What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
This proposal aims to introduce a new job within the Security Department, called the Executive Protection Unit (E.P.U). The role can either be whitelisted or require an Executive Protection License (A license made for this team, may be used for other stuff in the future). The E.P.U would not be a new regiment, but rather an additional specialized job within the Security Department. It would have four available slots and have Level-3 Security Clearance.
Purpose of the Executive Protection Unit:
The primary role of the Executive Protection Unit is to protect Site Administration and their assets. In essence, the E.P.U would function similarly to A-1/O-1, but with a specific focus on Site Administration, without inheriting their same level of authority. Their responsibilities would include stuff such as:
Enforcing Site Administration’s directives
Providing personal protection
Conducting internal riot control (particularly with site staff)
Handling anti-unionization efforts
Executing orders from Site Administration, even in their absence [Like A-1/O-1 do]
The E.P.U can also have a secondary role when no Site Administration personnel are online: protecting other high-ranking individuals, such as department directors. In these cases, they would follow the directors' orders, provided they don't conflict with Site Administration’s directives, acting as their protective and combative unit when needed.
Equipment and Tools:
I can create a custom model for this job. Their gear could include:
Assault rifles
Elastic restraints
Tranquilizer guns
Riot shields
However, they will not have access to tools used by A-1/O-1, such as spy cards, LMGs, or deployable shields, and they won’t have special arrest authority.
Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
No. This is a unique proposal.
Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
Enhanced Roleplay Opportunities
The E.P.U. would offer more immersive roleplay experiences, particularly for non-combative leadership roles. Currently, Site Administration and directors have to rely on other departments (which have many responsibilities) to handle situations that require security intervention. This unit would allow for more independent, directed responses in roleplay scenarios without adding unnecessary combat elements to the game.
Security Department Expansion
This proposal would further expand the Security Department, aligning with the community’s long-term goals. The E.P.U. would add an important gameplay loop without detracting from other departments. In fact, it could support departments like Internal Affairs, which may be understaffed, or assist MTF units when they are occupied with other tasks.
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
1. Potential Underuse
There is a risk that the unit may be misused or not utilized effectively by the player base, leading to it being seen as redundant.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
Since the early days of the server, there has been ongoing interest in creating sub-divisions focused on protection roles for MTFs, Combat Medics, and Security personnel. However, these initiatives have often failed due to mismanagement and lack of player interest, largely because the roles lacked distinctiveness.
The Executive Protection Unit would offer a unique, dedicated role for protecting high-value personnel and managing internal security issues, tasks often overlooked by other units due to their extensive responsibilities. By focusing on one specific job with limited slots, the E.P.U. minimizes server bloat and avoids redundancy, providing a fresh and necessary role in the server’s roleplay ecosystem.
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
1. Potential Underuse
There is a risk that the unit may be misused or not utilized effectively by the player base, leading to it being seen as redundant.
as niox said, this has potential to detract RP from other departments - however; SCU didn't really detract from E-11, it kinda works with them? and i think having something like that but purely for VIP protection might be something that could mesh well with the way CL4 positions work (i.e. SA & dpt. directors can't really do a lot without anyone willing to escort them (this applies to site command too, but - i mean, i guess something could be worked out between gensec and ISD? it'd create RP for all involved at the very least))
not sure how i feel about 4 slots, an actual implementation would probably end up with 2 - but i think having this be an option in gensec like, imagine you're someone new at the lower rungs of getting into the server and learning how it works, there's not really any good way to convey the experience VIP escort duty RP loop to someone learning the ropes? i think it could be beneficial, but it would have to be very carefully thought out - this could be a good way to learn OOC what it is A-1 and O-1 do (fun fact, i still have zero clue of the actual specific ins and outs of this, despite having been an E-11 CPT and an OSA, both of which positions knew these things IC... enough?) and generate interest into working towards those regiments, while also making this available to roles that kinda need these things to function at times when there aren't enough of those specific people available for when they're needed. +Tentative Support and of course, it needs an rpg7 in its loadout
as nice as dedotated escorting roles would be i feel this would just fall into the pile of unused mechanics / gameplay loops gensec have (IE patrolling, actually taking care of D-Class instead of just reacting to them ectect). This is also an action the department can achieve without the need of expanding.
