I am now the Lt. Of TFU.

[Bnjemann]

Hello, I am here to inform you that I am the new TFU lieutenant.

Expect some changes in the application process in the coming months! As well as better overall quality in how applications are processed.

If anyone has any ideas or questions regarding the application process of TFU, or any other changes to the administrative side of things, feel free to post them below and I’ll answer them to the best of my abilities!

And yes, TFU applications will reopen soon, I’m planning on opening them in just over a week whilst I go over the process of hiring new trainers, briefing the new trainers, and holding a meeting with the existing and upcoming TFTOs.

Also, I would like to take the opportunity here to encourage any past TFTOs who are eligible for a reinstatement to either request a reinstatement, or reapply for TFTO!

I look forward to helping pull this division out of the hole it dig itself into, and hope that the community can put aside some trust and faith in me doing so!

It’s worth noting that I already have plans for this division, but I will be running them through the existing command team before posting them, in case I make any “false promises”. I don’t want people to get behind an idea that wont see the light of day.

Things I want to hear in particular are:
- Ideas to change the application process.
- Feedback on the current process.
- Your opinions on the application process
- Questions about the current application process


No point in posting ideas such as:
Nerfing TFU:
Ultimately the decision to give any nerfs to TFU is solely down to the Chiefs of department and the developers, of course I will be given a say in the matter, but ultimately I can not adjust physical stats about TFU myself.
Bringing back SWAT:
I hope to work on a compromise between the crowds who want SWAT back and the crowds that want TFU to remain As, or become more of an elitist division only highly experienced officers and community members can become. Also, this choice wouldn’t be my final decision either.
Adding new weapons, vehicles, or equipment:
Again this is down to the developers and I would not be able to make this decision myself.

I look forward to answering your questions and ideas!

​

 

[Husky]

How do you plan on fixing the current incompetency and lack of training current TFU actually have?

I do not see them anymore trained or any better than SWAT.

Why is it if a Cpt of RTU goes on duty he instantly takes command of a situation and has more authority in tfu regards (in-game) than a LT of TFU?

Do you agree with that being the case? I don't.

 

[Bnjemann]

“How do you plan on fixing the current incompetency and lack of training current TFU actually have?”

I will be discussing in an upcoming meeting 3 countermeasures against incompetency in TFU.

The first one being hopefully after this TFTO recruitment drive has concluded, voluntary training sessions for TFOs will hopefully be bought back. These training sessions aim to be fun and engaging as well as challenging, with predetermined scenarios ranging from dynamic protection of VIPs (the mayor at a speech, escorting the mayor, protecting DNA tool equipped personnel from harm, etc) all the way up to sieges of government and civilian owned buildings, hostage situations, and high Risk arrest warrant execution on both properties, and pursuits. These will help hone the skills of officers willing to learn and improve themselves and overall will serve as a good afternoon or evening of fun for both TFU and the trainers.

The second, is an already existing system that hasn’t been used very much, shall be bought back in full life. The system is TFU who underperform to a standard that negatively effects others will have to be “reassessed” and go through a few of, or all of the existing stage 3 tasks and scenarios to allow myself and the rest of the training division to see if that person is at least salvageable. Members of the complaints committee should be able to decide if this is necessary, and present their case to myself, Madda, or others. TFTOs will also be able to have the ability to flag underperforming TFU. I will be making a post regarding this idea in full detail.


A third system for countering incompetence is an idea I like the one I am pitching above, but for less serious offences, where we organise a training server session to “recreate” an incident where a TFTO messed up in, and allow them to try it again, but correctly, and the Training staff will give them guidance whenever they get stuck, as well as feedback afterwards. This Is an idea I thought up an hour ago and I am yet to fully polish it up. Whether or not this idea actually sees the light of day is down to the higher ups in the command team as I am yet to polish it up and implement it, I need to ensure that TFTOs would be willing and able to do this (although I don’t see why not).

Tl;dr: We’re going to be giving training to TFU if they either want it, or need it, and reassess underperforming TFU. Training sessions that are voluntary will be offered to all TFU.


“Why is it if a Cpt of RTU goes on duty he instantly takes command of a situation and has more authority in tfu regards (in-game) than a LT of TFU?”

Good question. I personally feel as though the responsibility of commanding a situation would technically be split between the two in a sense, but ultimately, the TFU command member should be the one calling the shots. The TFU command member should be leading an assault team to handle the situation, negotiate, etc. Whilst the Captain of RTU should be ensuring the orders of the TFU are being met. I disagree with a non TFU member ultimately being in charge of a firearms incident when there are experienced and trained TFU personnel on scene, able to call the shots. Before I was command, if I was given 2 separate orders from 2 different command members, I would always follow the lead of the TFU command member as they are more likely to have a firm understanding on how to win a situation.

Tl;dr: I disagree with the Idea that rank beats role in the situation you described above. TFU trainers and command members ultimately should be leading an assault, hostage situation, etc.

