|
Content - RoE: Rules of Engagement
|
|
| Raptor | Date: Monday, 2012-01-09, 23:44 | Message # 1 |
Group: Commander
Messages: 3115
Awards: 0
Status: Offline
| 1. Every use of force is forbidden, except it's allowed by one of the following rules.
2. Against non-complying civilists (AFTER issue compliance [yelling] at the civ at least once) the use of lesslethal force except punching is allowed. Punching may harm the civilist and is therefore allowed if and only if the element leader orders so (because no other appropriate ll force is available).
3. Against non-complying suspects the use of lesslethal force is allowed as long as necessary to make them comply.
4. Against suspects the RoE are determined by the element leader using the following color codes.
CODE: The use of lethal force against suspects is allowed if there is no appropriate alternative and the suspects...
green: ... are aiming.
yellow: ...will probably become an extremely huge threat within the next few seconds.
orange: ...are armed and try to run away.
red: ...are visible (shoot at sight).
(The codes are ascending, i.e. yellow includes green and organe inlcudes yellow and green. So of course you are allowed to shoot aiming sus in code orange.)
The element leader can change the RoE color at any time. If the leader does not tell you a RoE color, use code yellow as standard.
Example for yellow:
Nades:
Terms:
"Teamwork is essential, it gives them someone else to shoot at."
Murphy's Laws of Combat #9
|
| |
| |
| Booone | Date: Tuesday, 2012-01-10, 14:04 | Message # 2 |
Group: Lieutenant
Messages: 849
Awards: 0
Status: Offline
| I don't want to rewrite, my arguments as of now again, but I made a table that we could use as base for showing our sets of RoE on the website: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28307273/AST/Rules%20Of%20Engagement.ods
First off, let's discuss the final table and tell me if something is missing or what should be added and then let's continue to discuss how to fill it.
Message edited by Booone - Tuesday, 2012-01-10, 14:05 |
| |
| |
| ShadowManu | Date: Tuesday, 2012-01-10, 15:25 | Message # 3 |
Group: NCO
Messages: 791
Awards: 0
Status: Offline
| The tables misses a critical spot: simplicity. If you try to make anyone (including yourself) to have any of those tables on mind while in a mission, you'll say THIS IS MADNESS!!!... I've been trying to figure out a way to make any of those tables simpler over an hour and it just doesn't work. The best way is to keep the lethal permissions and use of less lethal weapons on separate formats.
I'll be expanding the Raptor table on Tactics Hints and be updating as this thread develops.
|
| |
| |
| Booone | Date: Tuesday, 2012-01-10, 17:09 | Message # 4 |
|
Group: Lieutenant
Messages: 849
Awards: 0
Status: Offline
| The tables are a guide, explaining it, it's not about having them in mind, it's about having in mind what to do. You learn it by applying it. This is to new player who want to play with us and have to learn our RoE for that. We will advise them of mistakes and they will improve. We will know the RoE because we made them. The tables are just to have it listed somewhere, to see what to do after you had an unusual situation (or something that you just did not know what to do) and seeing what you did wrong and from that, improve.
It does not have to be simpler at all, it IS simple. It does not specialize anywhere. You just have to learn and you do that by applying it (members will advise you on mistakes) and as time passes you memorize the gist and after a while you will memorize the details of the table and be able to apply it perfectly (yet mistakes happen, ofc.).
And as of now, we don't remember some tables (not because we don't have them) but we remember what to because we do it often.
Message edited by Booone - Tuesday, 2012-01-10, 17:12 |
| |
| |
| Raptor | Date: Tuesday, 2012-01-10, 18:11 | Message # 5 |
|
Group: Commander
Messages: 3115
Awards: 0
Status: Offline
| Yeah, I like the table also for discussing RoE. For current critical situations you should turn off your brain anyway, rely on your mental triggers (still preparing the "mental-stuff" post).
Anyway your table just looks like a horizontal version of mine (with sligthly other situations). Or do I miss something? I have justed splited things to make them fit normal page format.
So let have a look at your situations:
Armed Person (Suspect)
- Idle: ok, mb rename to "not alerted"
- Stunned: perfect
- Alerted: well, not really a situation. Further reaction depends on the actions of the alerted sus. So scratch this.
- Aming at Civilian + Aiming at Officer: Imo there is no need to split this. Just name it "Aiming". No matter if the sus aims at officer or civ or if you can't see his target, it's always a current threat.
- Walking: = not alerted
- Running: means "Running away to an uncontrolled area", ok.
There are 2 things missing:
- indirect threat (charge or turn towards an officer or civ, pull a weapon)
- closly dangerous situation (mutiple sus, close range sus, flee towards a civ)
Unkown:
- Idle: again rename to not alerted 
- Stunned: perfect
- Walking: again same as not alerted
- Running: ok (interesting idea)
Civ:
I think "not compliant" would be enough. In any other case you just issue compliance (if the situation allows).
