My knowledge of the various command positions is fairly well rounded, in my opinion.
Importantly, I am aware of how important it is to be coherent, responsive, and composed as the Executive Officer (and how fast typing and good grammar ties into that). I also understand the criticality of frequent tactical map updates, coordinating inter-departmental requests, as well as being constantly aware of the situation both groundside and shipside.
Additionally, not only do I understand how each major officer position plays mechanically, I also understand their hierarchy, boundaries by Standard Operating Procedure, and generally where they should be, and when. I can read scenarios relating to shortages on the initial manifest, or operation deficits after casualties, and distribute alternative workflows to the more flexible command positions accordingly.
Finally, I am of the firm belief that command is meant to balance both the combat and roleplay elements of the game. It is important to interact with the Marines to provide memorable, interesting, and even unorthodox settings for roleplay, without blatant or malicious attempts to gain infamy under the guise of variety.
Dwight Morrison was raised in a conservative, rural part of Wisconsin in the United Americas, growing up on a farm. Most of his family was also of a military background at some point. Morrison decided to obtain his commission after his degree as he wanted to adhere to his family’s tradition of serving, while also not throwing away the opportunities of the degree he had earned.
Dwight Morrison was previously eyed for the position of CO due to his perceived dutifulness, loyalty, and ‘patriotism’. Prior to this, he was a rising star in the corps due to his precision and ruthlessness against terrorist cells operating in combat against the UA. His hawkishness due to his background, combined with his cooperation towards the company, made him many powerful friends in the past. The focal point of the decision, however, had come during his accrued experience in a survival against all odds when faced a new and unknown threat aboard a vessel he was acting in command of.
Pardons must fall into the conditions that would warrant pardoning. The criminal in question must have actually committed the crime(s) in question, with appropriate sentencing conditions. Additionally, pardons are a privileged tool afforded to a CO, and should not be used liberally. Use of a pardon must consider the behavior and mentality of the person in question, as well as the consequences of releasing them (for both the CO and the rest of the Marines). One erroneous mentality many may hold is that pardons should be indiscriminately used upon ‘important’ Marines. Reinforcing problematic behavior by not addressing it due to their perceived criticality is dangerous. While one might initially be more inclined to pardon an important role like a Smartgunner or Specialist, first one must consider if that pardon would come back to bite them. Offenders who are compliant and composed, with charges not rooted in behaviors that could be a continual detriment, would be key candidates for pardoning. Finally, repeat offenders of Marine Law, or those who are highly likely to re-offend, should not be considered for a pardon, regardless of their scenario.
Scenario #1: A specialist and another Marine get into a verbal argument over someone cutting in the requisitions line. The marine starts to shove the specialist, so the specialist proceeds to unholster their side-arm and unload into the marine. Once the MPs apprehend him, he cusses, resists, and immediately demands a pardon over comms. This person should NOT be pardoned. Their behavior is detrimental to the operation, no matter the role.
Scenario #2: The Chief Medical Officer says in Medical comms that a doctor may deploy. He then proceeds to inform the doctor he selects in person, forgetting to announce it over medical comms. Another doctor, already kitted up and ready to deploy, deploys. CMO then finds out after some time and orders the doctor arrested for illegal deployment while they are working. The doctor yields to arresting MPs and is incarcerated. The doctor’s request for appeal is later denied by the CMP while I am deployed. Said deployed doctor showed good intent and behavior despite their crimes. I would pardon them.
Scenario #3: A ComTech decides to throw smoke grenades around the briefing hall during brief, barricading the briefing bubble, and screams netspeak and memes in chat. LRP behavior is extremely detrimental to the health and enjoyment of a round, so without extreme extraneous circumstances, I would not consider pardoning someone like this, as their general attitude, despite the ‘non-severity’ of their crimes, is very poor.
Battlefield executions are another entrusted tool in a CO’s toolbox, and should be used with the same weight and discretion as all the others. As a tool, these executions are effective for maintaining cohesion and order in an instant, where a CO would be unable to bring a situation under control otherwise. This means in scenarios where the target is not detained by MPs or in the presence of officers capable of arresting them. BEs are also intended to be personal and direct, and they cannot be done by proxy, include collateral damage, be performed from the sky, et cetera. Appropriate scenarios to use a battlefield execution tend to be where your command, or the operation and it’s components, are being directly hindered, threatened, countered, or undermined. Griefers, seditionists, assassins, and fleeing capital criminals are all prime targets for the use of the BE.
Scenario #1: A marine has taken it upon himself at round start to hinder command at every point. Between interrupting briefing with shenanigans, telling people to ignore command, and causing fights in the brief hall. After being directly warned during the briefing, he decides to run at me and throw folded chairs at me. I would battlefield execute him. Him living is a detriment to the cohesion of my command and the operation, to the point where he directly assaults me.
Scenario #2: I walk in the medical bay after a failed operation, with MPs present aiding in triaging. A doctor decides to insult me, calling me incompetent and saying I got men killed. His disrespect, while illegal, does not pose an immediate threat to me or the Marines, in regards to physical danger or danger of undermining. MPs should take care of him swiftly.
Scenario #3: A marine has decided to aggressively open fire upon other marines in a hallway where I happen to be passing by. I would immediately battlefield execute him without hesitation, as he poses a direct threat to me and the Marines.
Scenario #4: The Pilot Officer running the Alamo on stand-by for evac decides to leave too early due to getting frightened, leaving marines and equipment behind. In this situation, I would NOT battlefield execute them. Given no other variables, the pilot’s neglect of duty could be punished reasonably within the bounds of a standard arrest without threatening the rest of operation.
Scenario #5: A green Staff Officer manages to jumble frontline supply coordinates with OB coordinates when JTAC comms get hectic. They proceed to fire upon the Marine frontline. If it is observable that the move was not intentional and they are genuinely inexperienced (through the ways they’ve been behaving throughout the round up to this point), as well as not fleeing after the mistake, I would NOT battlefield execute them. He will be able to be prosecuted normally by the MPs without further endangering the operation.