Disruptors or Phasers, pick your poison.

[brianeyci]

Precisely. Let's imagine the following situation:

Code: Select all

++++++++++++++++
|              |
|    Y Y       |
|              |
|              |
|              |
|              |
|              |
|         X    |
|              |
|              |
|              |
|          X   |
|              |
++++++++++++++++

Say you are team "X", and you're shooting at one of the members of team "Y". Problem: one of your teammates is ahead of you, using a piece of irregular terrain for cover. if your gun shoots straight, this is not a problem: you simply aim for one of the "Y" team and shoot. But if your gun "auto-aims", what's it going to do? What if it decides to shoot your teammates in the fucking back?

Simple. Different settings on your gun.

Three buttons not enough you say?

Big button - fire
Tap left button - power setting down
Tap right button - power setting up
Hold right button + tap left button - ?
Hold right button + tap left button 2x - ?
Hold right button + tap left button 3x - ?
...
Hold right button + tap left button x times - ?
Hold left button + tap right button 1x -?
...
Hold left button + tap right button x times - ?

So, with three buttons, so long as the user was trained properly, you could have infinite settings. You could set the phaser to target only non-humans. You could set the phaser to target people with comm badges. You could set the phaser to target people with uniform pips. You could even restrict the angle of autoaiming, so that it only hit people within say a twenty degree span of your aim. Alternatively, you could set the phaser to fire on axis or slightly off-axis depending on your style, and rely on your hand-eye co-ordination. There could even be a "reset" option, to set the phaser to factory defaults if you forgot what setting the phaser was on.

And why does Worf miss during his Holodeck target practice by such small amounts while Guinan hits the target reliably? He just forgot to turn on his auto-aim? She cheated because you're not supposed to use auto-aim? How do you turn it on and off? Why didn't he accuse her of cheating?

A limitation of assisted aiming. If I remember correctly, the targets were moving. Worf probably relied on the assisted aiming technology, while Guinan relied on her hand-eye co-ordination. It makes sense given the two character's methodologies -- Worf relied on assisted aiming to hit a Ferengi, while Guinan is wise enough to know not to rely on technology all the time. The Borg assimilated Guinan's home planet, so she probably distrusts automation.

Guinan wouldn't need to accuse Worf of cheating for using the assisted aiming -- Guinan won.

As for the incredible calculation abilities of computers, if the device that processes that data suck at making use of it that doesn't help all that much.

Limitation of assisted aiming. It can't track fast.

Or for that matter, how do Federation fighters get within spitting range of enemy ships without getting blown away?

Federation and others reliance on complicated sensors and automation rather than a simple Wars camera technology, thereby being vulnerable to jamming. I proposed some sort of hyper-optic targeting system in the Wars versus Trek, ignorant that Wars already uses "glorified cameras" in combat. Relying on visual cues would have let the Enterprise hit the Reliant in the Mutara Nebula, see cloaked vessels before the "perfect" cloak of Shinzon, and so on.

Brian

[The Silence and I]

You can estimate numerical ranges without a screenshot, based on subjective impressions while watching the movie?

I can estimate yes. In most shootdown scenes there were IIRC three camera angles: the first one shows the drone more or less from the path the Baku were taking, but not showing any major characters. Then the camera shows a major character looking at the drone (i.e. the drone is behind the camera) and taking aim and firing. The landmarks (when any) indicate the character was near the first camera, but I can't tell how near, exactly. Then a third camera angle shows a partial closeup of the drone getting pasted. Based on the first camera angle the drones were not more than perhaps 80 feet (24 meters) away, but they always closed significantly before getting shot, hence ~15 meters.
So I can estimate, or perhaps guestimate would be better. Regardless, 15 or so meters or less is not mindboggling huge. I would have trouble hitting a moving drone at that range, but I haven't had the practice I assume the main characters have.

Nice false dilemma, particularly when you snipped out the part of my post where I pointed out that your evidence can be explained just as easily without mind-reading phasers

Aye, you offered something. I don't happen to agree it explains everything though. I'll let this one drop until I can get more conclusive evidence than "Rascals."

And yet they need Vulcans to interrogate people for information. Why is that? And why didn't the UT figure out the people of "Darmok"?

