You're right of course, but what would TNG be without those hokey two-handed punches and Kirk-fu type "action" scenes
Starfleet hand to hand combat.
- Thread starter The_Baroness
- Start date
You're right of course, but what would TNG be without those hokey two-handed punches and Kirk-fu type "action" scenes
Better?
Yeah, well, probably, but... better in a good way? I don't think so, if you catch my driftYou're right of course, but what would TNG be without those hokey two-handed punches and Kirk-fu type "action" scenes
Better?
Something to remember, Major Hayes and the MACOs are not part of Starfleet, they are a seperate organization. Or so they were during Enterprise. We don't really know what happened to the MACOs after the Federation was founded.
In a modern military, a knife is more useful as a field/survival tool than as a regular weapon. I imagine the same applies to Starfleet.
What I would pack as a field kit for away teams:
-Phaser (Type II)
-Tricorder
-Personal Forcefield
-Pattern Enhancer
-Field Knife
-Medkit (Basic Version)
-Water Rations
-Protective eyewear
Not counting situational equipment, like heavy/specialized weapons, environmental protection gear, etc.
What I would pack as a field kit for away teams:
-Phaser (Type II)
-Tricorder
-Personal Forcefield
-Pattern Enhancer
-Field Knife
-Medkit (Basic Version)
-Water Rations
-Protective eyewear
Not counting situational equipment, like heavy/specialized weapons, environmental protection gear, etc.
Consider the fight style and skill of Stargate Atlantis's Ronon Dex (Jason Momoa ), now paste that onto Worf.
Maybe not. We know from various references that Klingons love a good fight, but that doesn't mean they're particularly good at it. It's sort of like the legions of gangsta rappers who compose entire albums about shooting up police stations, only to shit their pants at the first chirp of a siren.
Unless you mean what Bob Villa does for a living, fencing really is a martial art. It's a fighting style that requires one to use technique, training, and codified practices.
I didn't say that, you misquoted meConsider the fight style and skill of Stargate Atlantis's Ronon Dex (Jason Momoa ), now paste that onto Worf.
(That was JarrodRussel's post, not mine
)
Exactly. Sure, a gun (or phaser, in this case) is generally the superior weapon, but we have seen characters in Trek find themselves in dangerous situations without access to their normal technology. Plus, as has been mentioned a few times in this thread, the capabilities of a knife as a tool are probably more significant than any potential combat applications.
It was a bit "Hollywood", but my main point was that it was LEAGUES ahead of most melee combat sequences on the shows.
What? How in the world not?
Agreed here. Hand-to-hand combat is one of the few areas where I would say TOS was actually better than TNG or DS9.
While I don't agree with the idea myself, the idea that Starfleet security officers are essentially MPs is not without merit... until the Dominion War. It's pretty obvious that despite their lack of combat skill, they are the main (and pretty much only) force capable of fighting the war (and the only one expected to do so). Of course, this is balanced by the fact that NO ONE has any combat skills, really. Sure, Starfleet officers seem to be pretty bad at close combat... but Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, Jem'Hadar, etc etc., all suck too, so no one has the upper hand!
But humor aside, as I said in my previous post, I tend to go with explanation #2: if Trek were reality, we wouldn't have to explain why the hand-to-hand was so pathetic, because it wouldn't be so pathetic in the first place.
Hi, first post on here (sorry for necroposting a bit too ).
Anyway IMHO a useful part of this debate is being missed out on with the "no need for knives when there are phasers about" line of reasoning.
Why do military's now, still carry out bayonet drills?
Why do they also teach combatives/H2H combat systems today.
Krav maga, the USMC's MCMAP, etc.
The reason is partially to train the soldier/marine/Sailor/Airman in those skills to enhance their fighting ability and conditioning for combat.
But an equally important reason is condition the mind for combat. To get them into the mindset that they may have to kill someone at close quarters with hand, foot, knife, shovel what ever. It gives them confidence in their own abilities and instills (for want of a better term) a sense of the warrior (if that is not too cheesy)
You give a guy a rifle and teach him to shoot that's good, He'll plink away all day. you give him the skills and will to win while locked up with someone in H2H....that's great.
