Battlefield Executions topic

[Dolth]

What does the rule say:

► Show Spoiler

Battlefield Execution - Whitelisted Commanders are allowed to instantly kill any player at any time except for the Chief MP if they feel that player is a threat to the mission. A command announcement of the situation and reason must then be made. The Commander cannot be immediately arrested or retaliated against for this action, but players concerned that the CO has been compromised can send a fax to High Command requesting the CO's arrest. Excessive or poorly-reasoned battlefield executions (such as BEing MPs over a valid arrest) may end with the Commander being removed from the whitelist.

I have been recently browsing commander applications and BE conversations and oh boy, figured out something was wrong. Currently the Commander has a whitelist to prevent random players from being commanders and thus failing the operation and/or being low RP people.

As in, the Commander HAS TO maintain a high quality of RP. And as the rule clearly says, "if they feel that player is a threat to the mission", they can BE.

In almost every application I saw and this include accepted applications, players answers openly they would do a BE on officers disrespecting them/not following orders, sometimes with MP sometimes without.

And here is the issue: Unless the 'threat' is imminent AND real (such as a mutiny or people trying to harm or to physically prevent you from granting crucial informations at a said moment), giving death over 'insubordination' IS NOT FOLLOWING ANY HIGH RP STANDARD.

And so far accepted, which leads me to this post.

Any feedbacks are welcomed.

[ThesoldierLLJK]

As a CO I only use the BE in a munity or sedition situation. However there are times where if what someone is doing is so negligent that it’s gonna get marines killed I believe a BE is warranted in my opinion.

BE a SO for firing a bad OB after the fact no.
BE a CE/MT for forgetting to keep the reactors going no

[Dolth]

As a CO I only use the BE in a munity or sedition situation. However there are times where if what someone is doing is so negligent that it’s gonna get marines killed I believe a BE is warranted in my opinion.

BE a SO for firing a bad OB after the fact no.
BE a CE/MT for forgetting to keep the reactors going no

And that's exactly my point, why would you kill someone AFTER THEY DO A MISTAKE.

It's exactly what I am talking about, you DEMOTE the SO/PO/MT for doing garbage work, even if it led to people to die. Your objective is to prevent them from being a threat AGAIN, do you HAVE to murder them when you have other alternative?

Clearly not. And if you do that's beyond LOW ASS RP. Which IS the total opposite of what we expect from a CO.
"Unga dunga I commander you do shit I kill"

Hell no.

[carlarc]

threat to the mission is vague enough to suffer from marine lawitis, and can be spread to mean anything ("i shot the SO that obed 2 marines because the marines are trying to mutiny over it")

[Dolth]

threat to the mission is vague enough to suffer from marine lawitis, and can be spread to mean anything ("i shot the SO that obed 2 marines because the marines are trying to mutiny over it")

Still should be invalid to BE someone for a mistake whom is not fighting back. It is low RP and should not be CO behavior.

Yes you are 'allowed' but there are other easy ways to fix the 'threat'. Especially complying. Especially while having MPs. Ignoring those options to kill roughly is as stated before garbage-level RP and should not be matched with CO position.

So why is it even a thing?

[Blade2000Br]

We are actually tackling on unresonably BEs now.

If you see a very poorly reasoned BE that literally had no reason to be done, you can file a player report.

[Dolth]

I was more or less trying to point how controversal the current public opinion was, as currently even through applications the said examples are judged right and people are being vouched for.

Regardless thanks deeply for those investigations you guys lead. But. Still. What's your opinion on the topic?

[Davidchan]

BE's need to redefined to be only applicable to those actively opposing or interfering with the mission in a malicious manner, and as a Last Resort. A marine disrupting a briefing by clapping or knocking on the window would not count, but an SL refusing to lead their troops would be acceptable. If the actual act that is causing the CO to even consider a BE isn't something that qualifies for Permanent Incarceration, let alone against Marine Law, then that CO really needs to reconsider the situation and try other options before last resort killing someone.

[Chaznoodles]

Threat to the mission is ridiculously vague, and should only apply to people actively trying to disrupt the mission on purpose, such as capital crimes listed under Marine Law. I'm unsure why the part about "If there's no MPs near to detain them" was removed, seems to just give COs more license to softgrief.

[ThesoldierLLJK]

I'm unsure why the part about "If there's no MPs near to detain them" was removed, seems to just give COs more license to softgrief.

Probably because most of the times they end up getting caught and tazed by the MP when they're wanted by the CO.
Then comes the whole trying to get a firing squad together, or getting the CMO to make a lethal injection, where players don't want to be part of it.