I should clarify: by "mind reading" I mean only as much detail as a UT has, that is intent. You may notice I went very far with it trying to get answers for its operation, and frankly I don't now think it can go that detailed.
I have a new idea that would use an actual UT, and is much more in line with existing Treknology.
Phaser sensors map out all potential targets within the specified cone. The user thinks about which one he wants to hit, and the UT translates this into a command. That way the UT only does what it always does; translates intent into words, in this case words useful for a phaser computer.

brianeyci has offered a simpler explanation, one which I avoided because the characters never have to change settings manually on the run. However it has merits mine does not:
The command-don't target comm badges-will allieviate nearly any targeting problem a Federation user will face, therefore eliminating my biggest concern with it--that being no one has to manually update the targetting definitions on the go.
It also explains why people still punch in commands when changing the phaser settings (although I can explain this as a safety feature requiring a command button to be pushed before mentally changing settings, it is simpler to go with his--and there are three buttons anyway, not two)
Both deal with slow tracking and unfamiliar targets (Dominion) so I favor his. I think mine is well within the bounds of Treknology, but his requires fewer hoops.

[Batman]

So, with three buttons, so long as the user was trained properly, you could have infinite settings. You could set the phaser to target only non-humans. You could set the phaser to target people with comm badges. You could set the phaser to target people with uniform pips. You could even restrict the angle of autoaiming, so that it only hit people within say a twenty degree span of your aim. Alternatively, you could set the phaser to fire on axis or slightly off-axis depending on your style, and rely on your hand-eye co-ordination. There could even be a "reset" option, to set the phaser to factory defaults if you forgot what setting the phaser was on.

Small problems:
- it's baseless speculation. You have no evidence phasers have those abilities.
-We never see anybody make this settings. Unless the user is prescient and knows ahead of time what option he needs those modifications need to be made immediately before firing. Yet we never see it done, and still see a wide variety of off-angle shots. Given there's a grand total of three buttons that's also going to take one hell of a time. Furthermore, why don't we ever see a phaser go BLEEP! ILLEGAL TARGET IDENT when one is fired at the Feds after the bad guy takes it away from them?
-How does the phaser know wether or not the target is human, wears
uniform pips (dangerous criterion BTW since you can't see them from all angles) etc? There is no evidence the thing has sensors of any kind.

And why does Worf miss during his Holodeck target practice by such small amounts while Guinan hits the target reliably? He just forgot to turn on his auto-aim? She cheated because you're not supposed to use auto-aim? How do you turn it on and off? Why didn't he accuse her of cheating?

A limitation of assisted aiming. If I remember correctly, the targets were moving. Worf probably relied on the assisted aiming technology, while Guinan relied on her hand-eye co-ordination. It makes sense given the two character's methodologies -- Worf relied on assisted aiming to hit a Ferengi, while Guinan is wise enough to know not to rely on technology all the time. The Borg assimilated Guinan's home planet, so she probably distrusts automation.

This makes no sense. Given the angles we've seen phasers fire off and that Worf usually missed by a hair the only way to explain this within auto-aiming is he deliberately restricted its field of fire. Why? Either he relies on it and thus would use it to its full capacity, or he doesn't (because of Warrior's honor or some such bullshit) in which case he would turn it off.
The 'Guinan doesn't trust automation because of the Borg' is quite simply ridiculous.

As for the incredible calculation abilities of computers, if the device that processes that data suck at making use of it that doesn't help all that much.

Limitation of assisted aiming. It can't track fast.

It can't track fast enough to compensate for humanoid movement speed? That's pretty pathetic.

Or for that matter, how do Federation fighters get within spitting range of enemy ships without getting blown away?

Federation and others reliance on complicated sensors and automation rather than a simple Wars camera technology, thereby being vulnerable to jamming.

To the point that they can't hit B-17 sized targets at ranges that would be considered point-blank for modern jet fighters? That's pretty sad.
It IS, however, within the boundaries of the Federation's 'let's go for the most complex, error-prone and easily defeatable solution possible while not even CONSIDERING a backup' doctrine, so I'm inclined to buy it.

I proposed some sort of hyper-optic targeting system in the Wars versus Trek, ignorant that Wars already uses "glorified cameras" in combat. Relying on visual cues would have let the Enterprise hit the Reliant in the Mutara Nebula, see cloaked vessels before the "perfect" cloak of Shinzon, and so on.

While I hate to admit that TOS shared some of the deficiencies of modern Trek, you are unfortunately correct.
But then, that movie had a supposed tactical genius being unable to think 3-dimensionally, and Starfleets hero captain, after being informed of this, failing to make good use of it.

[brianeyci]

Small problems:
- it's baseless speculation. You have no evidence phasers have those abilities.
-We never see anybody make this settings. Unless the user is prescient and knows ahead of time what option he needs those modifications need to be made immediately before firing. Yet we never see it done, and still see a wide variety of off-angle shots. Given there's a grand total of three buttons that's also going to take one hell of a time. Furthermore, why don't we ever see a phaser go BLEEP! ILLEGAL TARGET IDENT when one is fired at the Feds after the bad guy takes it away from them?
-How does the phaser know wether or not the target is human, wears
uniform pips (dangerous criterion BTW since you can't see them from all angles) etc? There is no evidence the thing has sensors of any kind.