Agreed with everyone on the "two handed axe chop" and Kirks drop kick....oh and the palm strikes that everyone used but especially Worf.
Should have opened the cheque book and hired a decent fight coordinator.
Anyway IMHO a useful part of this debate is being missed out on with the "no need for knives when there are phasers about" line of reasoning.
Why do military's now, still carry out bayonet drills?
Why do they also teach combatives/H2H combat systems today.
Krav maga, the USMC's MCMAP, etc.
The reason is partially to train the soldier/marine/Sailor/Airman in those skills to enhance their fighting ability and conditioning for combat.
But an equally important reason is condition the mind for combat. To get them into the mindset that they may have to kill someone at close quarters with hand, foot, knife, shovel what ever. It gives them confidence in their own abilities and instills (for want of a better term) a sense of the warrior (if that is not too cheesy)
You give a guy a rifle and teach him to shoot that's good, He'll plink away all day. you give him the skills and will to win while locked up with someone in H2H....that's great.
Agreed with everyone on the "two handed axe chop" and Kirks drop kick....oh and the palm strikes that everyone used but especially Worf.
Should have opened the cheque book and hired a decent fight coordinator.
Well, everybody. Piloting a combat vessel is a martial art by the literal definition: it requires a lot of skill and is used for war.
OTOH, hitting somebody with one's fist is a martial art, too. Just not high art. But elitism is irrelevant; only survival and mission success count.
Why would a knife be superior to a phaser? The argument "they can lose their phaser" carries no weight, because it's even easier to lose one's knife (that is, its loss will more probably go unnoticed). And a phaser can do all the things a knife can, and probably will run out of batteries later than a knife gets dulled or broken by use. The only known case of a phaser battery running out in combat involved four people slaughtering a whole division of troops!
The concept of the enemy jamming the phaser is rather trite: if the enemy possesses the technology to depower a phaser despite Starfleet's best efforts to jam-proof said weapon, then the enemy by definition possesses the technology to turn off Worf's heart and shut down Kira's lungs. Whether those heroes then carry a knife or not is completely irrelevant.
However, it would be nice for them to carry some sort of armor. Of course, armor is one of the most tech-dependent things in the history of warfare: minor changes in the weaponry used can turn today's best defense asset into a severe defense liability overnight. One might also consider that humans fight best without any sort of armor whatsoever, because that's the way the human body is built; armor may add to defense, but it always reduces one's offensive fighting potential. Unless it is powered armor - but nobody knows yet how and whether that scifi classic will work. It's quite plausible that in the Star Trek universe, powered armor was experimented on, and then discarded as useless in the late 21st century.
Perhaps it's also technologically impossible to create personal shields that can block phasers. In that case, it is an open question whether the troops would choose to wear shields that only block shrapnel and knives. This sounds sensible at first, but if said shield glows like a beacon on the enemy sights, then it might be the least sensible thing ever in the history of warfare!
Timo Saloniemi
OTOH, hitting somebody with one's fist is a martial art, too. Just not high art. But elitism is irrelevant; only survival and mission success count.
Why would a knife be superior to a phaser? The argument "they can lose their phaser" carries no weight, because it's even easier to lose one's knife (that is, its loss will more probably go unnoticed). And a phaser can do all the things a knife can, and probably will run out of batteries later than a knife gets dulled or broken by use. The only known case of a phaser battery running out in combat involved four people slaughtering a whole division of troops!
The concept of the enemy jamming the phaser is rather trite: if the enemy possesses the technology to depower a phaser despite Starfleet's best efforts to jam-proof said weapon, then the enemy by definition possesses the technology to turn off Worf's heart and shut down Kira's lungs. Whether those heroes then carry a knife or not is completely irrelevant.
However, it would be nice for them to carry some sort of armor. Of course, armor is one of the most tech-dependent things in the history of warfare: minor changes in the weaponry used can turn today's best defense asset into a severe defense liability overnight. One might also consider that humans fight best without any sort of armor whatsoever, because that's the way the human body is built; armor may add to defense, but it always reduces one's offensive fighting potential. Unless it is powered armor - but nobody knows yet how and whether that scifi classic will work. It's quite plausible that in the Star Trek universe, powered armor was experimented on, and then discarded as useless in the late 21st century.
