Commanding Officer Application - Fourkhan
What is your BYOND key?
Fourkhan
What is your Discord ID?
4khan
What is your timezone in UTC?
UTC-08
Player Name You Use Most?
Zion Barnes
Ban Appeals, Whitelist and Staff Applications:
I have an ancient dev app from the old forums that I could dig up if needed.
Otherwise n/a
Have you been banned in the last 3 months?
No
If so, why?
n/a
Command Knowledge:
How familiar are you with command positions?
My only experience comes from playing SL and XO in preparation for this application. I’m familiar with both roles and have played 100+ hours on each. I enjoy playing both roles and have a good track record of leading operations under a multitude of challenging conditions. Most of my experience as XO is on lowpop, so I know how to do practically everything on the ship by myself including manning req and running the op from there if forced.
Hours in XO:
110
Hours in SL:
100
Character Information:
Why did your character decide to become the CO of a ship?
My character went to officer candidate school after a tragic childhood on the rim. He eventually left the marines after attaining the rank of First Lieutenant after becoming disillusioned with the role of the corps in the sector, but rejoined at the urging of a close friend from OCS. He decided to become a commander after watching his friend, by then a higher-ranking officer, make a real difference in the sector and save the lives of innocent people over the course of several operations. He also realized that he genuinely loved many aspects of being in the marines, from direct combat to nurturing his subordinates.
How did your character attain the position of CO?
After re-entering the marines, my character was eventually promoted to Captain. He assisted competently with a number of operations in the Neroid sector and built a strong rapport with the men under his command as the XO of Third Battalion, both enlisted and officers. Eventually his talent for leadership was noticed and he was given his own command.
Provide a short story of your CO.
Command Actions:
When do you believe it’s appropriate to pardon a prisoner?
Pardons are tricky. Pardoning someone, as opposed to granting their appeal, implies the prisoner is guilty and the CO is bypassing the due course of the law to let them free. Each pardon undermines MPs and the validity of the rule of law onboard the Almayer. To avoid eroding the rule of law aboard ship, pardons should only happen on rare occasions.
With that said, the existence of the pardon suggests the risk of pardoning the prisoner, both to the CO and to the rest of the marines, should be weighed with the potential good that releasing them could do for themselves and others. OOCly, this could be a new player not being punished excessively for a misclick. ICly, Zion highly values the lives of his men. If he thought pardoning someone could or would save marine lives, he would carefully consider it. However, this argument can be extended to literally every marine on board the Almayer. As such, the value the marine could provide needs to be substantial.
I don’t think pardoning minor crimes makes much sense as the punishment for them is already short and they function as guidelines for marines to follow, enforced at MP discretion, rather than something that needs to be treated super seriously.
This leaves us with major crimes. Major crimes, as the name suggests, are inherently more serious. Pardoning someone for a major crime requires a full understanding of the situation, cobbled together from the mandated investigation from the code of conduct.
These are the questions me and my character would ask before pardoning someone.
Will pardoning them improve the round//save marine lives?
Do they have good character?
The required investigation from marine law/CoC is the ideal opportunity for Zion to answer the question of the prisoner’s character. Zion would investigate the crime itself and also their actions afterwards. An honest person would not commit a crime that is itself inherently dishonest. A non-malicious person would not deliberately harm someone else. Anyone acting in good faith would not repeat a crime they had already been charged with. In short, if the crime demonstrates a serious character defect, Zion would not pardon the prisoner.
Zion would also analyze what the person did immediately after the crime. Good character means holding yourself accountable - this could mean turning yourself in, admitting the crime, or trying to help the person they hurt. Poor character could be indicated by fleeing the scene, attempting to conceal the crime, or not fessing up when confronted.
Zion would also assess whether he believes the person is genuinely remorseful. Remorse indicates understanding that what the person did was wrong and a person of poor character would be unlikely to display it.
All in all, the aim is to establish a picture of the person’s character. A person of low character would be extremely unlikely to receive a pardon from Zion.
To sum up, if pardoning a person would improve the round AND Zion believes they have good character, Zion would pardon them.
Give some examples of when you would or would not use pardon.
WOULD pardon:
Example #1:
A researcher blows themself up in research accidentally, destroying a chemical machine, and is arrested by the MPs for major destruction of government property. They explain in the brig that they know what they did wrong and won’t let it happen again, and seem to be shocked and dismayed about accidentally exploding themselves.
Zion knows that the researcher can create stimulants that will save marines. At worst, the only life they’d be putting in danger from fucking up again is their own. Also, from an OOC angle, it is extremely easy to blow yourself up with chemicals accidentally and I as a player would hate to see somebody excessively punished for it.
Further, the researcher is roleplaying well and from the facts on the table seems to have a strong character given that they turned themselves in and displayed remorse.
Zion would pardon the researcher in this case.
Example #2:
A squad leader is under orders from CIC to lead their squad north into the reactor entrance on Chance’s Claim, but the situation deteriorates rapidly so the squad leader issues an order for the marines to retreat to A-block. The retreat stabilizes the front and avoids a wipe.
In Zion’s judgement, this was a good call that saved the lives of multiple marines. However, a staff officer orders the SL arrested for insubordination, which is carried out upon his return to the FOB with the operation still ongoing. During the arrest, the SL is frustrated with the MPs, saying that he’s being arrested for doing his job, but calms down by the time he’s brigged. The SL is not remorseful and believes they did the right thing. When spoken to, the SL explains that while he believes the judgement call was correct, he understands that he should have at least radioed CIC explaining what was happening and requesting permission to retreat.