It would not take as much time as you think. How many situations do we see someone in front of someone else about to fire a phaser? I only recall a couple times when a Fed was crouching in front of another Fed, during the Siege of AR-whatever, and they were using phaser rifles. Most of the times, the field of fire is clear towards a target. The default setting of "shoot anybody who is not human" or "just shoot" would work in most cases.

Of course, I'm not saying that this is the way the phaser works. However, the phaser could work this way, and the theory is consistent with the theory of assisted aiming. Phasers = no sensors means assisted aiming doesn't work anyway since you need sensors for assisted aiming. Without assisted aiming, how do you explain off-axis shots hitting, and the axis changing so frequently? A change in ten degrees means the shot going almost a meter wide at a distance of five meters. Phasers weren't that inaccurate, and their axis definitely changed by more than ten degrees.

This makes no sense. Given the angles we've seen phasers fire off and that Worf usually missed by a hair the only way to explain this within auto-aiming is he deliberately restricted its field of fire. Why? Either he relies on it and thus would use it to its full capacity, or he doesn't (because of Warrior's honor or some such bullshit) in which case he would turn it off.

How? Worf uses the assisted aiming to its full capacity. It sucks, and can't track moving targets properly, such as ducking Ferengi. So the assisted aiming couldn't track the moving little discs. So Worf misses. And Guinan doesn't use assisted aiming. But she's smart and practised firing a phaser without assisted aiming. So she gets a lot of hits.

Is your objection that Worf misses by a hair shooting the discs and Worf misses by a meter with the Ferengi? Well Worf was in a perfect environment to fully concentrate in the holodeck on shooting, and shooting worse when in a real firefight isn't that much of a stretch. Worf's initial aim at the Ferengi was straight ahead -- he didn't even bother to aim in a downwards direction against the Ferengi, which would have helped the assisted aiming. Assisted aiming is not auto aiming. The better someone would have aimed, the less the beam has to track.

The 'Guinan doesn't trust automation because of the Borg' is quite simply ridiculous.

It is silly. But so is relying on assisted aiming in the first place. The Guinan hypothesis is consistent with the theory that Guinan didn't use assisted aiming while in the holodeck with Worf. Her whole race was destroyed, and her people scattered around the galaxy.

It can't track fast enough to compensate for humanoid movement speed? That's pretty pathetic.

Agreed. I am not trying to defend assisted aiming. Assisted aiming sucks. I don't remember how fast the discs were moving. For the Ferengi ducking example, the phaser might have had a problem tracking because Worf's initial aim was so off. The phaser was pointed straight ahead for god's sake, not even downward towards the Ferengi.

To the point that they can't hit B-17 sized targets at ranges that would be considered point-blank for modern jet fighters? That's pretty sad.
It IS, however, within the boundaries of the Federation's 'let's go for the most complex, error-prone and easily defeatable solution possible while not even CONSIDERING a backup' doctrine, so I'm inclined to buy it.

Of course. There is so much automation that they can't override the holodeck and let a Morarity take control of the ship! Also, fighters could have been a relatively new development. Ships don't seem to mount any kind of point-defense weapons, relying instead on their main phaser batteries to hit small targets. And main phaser arrays seem to be totally automated.

I proposed some sort of hyper-optic targeting system in the Wars versus Trek, ignorant that Wars already uses "glorified cameras" in combat. Relying on visual cues would have let the Enterprise hit the Reliant in the Mutara Nebula, see cloaked vessels before the "perfect" cloak of Shinzon, and so on.

While I hate to admit that TOS shared some of the deficiencies of modern Trek, you are unfortunately correct.

Yes, an optical targeting system would have helped Trek even in TOS.

But then, that movie had a supposed tactical genius being unable to think 3-dimensionally, and Starfleets hero captain, after being informed of this, failing to make good use of it.

Captain Kirk used the fact that Khan couldn't think three dimensionally to sneak up on Khan and shoot him from behind! Remember "Z-minus ten thousand meters, standby photon torpedoes?" Spock told Kirk after the initial encounter when the Reliant was about to ram the Enterprise about the three-dimensional weakness of Khan. So I would say that sneaking up behind someone and destroying their ship is making good use of the knowledge.