We should also think about, how to distinguish unknown and civ during game. What makes a civ a civ?
Btw: You be should be 100% sure about the RoE when playing! Discuss it here. Think about it before the mission. Any thinking about moral during the mission, any doubt on your current attitude towards suspects may lead to a fatal hesitating.
"Teamwork is essential, it gives them someone else to shoot at."
Murphy's Laws of Combat #9
|
| |
| |
| Booone | Date: Tuesday, 2012-01-10, 19:27 | Message # 6 |
|
Group: Lieutenant
Messages: 849
Awards: 0
Status: Offline
| I agree with your changes.
Unknown can be a civ and suspect, once you see his weapon he is suspect, once you see him with civilian behavior, e.g. screaming for help, he is civilian. This is the case for e.g. the "insiders" on DuPlessis, the ones that have the same suits as civilians and dont have their gun visible atm.
Running should seperate to controlled area and uncontrolled area (whereas controlled area would be at one/multiple officer/s).
Most actions would distinguish a suspect from civilians (running, walking), making some situations on unknown targets useless - removed.
Check the link on my first post, I updated it.
Also, I'll change the layout to make it fit better on a website page of ours when the concept is done.
|
| |
| |
| Raptor | Date: Tuesday, 2012-01-10, 23:12 | Message # 7 |
|
Group: Commander
Messages: 3115
Awards: 0
Status: Offline
| Quote (Booone)
Unknown can be a civ and suspect, once you see his weapon he is suspect, once you see him with civilian behavior, e.g. screaming for help, he is civilian. This is the case for e.g. the "insiders" on DuPlessis, the ones that have the same suits as civilians and dont have their gun visible atm.
Cool.
May I repeat myself:
Quote (Raptor) There are 2 things missing:
- indirect threat (charge or turn towards an officer or civ, pull a weapon)
- closly dangerous situation (mutiple sus, close range sus, flee towards a civ)
Futhermore the orange color is missing.
Anyway you can start to write down the reactions you want. Than I'll tell you whats wrong with it
"Teamwork is essential, it gives them someone else to shoot at."
Murphy's Laws of Combat #9
|
| |
| |
| Booone | Date: Wednesday, 2012-01-11, 13:06 | Message # 8 |
|
Group: Lieutenant
Messages: 849
Awards: 0
Status: Offline
| The colors on the left mark what set of RoE is applied not what level of force for the current situation is applied. As I said before (before the thread and everything else got deleted), the leader can, to make it more realistic, apply for example a green set of RoE (i.e. use lethal force earlier to be very sure that a suspect can not pose a serious threat at all (maybe for something like Stetchkov warehouse if you will) or apply a red set of Roe for the mission (i.e. use lethal force only as very last resort -> only to remove immediate threat) to protect suspects aswell (for example for A-Bomb if you will). Also you could apply this for extreme situations as, let's say you have a big warehouse, underestimated the situation, 5/6 officers died, and you are alone -> You may change the RoE to green to eliminate threats faster and heighten your chances of survival.
About the 2 things missing as you say, I didn't see it when I read you your post. That is not an indirect threat.. it is a situation likely to be escalating, if you will and the "closely dangerous situation" is just the situation even closer to an escalation (i.e. escalation to be an immediate threat).
I updated the link again.
Quote (Raptor) Than I'll tell you whats wrong with it
What doesn't fit with your opinion, that is, *cough* 
|
| |
| |
| ShadowManu | Date: Wednesday, 2012-01-11, 13:16 | Message # 9 |
|
Group: NCO
Messages: 791
Awards: 0
Status: Offline
| Use the names: Unaware, Stunned, Fleeing and Aiming
And the 2: Indirect Threat and Dangerous Situation.
I think actions against an unknown is to issue compliances (after attack plan is done) and react based on the weapon he pulls (if it is a water gun, shoot 'til death).
|
| |
| |
| Booone | Date: Wednesday, 2012-01-11, 18:11 | Message # 10 |
|
Group: Lieutenant
Messages: 849
Awards: 0
Status: Offline
| Indirect threat is bullshit, what would you say is an indirect threat?
Dangerous situation is too general. A suspect aiming is dangerous, a suspect running to an uncontrolled area is dangerous, hell the entire maps are a "Dangerous situation".
About your changes:
- Unaware: good, I'll change it to that
- Stunned: already is there
- Fleeing: not good as the person may also be running towards an officer, civilian
- Aiming: not good, only aiming by itself does not have to pose a threat to anyone he may be aiming at, say, paper targets for shits and giggles
And once again lets finish the concept first, when we agree on it we can start filling the table.
|
| |
| |