[Blade2000Br]

I was more or less trying to point how controversal the current public opinion was, as currently even through applications the said examples are judged right and people are being vouched for.

Regardless thanks deeply for those investigations you guys lead. But. Still. What's your opinion on the topic?

My honest Opinion is that BEs need to be situational to what's happening in the moment. I disagree with BEs that are made willy nilly, hence I myself rarely use then. Hell, I only have one BE and that was agaisn't a enginner that blatantly refused to follow my order and say he would murder his SL and disregard anything I said. In middle of a brewing mutiny agaisn't one of my SOs, mind you.

So yeah, I agree with BEs and their usage, but not for dumb petty things and to actual serious issues/a very good RP moment.

[Survivor]

If someone is causing people to die against the orders of a Commander and there are no MPs, sometimes a BE might actually be necessary.

[Frans_Feiffer]

Honestly, I went in to CO hoping to rarely, if ever have to BE anyone, and then first round I ended up BEing the RO. And it only happened after she continued to neglect her duty, ignore direct and threatened my life. (I was told I should’ve BE’d her sooner, but I was extremely hesitant to do so first game in until she pulled a weapon on me) Whenever it comes to BEing people, I try to talk it out first, however there are people that don’t want to talk it out or you end up in situations where the safest bet is to shoot first, ask questions later. It sounds terrible, and isn’t always the best for those who weren’t there to see it happen, but in the heat of the moment, you can’t always talk your way out of situations or calm it down otherwise. If you’re in a situation where things have escalated to the point where someones life is on the line, or the integrity of the OP could be bonked then your safest bet is to remove that threat immediately, then get them fixed and questioned or what have you afterwards. Perhaps it’s mental or what have you, but The times i’ve BE’d I try to have medical fix that person then have the MPs brig them so they can serve there time and have a moment to reflect. Even if it is boring, i’d prefer they do the time then be removed from the match permananetly because of me. Back to the main point though, BEing isn’t always the best route, but in the heat of the moment, it may be your only route. That isn’t to say though that if you miss the BE during he heat of the moment, you still have the right to BE the person afterwards. As mentioned above, if someones about to drop an OB on a squad after you told them not to fire, you BE them as they’re about to press fire or right after, I feel that is a justified BE, but if you BE that person for the same reason a bit after the scenario played out, then I think the justification for said BE becomes Sketchy at best. I’d also like to add that missing your chance to BE someone, and hesitating could lead to you being captured, tortured, pillaged, taken prisoner and eventually sold on the black market for 45 million dollars. Fun times.

[Dolth]

I am still amazed at how much you all enjoy murderboning. Do you really think killing someone after an OB missfire is just 'sketchy' ? Do you really think the only way to prevent someone from dropping an imminent OB as you forbed him IS TO SHOOT HIM DEAD ?

Careful there, there is a big ass difference between someone that grants an immediat threat to the mission on purposes and someone that is about to create a
clusterfuck THROUGH NEGLECT or anything NOT on purposes.

Because in both situations you are currently allowed by rules to BE, yes. But at what fucking RP cost? Can't you just tackle thay SO away or bash him with your gun in the face? Do you HAVE to BE his ass off?

Fucking no. In most sutuations you can always restrain or push people away, BRIG THEN, DEMOTE THEM. But unless someone is about to or already mutinying you have no reason to shoot his ass dead out of nothing. Unless hijack and other situation scraping your time into vital bits.

[Blade2000Br]

I am still amazed at how much you all enjoy murderboning. Do you really think killing someone after an OB missfire is just 'sketchy' ? Do you really think the only way to prevent someone from dropping an imminent OB as you forbed him IS TO SHOOT HIM DEAD ?

Careful there, there is a big ass difference between someone that grants an immediat threat to the mission on purposes and someone that is about to create a
clusterfuck THROUGH NEGLECT or anything NOT on purposes.

Because in both situations you are currently allowed by rules to BE, yes. But at what fucking RP cost? Can't you just tackle thay SO away or bash him with your gun in the face? Do you HAVE to BE his ass off?

Fucking no. In most sutuations you can always restrain or push people away, BRIG THEN, DEMOTE THEM. But unless someone is about to or already mutinying you have no reason to shoot his ass dead out of nothing. Unless hijack and other situation scraping your time into vital bits.

If an CO bash someones head, it could be perceived as an BE attempt, and anyone has permission, rules wise, to just gun down the CO should he start BEing you.

Trust me, sometimes, you gotta take the guy down. Theres no other way. Its literally either you take him or you die.

[Dolth]

Erm. No. If someone shoots you dead because you knocked them with a bash or disarmed them.
It's a bwoink.

It's just a huge no no if you do that. And no offenses but I do hope you understand that as a Mod.