Brian

[Batman]

Small problems:
- it's baseless speculation. You have no evidence phasers have those abilities.
-We never see anybody make this settings. Unless the user is prescient and knows ahead of time what option he needs those modifications need to be made immediately before firing. Yet we never see it done, and still see a wide variety of off-angle shots. Given there's a grand total of three buttons that's also going to take one hell of a time. Furthermore, why don't we ever see a phaser go BLEEP! ILLEGAL TARGET IDENT when one is fired at the Feds after the bad guy takes it away from them?
-How does the phaser know wether or not the target is human, wears
uniform pips (dangerous criterion BTW since you can't see them from all angles) etc? There is no evidence the thing has sensors of any kind.

It would not take as much time as you think. How many situations do we see someone in front of someone else about to fire a phaser? I only recall a couple times when a Fed was crouching in front of another Fed, during the Siege of AR-whatever, and they were using phaser rifles. Most of the times, the field of fire is clear towards a target.

Okay. So you're assuming the default is 'don't shoot Fed's'.
How, pray tell, do guys who take away phasers from them shoot them WITHOUT bothering with the settings?
how do the FEDS use phasers to shoot rocks and such without bothering with the settings?

The default setting of "shoot anybody who is not human" or "just shoot" would work in most cases.

'Shoot anybody who isn't human' doesn't work. Starfleet has plenty of nonhuman members. Using 'just shoot' as a default when your weapon is capable of 'don't shoot Starfleet members' is stupid even by Federation standards.

Without assisted aiming, how do you explain off-axis shots hitting, and the axis changing so frequently?

Shoddy manufactoring, lots of training. People compensate for weapons not firing true in real life all the time. The axis changing so frequently might be an extension of the shoddy manufacturing (assuming it actually happened- what about Mike's claim those screenshots are from different episodes?)

But then, that movie had a supposed tactical genius being unable to think 3-dimensionally, and Starfleets hero captain, after being informed of this, failing to make good use of it.

Captain Kirk used the fact that Khan couldn't think three dimensionally to sneak up on Khan and shoot him from behind!

Exactly. From behind. Where Reliant presented the smallest available target profile. How about shooting from above or below?

[brianeyci]

Okay. So you're assuming the default is 'don't shoot Fed's'. How, pray tell, do guys who take away phasers from them shoot them WITHOUT bothering with the settings? How do the FEDS use phasers to shoot rocks and such without bothering with the settings?

The default could be "don't shoot anybody with a comm badge."

<edit> when they shoot rocks, they could be changing the settings without us knowing. Its not like the camera is exactly zoomed into the phasers. When they order the redshirts to "set phasers to stun", its not like you see the redshirts doing it </edit>

'Shoot anybody who isn't human' doesn't work. Starfleet has plenty of nonhuman members. Using 'just shoot' as a default when your weapon is capable of 'don't shoot Starfleet members' is stupid even by Federation standards.

Agreed. "Shoot anybody without a comm badge" would be most likely.

Shoddy manufactoring, lots of training. People compensate for weapons not firing true in real life all the time. The axis changing so frequently might be an extension of the shoddy manufacturing (assuming it actually happened- what about Mike's claim those screenshots are from different episodes?)

Didn't see Mike's post about that. Yes, they are from different episodes, I made a mistake thinking that the rock background meant they were from the same episode.

Here are a couple from the same episode I believe,



(phasers.net, hosted on my own webspace)

The change in axis in Yar's phaser is definitely more than ten degrees, and if memory serves these screenshots come from the TNG episode "The Arsenal of Freedom".

Exactly. From behind. Where Reliant presented the smallest available target profile. How about shooting from above or below?

Maybe Kirk wanted to get a good shot at the warp nacelles. Firing at the Warp nacelles from above would be pretty hard. And the Enterprise wasn't exactly behind the Reliant, it was diagonally positioned so it could hit the Reliant's warp nacelles.

Brian

[SirNitram]

Brian, are you aware of the logical principle of Parsimony? Because these ever-more-convulted attempts at justifying an unobserved capability that would vastly alter every engagement we've ever seen in Trek are really quite painful to someone who does understand the principle and it's reason.

[The Silence and I]

But then, that movie had a supposed tactical genius being unable to think 3-dimensionally, and Starfleets hero captain, after being informed of this, failing to make good use of it.

Kahn failing to think 3D is a little sad on his part, but Kirk did make use of the information, and won the fight because of it.

Small problems:
- it's baseless speculation. You have no evidence phasers have those abilities.

Only indirect evidence which says phasers have abilities we are not told about.

-We never see anybody make this settings. Unless the user is prescient and knows ahead of time what option he needs those modifications need to be made immediately before firing. Yet we never see it done, and still see a wide variety of off-angle shots. Given there's a grand total of three buttons that's also going to take one hell of a time. Furthermore, why don't we ever see a phaser go BLEEP! ILLEGAL TARGET IDENT when one is fired at the Feds after the bad guy takes it away from them?