Zion as a commander knows that groundside leadership is perhaps the most important single factor in winning operations and preserving marine lives. Further, Zion believes initiative is a behavior to be encouraged in NCOs, not discouraged. The SL, while he initially displayed frustration with MPs, acted from a place of strong character in wanting to save marine lives and successfully did so.
Zion would pardon the squad leader in this case.
Would NOT pardon:
Example #1
A staff officer accidentally mixes up their coordinates and OBs the FOB, gibbing 10 marines. They immediately fess up and are arrested for manslaughter. The SO convincingly roleplays being shocked and horrified at the effects of their mistake. Zion believes that they made a mistake and will make an effort to not repeat it in the future.
The overwatch console is capable of instantly ending marine’s chances in the operation and being able to use it carries significant trust. Given that the SO didn’t respect it the first time, it’s too risky in Zion’s estimation to pardon them and risk them doing something similar again.
Furthermore, Zion believes that showing this degree of negligence does indicate a serious character flaw. Everyone knows that the overwatch console can fire OBs and obviously OBs are incredibly dangerous. The SO knowingly endangered other people’s lives by not treating the console with the respect it deserves.
Finally, in this case the cost to the RP environment would be too high as I think it strains credulity for a CO to pardon someone who accidentally killed 10 of his/her marines.
For all of the above reasons, Zion would NOT pardon the SO.
Example #2:
A spec gets rowdy in briefing and eventually starts chairing another marine and breaking a bone. While a certain amount of briefing shenanigans are tolerable and fun, this is clearly over the line. The spec is arrested for major assault. After being arrested, the spec calls the MPs shitters. In brig, the spec asks for a pardon because “MPs are griefers”.
While releasing the spec would without a doubt help marines to win, releasing them could actually cause a pretty serious disruption shipside by undermining MPs so completely. Further, the spec already showed their willingness to harm others over trivialities and could do so groundside.
Further, the spec is clearly malicious. They clearly believe the other person’s welfare doesn’t matter as they show no remorse and refuse to even apologize. This is antisocial behavior and to Zion indicates a serious character defect. They are doubling down on their behavior and would likely re-offend if released.
For the above reasons, Zion would NOT pardon the spec in spite of their important role.
When do you believe it’s appropriate to use a Battlefield Execution?
As far as I know, the BE is unique as a way for characters in game to OOCly round remove another person on their same team.
Speaking out of character, I don’t really like the BE and would avoid using it as much as possible. It is obviously extremely unique and powerful, capable of immediately round-removing someone. Many of the things that people could be BEd for are also OOC rulebreaks. Enforcing the rules is the server staff’s responsibility, not mine. The server also has a role for dealing with situations where a BE could be used in a more fun way than “bang, you’re dead” - the military police. So on the one hand, server staff is available to resolve rulebreaks. On the other hand, MPs are available to deal with IC crimes. For these reasons, I believe that the BE is a tool that should only be used in circumstances when there is no alternative and the situation requires immediate resolution.
My character would only BE for endangering the lives of marines in an ongoing and active way, with peaceful methods of resolving the situation unavailable or exhausted. This can include jeopardizing the chain of command, because that also endangers lives. MPs should be deferred to if they are available in my view because I’d rather create RP than round-remove someone if I had the choice.
I do not believe in using the BE for LRP behavior as I believe the best thing to do in those situations is to let staff handle it (OOC problem resolved OOCly) because using the BE gives the LRP player attention and encourages them to do it again.
Give some examples of when you would or would not use Battlefield Execution.
Example #1:
Zion has deployed to lead the operation from the front and sees an MP who has deployed outside of the FOB attempting to arrest a marine on the front lines (note that this is already a SOP violation). The MP is using his taser and stuns multiple marines within range of Xenos. When confronted, the MP sneeringly explains that the marines are interfering with an arrest. When Zion orders the MP to return to the ship, the MP refuses. I believe a BE would be justified in this situation but I would instead ahelp because the MP is breaking server rules.
Example #2:
It’s hijack and Zion has decided that the Falcons will attempt to hold the Almayer to prevent the Xenomorphs from infecting any further planets. However, a group of marines led by Alpha squad lead approach Zion and demand that evacuation be called. Zion tells the Alpha SL that evacuating would only endanger civilians on other planets or might enable the Xenomorphs to escape. In spite of this, the Alpha squad leader holds his gun on Zion and demands him to call evac. In this situation, Zion would execute the Alpha SL. ICly, Zion sees this as both a threat to himself and to other marines who would surely die if the CO was suddenly killed and replaced by a mutineer. Because it’s hijack and things are moving fast, there are no other options to defuse the situation.
Example #3:
A dropship pilot evacuates the planet, leaving behind a dozen marines to die to xenos. Before the evacuation, Zion was on the phone with the DP telling them NOT to evacuate as there were still marines who could make it on board. The dropship pilot starts making excuses about why he evacuated that in Zion’s mind are not valid. Zion would not BE the DP in this situation. Instead, Zion would simply order the DP to be placed under arrest. While the dropship pilot exhibited extreme cowardice and endangered lives, the threat is not ongoing and a compelling alternative is available via MPs arresting and subsequently executing the DP. If there were no MPs online, Zion would consider executing the DP because no alternative was available.
Example #4:
Zion has deployed to lead the marines due to deficient groundside leadership and an adequately staffed CIC. He notices a PVT shoot three other marines during a counter charge and ruin the momentum of the marines. Zion would NOT BE the marine in this situation. Although the circumstances justify it, it’s both fundamentally incompatible with Zion’s character and against the spirit of the BE to use it on a new player. When I was a new player there was NOBODY I looked up to more than the CO and using the BE on them would violate that trust. I want them to have a great experience in the round instead of a miserable one, so I would probably RP telling them off and instruct them on how to avoid FFing in the future.
Edited just after posting for formatting.