I can create a custom model for this job. Their gear could include:
Assault rifles
Elastic restraints
Tranquilizer guns
Riot shields
However, they will not have access to tools used by A-1/O-1, such as spy cards, LMGs, or deployable shields, and they won’t have special arrest authority.
im fine with the load except the tranq i see no reason for a class to have a tranq gun if the tranq gun is used to detain people and suppress riots thats the one of the reason why response units have it.
+support just no tranq gun.
I think this could be good, however with as many guard-detail regiments as already exist, it seems like it would be adding a drop to a bucket that's already full. A-1 and O-1 already fulfill 'guard duties' and don't do anything to contribute to roleplay - just stroke each other's egos for being 'top-notch MTF' and guarding the top brass.
- Support I feel like this will infact result in more roleplay of poorer quality. Alpha-1 and Omega-1 are regiments that exist as you described for their respective 'sides'. These regiments are very RP-intensive comparative to other combative roles, and infact rely fully on RP now that I think of it. Giving GSD the equivalent of an A-1 job to escort SA, I feel, will result in some sort of bootleg A1/O1. A particular issue I can see occurring is intentionally attempting to seek 'wars' between A1/O1 and this so-called "EPU".
A1/O1 wars ("ISD Wars") occur under very strict and controlled RP environments, with top-level Site Command (whitelisted and hand-selected positions) needing to authorize them. They usually occur during hostile conflicts between the two, although a particular issue I can see is EPU trying to involve themselves unnecessarily. When they occur, departments often try to get in the way and involve themselves with the action, although I can 100% foresee this becoming an actuality if implemented.
Since the early days of the server, there has been ongoing interest in creating sub-divisions focused on protection roles for MTFs, Combat Medics, and Security personnel. However, these initiatives have often failed due to mismanagement and lack of player interest, largely because the roles lacked distinctiveness.
I don't see how this suggestion will add any more 'distinctiveness' to this role. The common issue with these sub-divisions (which mind you, I hate these sub-divisions) is that they have an overlap in duties and generally not everybody in the facility needs a bodyguard.
Furthermore, I feel like a lot of the duties you listed will detract much value from other areas of RP in the server. To go into more detail:
This seems like the role of O-1, A-1 and IA, no? These are three RP-heavy 'jobs' and adding more people into the mix I feel will detract value from the existing jobs, it creates unnecessary overlap of duties
I don't see how this will work considering it isn't a regiment whose entire purpose is to serve this playergroup.
TL;DR:
- Bootleg O-1/A-1
- Will unnecessarily try to seek conflict with O-1/A-1
- Lower entry requirements leading to poorer RP (whilst you did say it's similar to O-1/A-1 with less authority, my point still stands, I still foresee them gunning people down for having a weapon near a VIP)
- Massive overlap of duties from existing departments and regiments
- Support I feel like this will infact result in more roleplay of poorer quality. Alpha-1 and Omega-1 are regiments that exist as you described for their respective 'sides'. These regiments are very RP-intensive comparative to other combative roles, and infact rely fully on RP now that I think of it. Giving GSD the equivalent of an A-1 job to escort SA, I feel, will result in some sort of bootleg A1/O1. A particular issue I can see occurring is intentionally attempting to seek 'wars' between A1/O1 and this so-called "EPU".
A1/O1 wars ("ISD Wars") occur under very strict and controlled RP environments, with top-level Site Command (whitelisted and hand-selected positions) needing to authorize them. They usually occur during hostile conflicts between the two, although a particular issue I can see is EPU trying to involve themselves unnecessarily. When they occur, departments often try to get in the way and involve themselves with the action, although I can 100% foresee this becoming an actuality if implemented.
You stated:
I don't see how this suggestion will add any more 'distinctiveness' to this role. The common issue with these sub-divisions (which mind you, I hate these sub-divisions) is that they have an overlap in duties and generally not everybody in the facility needs a bodyguard.