Good points IMO. My speculation tries to avoid these problems, but it also invents a great number of what ifs and--well it's speculation, 'nuff said

-How does the phaser know wether or not the target is human, wears
uniform pips (dangerous criterion BTW since you can't see them from all angles) etc? There is no evidence the thing has sensors of any kind.

On the Nemesis "Dolphin" type II hand phaser there are what may well be sensors above and below the beam emitter. TNG season I and II "Dustbuster" type II hand phasers have a very wide front end with a deflector esque dish, it would be easy to hide a sensor in there somewhere. TNG season III+ "Cobra" type II hand phasers are a little trickier; there is no obvious place to put a sensor. Perhaps under a panel? Run of the mill sensors in trek laugh at normal matter's opacity...

Shoddy manufactoring, lots of training. People compensate for weapons not firing true in real life all the time.

Ok, people can compensate for a gun that fires off axis. But can training help someone compensate for a gun that shoots 7 degrees to the left, then 12 degrees up, then 15 degrees to the right etc? AFAIK training does not grant precognition, and little short of precognition can allow a user to hit something with a weapon like that.

The axis changing so frequently might be an extension of the "shoddy manufacturing" (assuming it actually happened- what about Mike's claim those screenshots are from different episodes?)

If "shoddy manufacturing," then there is no rational explanation for frequency of hits. As for different episodes, I cannot comment on that, I do not have the DVDs.


"Shoddy manufactoring" is no good. Here's a thought experiment:
I give you a hand gun with iron sights and a good grip. Your target is a 10 cm disk at 10 meters. Unfortunately your gun has shoddy bullets and a wobbly barrel--you've found after using it for a while that at a range of 10 meters your gun will place bullets up to 2 meters apart from each other on any given series of shots.
Now you have to hit that target, you get one shot. Good luck, you'll need it right?
Now let's make it interesting:
Take away the iron sights, and the ergonomic grip. Again, you get to use this gun long enough to determine it has the same inconsistencies in accuracy. Now hit that same target again. Worried you might miss? I would be.

Even if you are a world-class shooter, not knowing which way the next bullet will go will cripple your ability to hit anything that isn't close enough to touch.

[brianeyci]

Brian, are you aware of the logical principle of Parsimony? Because these ever-more-convulted attempts at justifying an unobserved capability that would vastly alter every engagement we've ever seen in Trek are really quite painful to someone who does understand the principle and it's reason.

Very well. Let us say that changes in axis are not because of some sort of assisted aiming system and because of manufacturing defects/personal geometry preferences.

1. Let T = 10 and A = 5. Then tanT = O/A and O = 0.88. So a shot with a ten degree change in axis at a range of five meters would miss wide by .88 meters if the redshirt was focused on the old axis. So even if the manufacturing faults of the phaser varied the degree of fire by ten degrees, we should see misses on the scale that would make Klingons running around with glorified swords seem elite.

The fixed-axis or manufacturing fault variable-axis theories does not explain why we do not see missing to this scale.

2. Personal Geometry argument -- we have seen axis change between episodes, and axis change in between scenes in the same episode. If they were altering their geometry to suit their style, then it would make sense for an individual to keep the same geometry. It would be like they were deliberately changing their axis of fire in between episodes forcing them to retrain, and still somehow getting hits because they were lucky, if you assumed personal geometry.

Simplicity is good. However, simplicity cannot ignore observations. Phasers don't miss wide all the time, and axis changes so frequently that phasers should be totally useless. But they are not, and manage to hit stationary targets well.

Plus, assisted-aiming has the added advantage of explaining why this,


(phasers.net, hosted on my own webspace)

turned into this,


(phasers.net, hosted on my own webspace)

Is not the theory that explains more observations the better one?

Brian

[Batman]

The default could be "don't shoot anybody with a comm badge."

Which doesn't explain the 'prisoner takes phaser from inept guard and shoots him' scenario.

Agreed. "Shoot anybody without a comm badge" would be most likely.

See above.

Exactly. From behind. Where Reliant presented the smallest available target profile. How about shooting from above or below?

Maybe Kirk wanted to get a good shot at the warp nacelles. Firing at the Warp nacelles from above would be pretty hard. And the Enterprise wasn't exactly behind the Reliant, it was diagonally positioned so it could hit the Reliant's warp nacelles.