Perhaps it's also technologically impossible to create personal shields that can block phasers. In that case, it is an open question whether the troops would choose to wear shields that only block shrapnel and knives. This sounds sensible at first, but if said shield glows like a beacon on the enemy sights, then it might be the least sensible thing ever in the history of warfare!
Timo Saloniemi
Knife use in Starfleet:
In "Macrocosm" when Janeway is kitting herself out for her fight against the giant bugs, she slaps a knife onto her hip and uses it near the end of the episode.
Hand-to-Hand Combat:
None of the fight sequences really stick in my head, aside from the fight in Ops in "Way of the Warrior" (especially Kira getting stabbed in the side and yet still able to kick ass), Kira (again) heavily pregnant beating up three security guards, and then Troi smacking Jeb over the head with a PADD (merely for the sheer comedy value).
It would make sense that all Starfleet personnel, regardless of their position, would be trained to defend themselves. Why they don't have personal forcefield generators and body armour is a mystery (the latter was used in the TOS films by security goons, as for the former, Worf made one out of a combadge in "A Fistfull of Data's", so why it couldn't be developed for widespread use baffles me).
In "Macrocosm" when Janeway is kitting herself out for her fight against the giant bugs, she slaps a knife onto her hip and uses it near the end of the episode.
Hand-to-Hand Combat:
None of the fight sequences really stick in my head, aside from the fight in Ops in "Way of the Warrior" (especially Kira getting stabbed in the side and yet still able to kick ass), Kira (again) heavily pregnant beating up three security guards, and then Troi smacking Jeb over the head with a PADD (merely for the sheer comedy value).
It would make sense that all Starfleet personnel, regardless of their position, would be trained to defend themselves. Why they don't have personal forcefield generators and body armour is a mystery (the latter was used in the TOS films by security goons, as for the former, Worf made one out of a combadge in "A Fistfull of Data's", so why it couldn't be developed for widespread use baffles me).
As said, we have never seen a shield like that stop the "regular" weapons of Star Trek (except of course in the hands of advanced aliens, and with the explicit purpose of establishing those aliens as advanced). So all we need is a reason why such a shield would be tactically inconvenient for the wearer, thus negating its ability to defend against rarely encountered bullets or shrapnel.
The shield can't be "too clumsy to carry", because we've seen our heroes carry relatively bulky items such as the life support belts of TAS (useless against weapons, mind you).
It probably won't be "too power-consuming", either, because our heroes regularly carry sources of great power with them, and forcefields are often seen being erected by portable devices that aren't (visibly) hooked to external power sources.
Could it be a "health risk"? We've never heard of shields being harmful, and again we saw shield tech worn skintight in TAS. But it's at least intuitively possible that combining skintightness and high energy would kill the wearer faster than any bullet would. A bit unlikely, though, and certainly not indicated by onscreen evidence yet. Unless we count those instances where a prisoner hurls himself against the forcefield of a holding cell and is obviously hurt a lot.
IMHO the second best bet is "too clumsy to use". If you're surrounded by a forcefield bubble, you probably can't interact with your surroundings much. Even getting through a doorway might be a struggle. But then again, the TAS life support fields allowed quite a bit of interaction.
So my prime bet remains "shines like a beacon". You really, really don't want to use a medieval suit of armor today, even when it's likely to be knife-proof and certainly is fist-proof (and remember, we already decided we don't expect the armor to survive the "regular" weapons of the day, in this case bullets). The horrid noise eliminates any chance of stealth, and your own senses are greatly limited by it, too. An energetic forcefield might have the exact same shortcomings, not merely through the visible glow that we see adjoining all impacts with forcefields (say, when you wallow through foliage), but through the powerful signals the enemy's ubiquitous tricorder can sense.
You might still wear that suit of medieval armor if the enemy didn't have guns. And you might wear a bullet-stopping forcefield despite the glow if it were effective against phasers. But once phasers enter the picture (and they basically always do), the shield could become much worse than useless, serving solely as a targeting aid for the enemy.