Furthermore, I feel like a lot of the duties you listed will detract much value from other areas of RP in the server. To go into more detail:
This is the job of O-1 and A-1 respectively. Afaik A-1 provide protection to SA when necessary.
This seems like the role of O-1, A-1 and IA, no? These are three RP-heavy 'jobs' and adding more people into the mix I feel will detract value from the existing jobs, it creates unnecessary overlap of duties
I don't see how this will work considering it isn't a regiment whose entire purpose is to serve this playergroup.
TL;DR:
- Bootleg O-1/A-1
- Will unnecessarily try to seek conflict with O-1/A-1
- Lower entry requirements leading to poorer RP (whilst you did say it's similar to O-1/A-1 with less authority, my point still stands, I still foresee them gunning people down for having a weapon near a VIP)
- Massive overlap of duties from existing departments and regiments
I feel like this will infact result in more roleplay of poorer quality. Alpha-1 and Omega-1 are regiments that exist as you described for their respective 'sides'. These regiments are very RP-intensive comparative to other combative roles, and infact rely fully on RP now that I think of it. Giving GSD the equivalent of an A-1 job to escort SA, I feel, will result in some sort of bootleg A1/O1. A particular issue I can see occurring is intentionally attempting to seek 'wars' between A1/O1 and this so-called "EPU".
A1/O1 wars ("ISD Wars") occur under very strict and controlled RP environments, with top-level Site Command (whitelisted and hand-selected positions) needing to authorize them. They usually occur during hostile conflicts between the two, although a particular issue I can see is EPU trying to involve themselves unnecessarily. When they occur, departments often try to get in the way and involve themselves with the action, although I can 100% foresee this becoming an actuality if implemented.
I don't see how this suggestion will add any more 'distinctiveness' to this role. The common issue with these sub-divisions (which mind you, I hate these sub-divisions) is that they have an overlap in duties and generally not everybody in the facility needs a bodyguard.
yeah, i can see it. sure - i agree with a lot of these statements to an extent. but imo if EPU tries to involve itself in ISD wars, that'd more likely than not just be straight up failRP or some other rules infraction. like, i get what you're saying, especially with that one ISD war on UK that disrupted the entire server about a year ago, things have improved since then, i think? not sure how things are on US, but... eh. i feel like this can just apply to a lot of roles and EPU feels like an unnecessarily singling out. "oh ISD are going to have an ISD war" and it'll be this big thing that will encompass a significant portion of the site and i forgot where this train of thought was going because i came to another realisation
issues with ISD wars in all circumstances are 100% a map issue. this is a separate suggestion and imo not even worth a suggestion at all because it would involve the level design team and level design and i are somewhat diametrically opposed when it comes to things, even though i fully understand their viewpoints and reasoning, but
i feel like PW loop is a choke point for this sort of thing; like, just look at the map. you have one four-way crossroads that is primarily being used by RsD, GenSec, IA, DEA, SA, Ethics, O-1, O5 & A-1. you shut that crossroads down for any reason and... well realistlcally, not much happens because it can be bypassed to get to medical/d-block via CPC. however, in a practical situation where CPC is not manned as it usually isn't nearly 100% of the time (and why would you? CPC feels like it's missing a gameplay loop because if you man it, you're just basically doing so for virtually no reason other than to let people in and out), if at any point you want to go to PW, where are you going to go? (not through CPC, since even if it's manned, you have no way of knowing from the LCZ side, unless you try to go in. so generally you just assume it isn't) you're going through that crossroads (which is also the shorter and more intuitive route if you are coming from either d-block or medical).
you have an ISD war, O-1 need to go through it to get to FL3, A-1 need to go through it to get to ECO. and in an ISD war, they're gonna be fighting the whole way. you know what else A-1 and O-1 can do? take disguises. which means to them, literally anyone can be the opponent's side and can't be trusted. which is what led to a lot of disruption that one time.
my point here is that the connection from CS to EZ feels... wrong, i think there needs to be more routes to get from CS to EZ that don't involve heavily trafficked areas. but i get how that could harm roleplay. that's a tricky one.
