Small but important differences in ships

[brianeyci]

They'd still know that they are in a simulation though. And even though live-fire ex's are usually against targets, you know that if you wander into your buddy's line of fire, your going to die. To say nothing of the risk's involved with live grenades and other explosive's.

My two cents on the simulation thingy is that there really isn't any substitute for being in the line of fire. I know that I sound silly saying that, given that I'm a civilian and a civilian barely turning twenty and buried in algebra books and Shakespeare rather than physical activity. But there is another analogy -- exams.

I know it must be hard for some of you who aren't in school anymore to imagine this. But when you're a student, and taking an exam that could determine your profession for the rest of your life, there is a certain anxiety level when you walk into the exam, no matter how many practise exams you do. I am not trying to compare risking life to examinations. I am saying that there are certain things that the holodeck could never emulate -- namely, the feeling of the simulation "mattering".

However, if I did not do practise exams, I wouldn't have the technical ability to complete questions, no matter how confident I was. The holodeck is not a totally useless tool -- who wants to fumble around figuring out how to fire a phaser, or figure out how to fire a ship's phaser array on manual during a life-and-death situation? (We see close ups of phasers with only three buttons, but we know that phasers have at least 16 settings I believe Riker or someone on TNG said this. Plus Sulu's manual phaser lock sucked in Wrath of Khan. I mean come on, the ship was so freaking close, what he didn't know how to calculate angles properly?)

The holodeck would be good for weeding out those without technical proficiency, and separating the Data's from the Sulu's. (Yes Sulu's phaser lock sucked, but they didn't have dedicated holodecks back then, and he was the helmsman. Big improvement bringing in a burly werewolf to shoot the phasers and torpedoes I say =D)

Brian

[brianeyci]

I recall that they had a machinegun, but it's always possible that I remembered incorrectly; it's been several years since I saw that episode and I was not particularly keen on seeing it again. But even if they only had sidearms and SMGs, it's still ridiculous for them to get overrun by screaming, knife-wielding morons.

Agreed. But it is also ridiculous for Ewoks to overcome the "Emperor's Finest Troops". And it was also ridiculous for farmers in ST:V with improvised projectile weapons to overcome phasers, although not as bad as the Ewok scene. Both ST and SW had their funny moments =D.

Brian

[brianeyci]

In a Star Trek novel (non-canon, I know), they used hypnosis to make Cadet Tasha Yar believe the holodeck simulation was real, so she would gain proper combat experience.

And her opponents were security personal in custum

There is a canon example of this. Wesley, while training as a cadet in Starfleet Academy, was put in a situation where he thought there was a crisis and had to go into a dangerous situation to save another cadet's life. If I remember correctly, it might have not been in the holodeck. However, Wesley was decieved into thinking the situation was real. It was a test of his command abilities. I am working off memory here, so don't sue me if I'm wrong.

If Starfleet goes to such lengths to "test" cadets, it is not unreasonable to assume that Starfleet would go to the next obvious type of test and have the cadets walk into a holodeck without informing them.

Brian

[brianeyci]

Oh I know this is a lot, but I just remembered another example. Deanna was tested by Riker on a holodeck which simulated the Enterprise in crisis... the result was that Deanna had to order "Geordi" to sacrifice his life to save the ship.

Given that Starfleet puts such a premium on well-rounded personnel (think of Picard), holodecks could be used to test more than technical proficiency -- they are a good way of creating hypothetical situations to test a person's "character".

Brian

[ANGELUS]

I remember Rob Wilson once mentioned that it was amazing how much worse a typical recruit would perform during his first live-fire exercise. You can argue that it's "worthless in wargames", but soldiers who haven't had it are going to be questionable, and as I said before, this does neatly explain the ability of Klingons to mow through Federation personnel on the ground until they run into a main (experienced) character.

No differnt then the Paintball scenario unless you actually have the thought of dying.

It's why people who spar are shitty when it comes down to when someone with live steel is prepared to slice them in half. Nothing in training prepares you for your blood and knowing saying stop is not going to stop said person.

Soliders have to get over that and hold their ground...something that unless you have a live fire workouts will not get a person over.

OK, then give the teams real phasers and make them fight each others, turn off the security protocols (I know any of this would never be done by the feds), and there's your live-fire exercise, you can actualli get killed by equally smart and living enemies. You can still use the hollodecks to program a fighting scenario.
And just as I said before, I can't think of any other smart use for hollodecks (ok, maybe engineering simulations or stuff like that, but definitelly not for recreation).