit: I'd also like to apologize to Deffos if it seems that I might have "something against him", as I had to contact him post-mortem to make sure he understood that staff are not to be insulted. I apologized for having come off as aggressive in that moment, but I just want him to know that I'm not saying this due to being angry at him or anything.

 

No offense taken and I really appreciate you clearing this up. I very much retract any comments I made about your fitness as a moderator, they were wrong. I apologise.

Just to clear up a few loose ends from my side:

At no point did I have an intention to start a fight. When I entered the hallway the antags were occupying, it was to pull a hostage to safety back the way I came. At the time I made the move to do that, there were no antags in sight. It was a split second chance. Personally, if the roles were reversed and I was the hostage in this situation, I would like to think security would do this for me and get me out of there! The fight happened because Jack stumbled on my rescue attempt at precisely the wrong moment. He had previously walked down the hallway for some reason, so in no way was I expecting him to come back so suddenly. I was however, prepared for him to come back because I would be pretty incompetent security if I wasn't. SMGs had been fired near the hostages less than a minute earlier. Also something interesting to consider; the AI actually unbolted the doors precisely for this purpose. If those doors were still bolted, I could never have entered the hallway.

At no point did I have the intention of killing anyone. Nuke Ops or not. Did the other players know this? Of course not, there's no way to communicate your intention to use a lethal weapon to wound, but do everything you can to save the other person from dying. I actually had gauze and ointment in my backpack, which would have been immediately applied to prevent death to Houssam if at all possible. Security's job isn't to be judge, jury and executioner after all. I was just trying to respond with the 'appropriate' force, which is to say, equal or slightly greater (on account of the hostages).

This fight was one on one and lasted about a minute. What I didn't do was stumble blindly into a fight with more than one Nuke Op. For the sake of a hostage, I entered a hallway where, in the very worst case scenario, I would be facing a single Op, but I would be as heavily armed as he was and would very likely have the initiative. This was not the preferred outcome, but the possibility did exist.

The deaths were caused by LOOC and the consequences of it. Had I pressed the issue, and I don't think Jack would disagree, I could have killed him and been on my merry way and this would have been a totally different situation. I had two bullets in his head before he had made a move, and several more seconds to shoot him repeatedly. The fight was stopped because of OOC concern for another player, and desire not to break any rules or ruin his round. Conversely, if I had killed him, I could potentially have rescued 'both' hostages which would mean the Ops had no collateral to stop security from rolling over them. In this way, killing him actually has some merit. Despite that, I did NOT intend to kill him if I was successful in the scuffle.

Yes I used a potentially lethal weapon. The same weapon they had (C20 SMGs). As TishinaStalker points out;

 

It seems to me like the officer had all of the non-lethal options, but the operative had none of them.

 

This is true, I had options other than the C20, but of those options, I was required to make a choice out of what was available. I decided that the other options had problems that could result in hostage deaths if I was required to fight.

I'll break it down;

Stun Baton - Requires close range, how likely is that to happen when your potential opponent has a 20 round rapid firing weapon? Getting myself captured or killed will help no one so this is out.

Taser - While a legitimate option for non-lethally taking down anyone, again, it has a limited number of shots and some recharge time between them. Nowhere near a match for the C20. Do I really want to try and defend myself or worse, someone else, with an inefficient weapon when I have access to a more reliable one?

Flashbangs - Actually incredibly effective, but the stun duration is very limited if they have sunglasses. Did they have those? I don't know, but again, I'm not going to IC gamble a hostages life on "maybe".

C20 - If it did come to a fight, this was the ideal weapon for 'everything' I need it to do. It can provide a credible threat so that they don't pursue me if I do rescue a hostage because I'm as heavily armed as they are. In a worst case scenario, it can hold it's own in a stand up fight against another C20.

For 100% clarity, Roscoe was not in there to arrest a Nuke Ops. Roscoe wasn't in there to kill a Nuke Ops. Roscoe didn't even want to 'encounter' a Nuke Ops.

Roscoe was in there to rescue a hostage when he saw the chance. Everything else was just (IC) panic. The flashbang seemed prudent to get some area control, and firing with the C20 was simply because, just in case we ever forget, Nuke Ops themselves have C20s! When hostage lives were riding on his back, I can't imagine Roscoe or 'any' security officer would ever do less than they possibly could to save them. While OOCly I'll always respect other players right to enjoy their round and do everything I can to make sure I don't infringe on that but, ICly, we're still talking about heavily, heavily armed terrorists threatening to kill innocent people. There is literally zero chance that competent security will not spring into action to protect them. It's the entire job.