 

[Mim]

“Why is it if a Cpt of RTU goes on duty he instantly takes command of a situation and has more authority in tfu regards (in-game) than a LT of TFU?”

I spoke to Husky about this @BigBenji

What I said was that if someone came on the scene (I'm in TFU gear) and they were TFTO or TFU Command I would happily hand over the reign, TFU isn't my speciality, therefore, it would be improper for me to command as it would be risking officers lives. However, if it came to let's say a pursuit or car chase then obviously that's when I would expect to be leading over other command members.

Hope this helps.

 

[Bnjemann]

@Mimball Thank you for this insight, I agree with you, an officer should only take lead in a situation if their Role in the PD Qualifies them to do so, not necessarily just because of their rank alone.

 

[Bert]

@BigBenji me too

 

[Mxdium]

We've talked my problems with the application process already but I'll put them down here aswell.

Stage 2
It is completely unnecessary, you throw a flashbang and that is basically it. I didn't see how that had to have an entire day for itself. It causes people not being able to join the training sessions due to having a life, it's the weekend after all.

Stage 3
This probably doesn't apply to all Stage 3s, but it definitely did to mine. It was COMPLETE CANCER. It seemed like all the trainers were just having a laugh and not taking anything serious at all, they were minging around doing unrealistic shit. You can't tell me it is realistic to stand on top of a Ford Transit and spray an AK-47 fully automatic while it is driving.
Then we had the hostage situation, the trainers kept saying put your guns down or we will shoot the hostage, they said this about 15 times even when the applicants did the right thing by saying 'No, I won't put my gun down'. After you get pressured for 10 minutes straight to put your gun down, you feel like it is part of the scenario so you do it and you get gunpointed inside. If an applicant shows he knows how to act when the hostage takers give demands then the scenario should continue following the guidelines given to the trainer. It shouldn't be pushed until they actually do it, that is extremely unfair.
I also got no marks for using equipment, which was also extremely unfair and I will go over this in the next part of my concerns.
I don't remember my entire Stage 3 because it was aids so I just wanted to get it over with and continue with a Remington instead, it's OP anyways.

Marking applicants
When marking applicants it should be taken into consideration what roles they are given in their group of applicants. In my application, we gave another applicant the lead and we also let him throw the flashbang. I was given the role to breach and the 3rd applicant was the first inside. What happened was is that I was not given any marks for 'using equipment' because I didn't use my flashbang throughout the session. The only scenario there was where it was viable to throw a flashbang was the apartment raid and we chose the leader to throw the flashbang. I got quite upset over this due to that and I said the following; "Do you expect me to throw a flashbang in the middle of the fucking bazaar so I use my equipment?".
When roles are assigned this should be noted in the application by the trainer and it should have different marking guidelines. The Leader should get marks for leading and flashing, the breacher for planting C2 properly and doing what he is supposed to do, the man behind for whatever he has to do. This should be SEPERATE. It is extremely unfair to not receive marks for something you are physically not able to do due to your role in the team. Or make them all have a different role 3 times and mark them for all of it.

There is probably a lot more I can say but I can't think of anything right now. I was looking forward to do my application stages and I was met with nothing but dissapointment when I did my stages. This made me not want to apply for TFU next cycle, which I didn't.

 

[Bnjemann]

I understand your frustrations for that stage 3 because it was absolute chaos, But I can ensure you under my leadership, sessions like that won't occur again.


" It is completely unnecessary, you throw a flashbang and that is basically it. I didn't see how that had to have an entire day for itself. It causes people not being able to join the training sessions due to having a life, it's the weekend after all. "

Stage 2 is to not just teach about flash bangs, But to also teach about breaching charges and how to use them, coordinating and synchronising a flashbang with a breach, weapon familiarity and to do a "Practice raid" or several. The way the current stage 2 is set was the direct result of applicant feedback, claiming that at the time, TFU stage 2's, which were an assessment too, were stupid, unfair, and unnecessary. Countless applicants failed because they couldn't navigate a SWAT Van obstacle course and / or the wooden kill house that failed to allow officers to demonstrate other core skills. And yes, the flash bang thing was still a thing on the old stage 2, it was just far trickier, and an assessment. We also noticed during the days of Stage 2's being assessments and TFU were given no real training that as a result, flash bang usage during stage 3's were consistently terrible, with people throwing them wrong, resulting in either an ineffective flash, or the flashing of other applicants.

Expect a fair number of changes to the Stage 2 and 3 process because an overhaul of the scenarios and marking criteria, as well as a guideline document on how to behave as a criminal when acting as one during a TFU stage 3 is next on my list once I've interviewed, marked, assessed, and briefed the current TFTO applicants.

 

[Kempotent]

Will you be changing the TFU stage 1 questions around, they are designed to be answered as if you already knew how to be TFU and the handbook doesn't explain any of these questions to you.

 

[Bnjemann]

The Questions for the current stage 1 are fairly recent ones. I personally feel as though they allow officers to demonstrate knowledge of skills under the 5 principals of TFU.