SB118 Starfleet Intelligence OOC Information

Intelligence Post Introduction Intelligence Officer Simming Guide Becoming Agent X Types of Intelligence The Intelligence Cycle Counterintelligence Starfleet Intelligence SFI Sections SFI Missions Academy Intelligence Courses Factions Information Control and Classification Information Security Lifespan of Classified Information StarBase 118 Intelligence USS Albion The Black Tower Starbase 118 Black Tower StarBase 118 Intelligence notes List of Intelligence Officers Notable Intelligence Officers Evan Ross Rune Jolara David Knight Intelligence Duty Post Forums Edit this nav

SFI has a long history with the SB118 Group, in many incantations both in its beginning years as well as present day. Often it’s difficult to understand the dynamic relationship between Intel and how it’s used between various sim groups as proponants would argue there either is or isn’t a cohesive relationship since it is a mysterious and often times aloof department.

On general breakdown, we can ascribe the Branch in UFOP history as a loose field without a centralized core group up until the design of the Black Tower. Time ultimately proved, however, a flagrant abuse of running Intel officers characters through the course of the late 1990s into the early 2000s, involving several incidents in the abuse of OOC vs IC information and how it used in respective sims.

The key to understanding how Intel characters have been simmed in prior incantations is recognizing the factors that can lead to a specific style that is destructive to group participation as well as drive plots to premature closure.

How SFI Works with the Groups

It’s commonly agreed the Black Tower adjunct to SB118 has served as the basis for the entire Fleet, but in actuality it serves for Romulan/Klingon Intelligence rather than on a general whole in the present day opposed to the Tower’s heyday, which was designed as a centralized division. Once the Tower was closed, the USS Albion sim group served as the platform for the Tower group before ultimately being closed.

Today, SFI lies within the discretion of the ship’s CO opposed to a centralized sim group. Commanding Officers hold the guidelines of how Intelligence interfaces with their respective UFOP ships. Some do not care for it, some have a strict guideline, some are flexible, some view the duty post as a privilege, but the general rule in regards to running Intel characters starts with the respective CO, usually by first asking permission.

Sim Styles and What to Watch For

There are simple indicators that can pinpoint the destructive nature of the duty post, which fall into two categories:

• Use of OOC information in IC

The most common aspect, from a historical viewpoint, is the use of information the agent couldn’t have possibly obtained the player knows OOC, but decides to apply it IC. Actions like this short-circuit the basic premise of the PBEM group team-work to reach the objective of a given mission, and also generally will a leave a sense of resentment from fellow players. The second factor in this is how these kinds of posts can influence others to adopt a similar style.

Unwritten, what is put in play in sim is free for others to take and run with. All it takes is one to write in a way that can (and often has) led others to adopt a similar pattern, which inevitably leads to the death of collaborative writing.

• The combination of power simming as a soloist (aka “cowboying”)

Sometimes referred to as the James Bond approach, whereas an action taken by a simmer is coupled by two or more posts that locks the event without letting others react or spin the concept. Intel officers (or as Capt. McCall accurately calls Field Agents) in general over the course of their use have been simmed aloof and not prone to follow a chain of command on their respective ships. It’s very easy to take the mandate of secrecy and apply it, in posts that are outside of what the group is doing but reaches the conclusion of the group objective (aka leapfrogging), intended to enforce an end result that must be accepted.

What these elements do is establish a disregard for the ship’s Chain of Command as well as hold the simmer unaccountable for actions taken “by order of SFI”, which realistically isn’t the case. Every officer, whether a HCO or a Tactical officer, has a Chief, who answers to the Executive Officer, who answers to the Commanding Officer.

The Intelligence Officer is no different, and cannot be played differently either, as COs have the final word on what goes on their respective ships.

The Role & Responsibility of the Intelligence Officer

Depending on the section the CO would allow the player to sim, the actual Intelligence officer is a team player, rather than striking out. A PC cannot simply access another PC’s thoughts and interpretations at whim through the ship’s computer network.

The Intelligence Officer must interact with every single character on ship at a daily basis. There are no short cuts. One cannot, at any time, simply make up a means of how said information simmed by others outside of character knowledge has been arbitrarily acquired. One also needs to be aware how to construct the sims in a manner appropriate to group involvement.

Field assignments, depending on the CO, may either be left to the discretion of the simmer (in which case, the simmer would be giving their CO a head’s up on what they were planning before engaging in a covert assignment), or presented to the simmer by the CO on occasion when the need is called for.

General Parameters

1. Permission first, always
2. One should be holding the rank of Lt for a minimum duration
3. Unless the ship has an active Intelligence Branch, it is considered a secondary assignment, and not the character’s primary.
4. There should not be a reference to Section 31 (see Sect.31 below)
5. The officer first answers to the ship’s CO, then SFI (not the other way around).
6. Sim appropriately to group participation
7. Applies equally to NPCs (or PNPCs)

The Section 31 Factor

Canon source divides Section 31 from SFI, although there is an ongoing debate whether the two groups are separate or Sect.31 falls into a section of the branch SFI can officially claim “plausible deniability” on some of the nastier aspects of Field operatives.

In the UFOP, Section 31 has never been used. It’s proper section is Field Operations and should not be treated any differently.