 

Deffos, I returned the hostile intent, because I fully believed that - with a history of facing people who gank and don't actually stop ganking when you ask them - you would keep doing your rambo. You never told me in LOOC that you stopped, you just stood there. But I was pretty angry, and retaliated. You fired lethal bullets at me after a /flashbang/ instead of a stunstick or taser. I had zero reason to believe you were doing anything except a complete murderbone.

 

No worries Sen, I don't contest at all that I never informed you that I'd stopped and never meant to somehow imply otherwise, and the same for you having zero reason to believe I wouldn't murder you. I can completely understand you being, uh, "twitchy on the trigger" when faced with a situation that's volatile. We've all seen grief (which this wasn't, but you couldn't know that for sure) and I'm sure everyone knows you have to hit fast and hard or else you can die. I don't blame you for anything you did. You had no way to know I was just trying to extract a hostage with no intention of killing you.

My disappointment with things was just that, I was able to notice that you were not fighting back when I fired the initial two bullets at you. That's when I knew there was a problem that went beyond IC.

I thought that, being a veteran of the server yourself, you would have astutely seen that I had stopped and done likewise so we could quickly resolve things without anyone's fun being ruined.

Maybe I get away with the hostage and you fall back to your comrades. Maybe I get shot in the arm and have to retreat. We could've worked things out ICly or OOCly and like gentlemen. I'm extremely open to mutually respectful communication. We're all just here to have fun, right?

Instead things regrettably devolved into a screaming match with accusations flying left and right. I'm only participating here on the forum to defend myself from some things that probably were said in the heat of the moment. It's my honest belief that no one involved had any intention to ruin anything for anyone else and, like Valkrae says;

This all seems like it was blown out of proportion, very quickly.

 

TL;DR

No intention to kill or fight anyone. Trying to save hostage(s) only. Disappointed with outcome since everyone got upset. Was only trying to play my role to the best of my ability. Used C20SMG for best chance of success in rescue. LOOC is the Devil. Always open to communication to prevent similar outcomes. Did not appreciate accusations and wanted to clear things up. Acted for hostages only, not to be a hero or Rambo. Happy to let bygones be bygones if everyone else is.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Okay. I'm willing to accept DeffosNotRed's explanation. While I feel it could have been done better - a stunstick after the flashbang - there's at least a sense of mutual understanding and dialogue going on.

I'm sorry for getting angry; I was frustrated to have another seemingly-mindless sec officer completely throw a hostage crisis. I still feel that security really needs to be policed about these things - hostage taking isn't something that is supposed to be totally thrown by the authorities, but in this case it seems like a legitimate mistake that all sides can learn from.

[DeffosNotRed]

Totes understand man. If the situations were reversed, I could see myself in your shoes very easily. I hope it goes without saying that I'm sorry things turned out how they did, the situation just blew up unexpectedly to all involved, it seems. Not one of us was prepared for how things developed and it all got out of hand.

I agree that maybe security guidelines could be expanded on a little bit to include some more unorthodox situations, like hostage taking or bomb threats. It would be nice if it was easier to differentiate between a robust action and 'being a hero'.

I think that as it stands, there's a bit too much reliance on authority. There's standard procedure, and then for anything you're not sure about you radio in for advice. But what happens when advice is unavailable or disinterested? Does the security officer stand there, staring helplessly as the assistants bash the chemists brains in with a toolbox, just because they claim to also have a bomb and are threatening to blow it up if anyone interferes?

But anyway, this is probably a discussion for another forum rather than player complaints.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Totes understand man. If the situations were reversed, I could see myself in your shoes very easily. I hope it goes without saying that I'm sorry things turned out how they did, the situation just blew up unexpectedly to all involved, it seems. Not one of us was prepared for how things developed and it all got out of hand.

I agree that maybe security guidelines could be expanded on a little bit to include some more unorthodox situations, like hostage taking or bomb threats. It would be nice if it was easier to differentiate between a robust action and 'being a hero'.

I think that as it stands, there's a bit too much reliance on authority. There's standard procedure, and then for anything you're not sure about you radio in for advice. But what happens when advice is unavailable or disinterested? Does the security officer stand there, staring helplessly as the assistants bash the chemists brains in with a toolbox, just because they claim to also have a bomb and are threatening to blow it up if anyone interferes?

But anyway, this is probably a discussion for another forum rather than player complaints.

 

I will try to push additional SoP for these things in the lorechat. As for the complaint itself, I consider it resolved unless others have things they want to say as well.