Enterprise was marginally above Reliant. The ideal approach to hit the Warp nacelles would have been from directly below, where
a)the Warp nacelles would have presented the second-largest target profile, the largest being directly abeam), and
b) presented Enterprises smallest target profile to Reliant.

[brianeyci]

Which doesn't explain the 'prisoner takes phaser from inept guard and shoots him' scenario.

Easy. Press both buttons at once, and you could reset the phaser to factory defaults. Pretty easy to do, and default could be "shoot anything living in front of you."

The buttons don't limit the asssited aiming argument.

Enterprise was marginally above Reliant. The ideal approach to hit the Warp nacelles would have been from directly below, where
a)the Warp nacelles would have presented the second-largest target profile, the largest being directly abeam), and
b) presented Enterprises smallest target profile to Reliant.

Going directly below would have meant turning the Enterprise right-side up. Maybe it is difficult to do this in Trek, or the Enterprise thrusters were so badly damaged that they couldn't go right-side up.

They were playing a guessing game in the Mutara nebula. There are many possibilities. Khan could have suddenly realized his 3D faults after saying "I will avenge you", and went around in 3D running into the Enterprise by accident. Stupidity is a last resort argument.

<edit> As an aside, do you have an example of someone stealing a Type-I or a Type-II from a Federation guard and shooting him? I don't remember this ever happening, and if it did it would be Picard or one of the good guys stealing a disruptor, not a Type-II </edit>

Brian

[SirNitram]

Is not the theory that explains more observations the better one?

Brian

What is it about recent posters and not being able to simply answer the question?

Apparently, you are vastly confused about the nature of Parsimony. If your theory is built on unobserved phenomena(Your magic IFF system, the auto-aim itself, etc), and cannot explain all situations(Why the Feds aren't slaughtering people at hundreds of meters, but getting slaughtered at 5 or less), it fails under Parsimony. The existance of unobserved unknowns dooms a theory, and yours is doomed because of this.

[Batman]

Which doesn't explain the 'prisoner takes phaser from inept guard and shoots him' scenario.

Easy. Press both buttons at once, and you could reset the phaser to factory defaults. Pretty easy to do, and default could be "shoot anything living in front of you."

That would be stupid even by Fed/Starfleet standards given that the 'don't shoot Starfleet members' one makes way more sense.

The buttons don't limit the assisted aiming argument.

They cast severe doubt on its viability. To do the variety of programming you assume is available takes a shitload of time. A more complex 'keyboard' on the phaser is clearly not an easy task to achieve (but IS doable, see modern cellphones), but how about voice control a la the 'Judge Dredd' movie?

Enterprise was marginally above Reliant. The ideal approach to hit the Warp nacelles would have been from directly below, where
a)the Warp nacelles would have presented the second-largest target profile, the largest being directly abeam), and
b) presented Enterprises smallest target profile to Reliant.

Going directly below would have meant turning the Enterprise right-side up. Maybe it is difficult to do this in Trek, or the Enterprise thrusters were so badly damaged that they couldn't go right-side up.

Oh please. You're reaching and you know it.

[brianeyci]

Apparently, you are vastly confused about the nature of Parsimony. If your theory is built on unobserved phenomena(Your magic IFF system, the auto-aim itself, etc), and cannot explain all situations(Why the Feds aren't slaughtering people at hundreds of meters, but getting slaughtered at 5 or less), it fails under Parsimony. The existance of unobserved unknowns dooms a theory, and yours is doomed because of this.

It is not auto-aiming, it is assisted-aiming. The assisted-aiming sucks, so it can't track for hundreds of meters. It can't even track a ducking Ferengi. It can explain all situations of phaser fire.

Unobserved unknowns are pretty bad, I agree. But what is the alternative? Say that the phasers score hits with axis that varies so much that the phaser should never hit? We should see far more on-screen examples of misses. The manufacturing defects or personal geometry argument relies on luck and stupidity. Extreme luck, and extreme stupidity at that. Why would someone handicap their aiming on purpose, and why should phaser blasts even hit anything?

Brian

[SirNitram]

Apparently, you are vastly confused about the nature of Parsimony. If your theory is built on unobserved phenomena(Your magic IFF system, the auto-aim itself, etc), and cannot explain all situations(Why the Feds aren't slaughtering people at hundreds of meters, but getting slaughtered at 5 or less), it fails under Parsimony. The existance of unobserved unknowns dooms a theory, and yours is doomed because of this.

It is not auto-aiming, it is assisted-aiming. The assisted-aiming sucks, so it can't track for hundreds of meters. It can't even track a ducking Ferengi. It can explain all situations of phaser fire.

So you have a capability which adds nothing and explains something which is at best a tiny fraction of a degree shift, which can be explained by anything from a twitch to a shift in grip. Your theory sucks ass.