anyway, i think your whole point about ISD wars here feels not only like an edge case, but like... idk. it feels wrong for some reason and i can't put my finger as to why.
so i'll just say, you're right and you're wrong at the same time and leave it at that
VIP protection does not, and should not, need to be something exclusive to ISD.
on UK at least, Nu7 have a subdivision that has this as part of their duties. i can see issues with detracting from or diluting as we both said, but also as i said before, SCU didn't detract from E-11 despite combating breaches being E-11's whole thing.
although you can argue that it's apples to oranges since SCU & E-11's whole thing is combative and having more combatives ready and available in the event of a breach is better overall, you can never have too many people fighting a breach, as opposed to this which would be more vectors for VIP protection - which is more of a non-combative kind of RP and you only need so many people for VIP protection before it becomes excessive.
however as i said, a lot of CL4 RP (outside of SC) heavily depends on there being an security escort ready for them. the chief problem with restricting this to select roles then makes that less possible and reduces flexibility in this area - like availability is an important thing and you can't expect A-1 & O-1 to always be available, which hampers a lot of CL4 RP, which is why the Nu7 sub-division that we have on UK that does this would help in that regard. like, i guess you can never have too many people available to escort? but you can have too few.
i imagine that's less of a problem on US since US is pretty evergreen when it comes to activity, but on UK, activity overall is kinda spotty imo and that's hell for a lot of CL4s trying to get RP done
ehhhh? ehhhhh. i see it, but at the same time, like
not really? like if you consider this adjacent to, again, Nu7's UK subdivision that does the same thing, i feel like the entry requirements could be comparable (and entry requirements for this would have to be very carefully looked at anyway). i guess maybe on US? i can see why i would be an issue (a skill issue)
this is a bit of the problem with content needing to be 1:1 on both servers i guess, there are some things that are vastly different. this is a pretty difficult thing to think out. i don't envy CT, but i guess the easiest solution here is to just say no.
imo it's worth exploring. maybe make it locked behind a VIP rank, that'd be funny i guess
so aside from everything about geronimo's reply that i addressed, i will say the reason why i didn't just simply -support this because "we have a Nu7 subdivision on UK that does the same thing" and that is basically,
the subdivision is not guaranteed to stick around. that's part of the whole double-edged sword with these kind of IC groups created in RP, if you see a need that can be filled, you can make the group in that area to fill that need, then when it's no longer needed or otherwise too much of an issue to maintain, it gets removed.
now of course you can say "well since as you keep saying, there will always be a need for a lot of CL4s to have security escorts, so surely by virtue of that being evergreen, the need for the subdivision will keep it going" and... well, yes and no. i agree that there will always be need for a subdivision of that nature, by virtue of there always being a need for security escorts in a lot of CL4 RP, on top of the other part of what i said, where it's too much of an issue to maintain; issues being like say, within Nu7 there could just be issues trying to continue running that subdivision, so they'd need to axe it. i know it was recently changed as it used to be a separate subdivision by itself, but it got merged into another subdivision.
which lends into my greater point here in that, this is something that is controlled by the leaders of that area of RP, which are subject to numerous things, including them having to balance things within that group and frequent changes in leadership. so it could be that one leadership team of Nu7 would look at things and be like "yeah, we can manage this and it's needed right now, this is fine" and then later down the line, Nu7 leadership changes with new COs and they look at things and be like "we can't manage this, we have to axe it" and then no more subdivision. now, there's no issues with this process as-is, i think having this level of flexibility is important for keeping a regiment running properly and adjust as needed, however you can see how, in this specific example, CL4 could be deprived of RP - suddenly having to rely on only ISD being available for them, instead of having both ISD and the subdivision to rely on.
i also recall there being something with medical on UK where combat medics could provide this kind of support? i think they're just allowed to do so anyway? but i don't know the specifics or remember everything fully so i'll refrain from commenting on the state of that (although i think in an in-RP sense, allowing combat medics to help with security escort is a decent idea).