[Blade2000Br]

Erm. No. If someone shoots you dead because you knocked them with a bash or disarmed them.

It's just a huge no no if you do that. And no offenses but I do hope you understand that as a Mod.

The CO is the only person that can BE someone, aside from Admirals.

They can BE by shooting with the Mateba, by struggling, by throwing down disposals... This all can be perceived as an BE if you are attacking someone as CO.

Unless we get the BE rule worked, we are doing it, the players can attack back if the CO attack then. If he tries BE and fails, the other side can shoot back as no one would stand still while getting murdered.

[Dolth]

Nothing proves you neither ICly nor OOCly a CO is about to BE you if he knocks you down the pulls you away yelling at you.

If so, the the rules need a serious rework there and I would gladly join the struggle to help fixing them.

[Dirt]

I personally am very reluctant to use a BE, as removing someone from a round on my own team is an extreme measure in my eyes. Xenos can always come back from larva, but if you blast a marine's head off for saying he hated you, that sucks for him.

Even in a mutiny situation, I would either step down if it was really big, or try my absolute hardest to de-escalate with negotiations before firing. Less marines means less fighters for the ground or shipside, after all.

[Dolth]

As easy as it is. Killing someone that is not willfully threatening the operation is fucking low RP and doesn't fit CO role guidelines. You can always MP/robust/demote people instead of murderboning. And seriously Blade if you're reason to BE instead of finding another way is ; "They might think I wanted to BE and will kill me!" Then it's really sad.

This exclude mutinies which are more likely okay to BE.

[Blade2000Br]

I never said this is my reasoning. I am just saying that if you attack someone, he can and will attack back. That's what you should expect if you bash him and whatnot.

If I have to BE, I will just make it fast and clean. I won't be giving him time just for one RNG miss to get attacked/shot back depending of what I used on him.

[Frans_Feiffer]

I am still amazed at how much you all enjoy murderboning. Do you really think killing someone after an OB missfire is just 'sketchy' ? Do you really think the only way to prevent someone from dropping an imminent OB as you forbed him IS TO SHOOT HIM DEAD ?

Careful there, there is a big ass difference between someone that grants an immediat threat to the mission on purposes and someone that is about to create a
clusterfuck THROUGH NEGLECT or anything NOT on purposes.

Because in both situations you are currently allowed by rules to BE, yes. But at what fucking RP cost? Can't you just tackle thay SO away or bash him with your gun in the face? Do you HAVE to BE his ass off?

Fucking no. In most sutuations you can always restrain or push people away, BRIG THEN, DEMOTE THEM. But unless someone is about to or already mutinying you have no reason to shoot his ass dead out of nothing. Unless hijack and other situation scraping your time into vital bits.

It's not like I enjoy it. As I said, I try to talk it out first, but you don't always have that choice.(tried talking things out, then the whole Blackmarket bit happened to me) There are a lot of people that speak with actions, not with words. that, and if they're about to fire the OB, there isn't anytime for me to try and RP with them. Yes, it's not a great situation but it prevents the SO from taking out potentially multiple men and tossing the Benos a win, at the cost of one man being put temporarily out of the game. Though I do admit, I could've made a better scenario then the one I did. Asides that though, BE is there to deescalate a tense situation quickly or prevent the OP from being bonked, so say I went to disarm the SO or whoever, they can always pull a gun and then shoot at me or what have you. that causes an even bigger issue and could've been avoided if I had just BE'd. It puts you at risk of death, and If you die, even if you do get revived, you are Commander, and in charge of the OP. The CO dying can cause panic, potential mutiny (I was "misplaced" and Alpha lost all faith in Command so they took over the CIC) and confusion especially since there is no Commander to lead the troops while he's out for the time being. All of which are very bad and lead to a lot of players having their round ruined. It's not a great position to be in, but it keeps the situation from escalating any further.

I can't speak for every other Commander, but of the Three BEs I have done, It was either BE or get myself or another Marine killed. In one of those times I gave the person all the time in the world to RP and instead they chose to grab a gun and shoot at innocent marines under my command without word, and in the other 2, we RP'd it out until the situation naturally escalated to where it was BE or get shot, risking Death. Oh, and one time I tried to Roleplay, and instead got tased without warning then tortured. Still a fun time, just you know, a BE could've prevented me getting put on the Black Market and allowed us to win the Event. GG, [REDACTED].

[DriedMilk]

shooting people is fun

[Casany]

shooting people is fun

“Sir your shoes untied”
“What did you say about me you little bitch?”
*unholsters Mateba*

[Frans_Feiffer]

shooting people is fun

BE’d