Unobserved unknowns are pretty bad, I agree. But what is the alternative? Say that the phasers score hits with axis that varies so much that the phaser should never hit? We should see far more on-screen examples of misses. The manufacturing defects or personal geometry argument relies on luck and stupidity. Extreme luck, and extreme stupidity at that. Why would someone handicap their aiming on purpose, and why should phaser blasts even hit anything?

Brian

To say We Don't Know, which alot of morons seem to fail to realize is a valid answer to a question.

[brianeyci]

That would be stupid even by Fed/Starfleet standards given that the 'don't shoot Starfleet members' one makes way more sense.

Or, the default press two buttons could be "don't rely on assisted-aiming", therefore disabling the safeties. The Feds have to incorporate a way to turn off the assisted aiming, for specific situations.

They cast severe doubt on its viability. To do the variety of programming you assume is available takes a shitload of time. A more complex 'keyboard' on the phaser is clearly not an easy task to achieve (but IS doable, see modern cellphones), but how about voice control a la the 'Judge Dredd' movie?

Yes it does. But what is the alternative? Assume that every single phaser hit we see is pure luck? A variation of even ten degrees would make the phaser totally useless. We've seen phasers vary by more than ten degrees. Training would not make up for such a shoddy weapon, and the Feds should miss every single time. They don't.

Oh please. You're reaching and you know it.

Yes I am. But stupidity is always a last resort arugment, and if I reach rather than resort to stupidity, that is fine with me. For example, creating a large battlestation with a single exhaust vent that can destroy the battlestation if a proton torpedo goes into it is stupidity, but I would rather say that the exhaust vent was necessary somewhere on the battlestation, rather than resort to saying "The Empire was Stupid"

Brian

[Batman]

Going directly below would have meant turning the Enterprise right-side up. Maybe it is difficult to do this in Trek,

Bullshit. Around which axis you turn is entirely irrelevant to how hard it is to turn in zero-g.

or the Enterprise thrusters were so badly damaged that they couldn't go right-side up.

The very same Enterprise (which was scheduled for decomission and is unlikely to have received any repairs during ST III, especially given the short time it was in spacedock) managed a 180 degree turnover after exiting spacedock. Damaged thrusters my ass.

<edit> As an aside, do you have an example of someone stealing a Type-I or a Type-II from a Federation guard and shooting him? I don't remember this ever happening, and if it did it would be Picard or one of the good guys stealing a disruptor, not a Type-II </edit>

You know, that may be the smartest thing you've done in this thread. Because as of right now I can't think of an incident whre the prisoner actually fired.
Nevertheless, in FC Picard assumed he'd be vaporized by the Type II Lily just stole from him. Good enough?

[brianeyci]

So you have a capability which adds nothing and explains something which is at best a tiny fraction of a degree shift, which can be explained by anything from a twitch to a shift in grip. Your theory sucks ass.

Alternatively, the assisted aiming would work better if the phaser was aimed better before pressing fire. Worf's initial aim was shit -- he wasn't even aiming the phaser downwards at the Ferengi, and the beam started going straight then had to track downwards. "Assisted-aiming" isn't autoaiming, and the Feds seemed to forget that.

To say We Don't Know, which alot of morons seem to fail to realize is a valid answer to a question.

So we don't know how phasers hit anything at all? If we don't know, eg. training wouldn't help, then don't know actually means luck. The odds are against phasers hitting anything at all, if axis variations were just manufacturing defects.

Brian

[SirNitram]

So you have a capability which adds nothing and explains something which is at best a tiny fraction of a degree shift, which can be explained by anything from a twitch to a shift in grip. Your theory sucks ass.

Alternatively, the assisted aiming would work better if the phaser was aimed better before pressing fire. Worf's initial aim was shit -- he wasn't even aiming the phaser downwards at the Ferengi, and the beam started going straight then had to track downwards. "Assisted-aiming" isn't autoaiming, and the Feds seemed to forget that.

Or it doesn't exist at all and Worf shifted his gripe. Mine is inherently simpler; a Klingon's ability to grip things differently is known, assisted-aiming is not.

To say We Don't Know, which alot of morons seem to fail to realize is a valid answer to a question.

So we don't know how phasers hit anything at all? If we don't know, eg. training wouldn't help, then don't know actually means luck. The odds are against phasers hitting anything at all, if axis variations were just manufacturing defects.

Brian

Are you trying to be particularly dense? We simply say we don't know why the beam twitched in the one case we have of it shifting without twiddling at the controls.