this is obviously different from say, the Nu7 subdivision where they can assist E-11 in breaches; but tbh, even considering the above, they can do that anyway? like i should probably say that a subdivision is not mandatory to allow for certain activities; because i think there's like... if it makes sense for that thing to be able to do the thing, then they should, by all means, do the thing, right? i'm not crazy with this, surely? you get me, right? (in fact, it's even UK IC policy that subdivisions can't restrict what a department/regiment can and can't do, but i do also know that ISD are for some reason immune to SA policy (at least on UK), something about SC?, bla bla bla, so they... uh... it's messy, idk, w/e).
so you could argue that since Nu7 don't necessarily need a subdivision to go help with breaches, they also don't need a subdivision to go provide security escort and can just do that as part of their duties, and i'd agree. that's fine (although security escort is kinda a little different by virtue of clearance info, like ISD are cleared to know about CL4 things and Nu7 are... uh, not. which i guess, this job would also run into. you know what, easy solve, add 1L of class A to every non-combative CL4's default loadout, fixed).
i would also like to point out that even though that, as i like to keep bringing up, it is a well-established staff position that due to the imbalance of combative and non-combative situations on the server with things currently being skewed toward combative gameplay, that staff are actively looking for and would be appreciative of ways that non-combative gameplay could be emphasised, enhanced and encouraged - now why am i pulling this card (as i like to do often) here? i would like to draw your attention to the fact that, to my knowledge, the addition of SCU to the server felt rather sudden and unprompted (at the very least, i understand the the community saw it this way. i may be wrong and that there was significant impetus, but my point as follows still stands) - which is a primarily combative role that, while it does have some non-combative applications and is beneficial to server health (by virtue of it being intended for dealing with breaches and as i said earlier, you can never have too many combatives fighting a breach), is a combative role and thus promotes combative activity, which in turn, its addition to GenSec increases the proportion of combative-focused roles in the department.
this is a department that players tend to enter early on and so having all of this combative focus is probably not what is wanted or needed - so in that regard, the addition of SCU kinda both boggled me as to why - but i understand its benefits (as well as encouraging fighting against breaches, which i imagine is something that is good to encourage for server health reasons)
and its by that analysis of the SCU role why i advocate for the addition of this role, because even though it... yes, it would be a combative role, it would enable a lot of CL4 non-combative roleplay, it may encourage more of this type of security escort roleplay - you need a sort of feed in for encouraging this as ISD are... like, this isn't an insult, they are literally gated. and that's a good thing for several reasons, but is also harmful especially in the regard of "some CL4 roles need security escorts for their RP, so therefore you need to generate interest and awareness of this kind of RP in order to keep it going" and it's like... if you have just ISD as VIP protection, you kind of have a closed ecosystem without anything feeding into it.
i understand that the standard progression is to start with the other regiments, then work up to ISD and that makes sense on paper, but in practice, what is that? think about this from the perspective of someone new to the server and this whole entire environment - like okay, you have this goal, what does that mean? what do the ISD regiments do? they protect VIPs and take orders from Foundation Command? okay, that sounds cool, but how does that pan out in gameplay? what does that look like? and then when you think about that, you kinda realise that this... it stops making sense. i think this role would help to make that make sense. does that make sense?
that's pretty much everything i had to say on the matter right now. hmmm, i see i have used the word 'like' 26 times in this post. 27 now. ...noted.
TL;DR -
You're wrong. I mean, you're right? But you're wrong.
Site Administration is controlled by O5, A-1 have previously been tasked and will continue you to protect them when available. Alternatively (on UK) there is Aa which escort SA to ensure they are protected when A-1 are not available. On the UK we have found this gap and utilized a squadron to fulfil this need, this shouldn't be a content update and the US should simply look to follow what we've done on the UK. There is no need to create an entire squadron / job for this gap
+Support
I think this would add more things for GSD in a positive light. SA Does get protection from A-1 but this happens rarely now a days and Nu-7 is not always avaible. Im not sure about creating a specific license for it but a job would be nice.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Developer
Artist Team
Game Master
Donator