[brianeyci]

Nevertheless, in FC Picard assumed he'd be vaporized by the Type II Lily just stole from him. Good enough?

Assimilated Borg had comm badges underneath all that leather and cybernetic implants (when Picard took out the chip in the holodeck we see that). So the Type-II's would have to shoot Borg with comm badges, so maybe the Type-II was set to shoot anything.

Brian

[brianeyci]

Or it doesn't exist at all and Worf shifted his gripe. Mine is inherently simpler; a Klingon's ability to grip things differently is known, assisted-aiming is not.

Yes, but I am not just looking at that one instance, I am looking at the big picture. Phasers haven't been demonstrated to miss wide by 2 meters all the time, which is what would happen if there was a random 20 degree shift in axis against a target 5 meters away.

Are you trying to be particularly dense? We simply say we don't know why the beam twitched in the one case we have of it shifting without twiddling at the controls.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I am talking about the big picture. Worf's hand twitching is a good argument for that one instance. But it doesn't explain why changes in axis allow for the Feds to hit anything at all, given that even a small variation in axis would mean massive missing.

Brian

[brianeyci]

Bullshit. Around which axis you turn is entirely irrelevant to how hard it is to turn in zero-g.

Agreed.

The very same Enterprise (which was scheduled for decomission and is unlikely to have received any repairs during ST III, especially given the short time it was in spacedock) managed a 180 degree turnover after exiting spacedock. Damaged thrusters my ass.

The Enterprise crew herself could have repaired some of the thrusters before reaching spacedock. The thing you are trying to do is say "Kirk was stupid, because he didn't approach the Reliant from underneath or above". We should exhaust all other possible options before resorting to stupidity.

Brian

[Batman]

That would be stupid even by Fed/Starfleet standards given that the 'don't shoot Starfleet members' one makes way more sense.

Or, the default press two buttons could be "don't rely on assisted-aiming", therefore disabling the safeties. The Feds have to incorporate a way to turn off the assisted aiming, for specific situations.

What would those situations be? I can't think of a single one where the weapon correcting for my drawbacks is a problem.

They cast severe doubt on its viability. To do the variety of programming you assume is available takes a shitload of time. A more complex 'keyboard' on the phaser is clearly not an easy task to achieve (but IS doable, see modern cellphones), but how about voice control a la the 'Judge Dredd' movie?

Yes it does. But what is the alternative? Assume that every single phaser hit we see is pure luck? A variation of even ten degrees would make the phaser totally useless. We've seen phasers vary by more than ten degrees. Training would not make up for such a shoddy weapon, and the Feds should miss every single time. They don't.

We have seen phasers vary by more then ten degrees in different directions on the same phaser every once in a blue moon.
Phasers firing off-axis and people still hitting with them is easily explained by training. Proving that phasers regularly mutate how they fire off-axis is yours to prove.

Oh please. You're reaching and you know it.

Yes I am. But stupidity is always a last resort arugment, and if I reach rather than resort to stupidity, that is fine with me. For example, creating a large battlestation with a single exhaust vent that can destroy the battlestation if a proton torpedo goes into it is stupidity, but I would rather say that the exhaust vent was necessary somewhere on the battlestation, rather than resort to saying "The Empire was Stupid"

False anology.
1. That there was only that single exhaust vent is your contention.
2. How propable was it for a torpedo to achieve that? Wedge claimed it was impossible, Red Leader failed to do it, Luke only managed it only because he was guided by The Force. Discounting a possibility that is impropable like nobody's business is not stupidity, it's common sense.
Building an exhaust shaft that is an engineering necceccity and accepting a threat that is virtually nonexistent by doing so is OK. Kirk had no such excuse. Your reasons for Enterprise not cmming at Reliant from straight below were she presented the largest possible target are?

[Rihannsu Science Officer]

IIRC, in "The Hunted" Roga Danar shoots several Federation guards with a stolen hand phaser.

[brianeyci]

What would those situations be? I can't think of a single one where the weapon correcting for my drawbacks is a problem.

For people who prefer the old-fashioned way of aiming. Like my Guinan theory.

Phasers firing off-axis and people still hitting with them is easily explained by training. Proving that phasers regularly mutate how they fire off-axis is yours to prove.

I just showed a couple screenshots where the axis "mutates", in the same episode in a span of "less than twelve minutes" in Data's words.

Your reasons for Enterprise not cmming at Reliant from straight below were she presented the largest possible target are?

Busted thrusters. Good explaination, given that everything from transporters to turbolifts were damaged from Khan's phaser blasts, and from what we know of the Federation integrating everything from transporters to the holodeck, it is unlikely that the thrusters could have escaped some damage.

Brian