Timo Saloniemi
The shield can't be "too clumsy to carry", because we've seen our heroes carry relatively bulky items such as the life support belts of TAS (useless against weapons, mind you).
It probably won't be "too power-consuming", either, because our heroes regularly carry sources of great power with them, and forcefields are often seen being erected by portable devices that aren't (visibly) hooked to external power sources.
Could it be a "health risk"? We've never heard of shields being harmful, and again we saw shield tech worn skintight in TAS. But it's at least intuitively possible that combining skintightness and high energy would kill the wearer faster than any bullet would. A bit unlikely, though, and certainly not indicated by onscreen evidence yet. Unless we count those instances where a prisoner hurls himself against the forcefield of a holding cell and is obviously hurt a lot.
IMHO the second best bet is "too clumsy to use". If you're surrounded by a forcefield bubble, you probably can't interact with your surroundings much. Even getting through a doorway might be a struggle. But then again, the TAS life support fields allowed quite a bit of interaction.
So my prime bet remains "shines like a beacon". You really, really don't want to use a medieval suit of armor today, even when it's likely to be knife-proof and certainly is fist-proof (and remember, we already decided we don't expect the armor to survive the "regular" weapons of the day, in this case bullets). The horrid noise eliminates any chance of stealth, and your own senses are greatly limited by it, too. An energetic forcefield might have the exact same shortcomings, not merely through the visible glow that we see adjoining all impacts with forcefields (say, when you wallow through foliage), but through the powerful signals the enemy's ubiquitous tricorder can sense.
You might still wear that suit of medieval armor if the enemy didn't have guns. And you might wear a bullet-stopping forcefield despite the glow if it were effective against phasers. But once phasers enter the picture (and they basically always do), the shield could become much worse than useless, serving solely as a targeting aid for the enemy.
Timo Saloniemi
Shields/forcefields are usually invisible unless acted upon in Trek. Sure, there's usually a glowy emitter it, but sometimes there isn't.
Also, protective shields needn't be personal gear. I could see a deployable small-scale theater shield being utilized for squad protection.
Also, protective shields needn't be personal gear. I could see a deployable small-scale theater shield being utilized for squad protection.
A platoon shield would be perfectly compatible with canon, if we encumber it with one dramatic limitation: that it cannot be mobile.
A mobile shield would be acted upon, by impacts with terrain. After all, we have seen all other types of impact generate the characteristic visual effect, even though we admittedly have never seen a mobile shield interact with terrain.
Also, a mobile shield of platoon size would be like a tank that is fifty meters wide. It would be constantly hitting rocks and trees as the platoon and its generator moved, and it's anybody's guess whether it would fell those trees or get stuck in them. Certainly a field that malleably "amoebaed" its way through the forest would be unlikely to resist bullets or shrapnel. And even a field that temporarily hardened against bullet impacts while allowing for the softer bumps with trees would be a great hindrance to troop movement.
All this on top of the fact that we have never seen a platoon huddle behind a mobile shield. Now, the fact that we have rarely seen a platoon, period (because it's damn expensive to get fifty extras for a movie scene, let alone an episode), allows us to argue that the non-mobile shield might still exist. And indeed the TNG Tech Manual claims that it does. But the only place we'd have seen it in action would be AR-558, and that particular unit was low on materiel anyway and could have lost its shield generator (or generators, if the unit originally was 150 people and thus probably at least 3-4 platoons strong).
Personal shields no doubt do exist as well - in addition to Worf's little technology demonstration in "A Fistful of Datas", we saw them in TAS and heard them mentioned in "Homefront"/"Paradise Lost". But everything we've seen or heard (and not seen and not heard) indicates that such shields are not combat gear - that they are at best riot gear, and probably just rudimentary environmental protection for the most part.
Timo Saloniemi
A mobile shield would be acted upon, by impacts with terrain. After all, we have seen all other types of impact generate the characteristic visual effect, even though we admittedly have never seen a mobile shield interact with terrain.
Also, a mobile shield of platoon size would be like a tank that is fifty meters wide. It would be constantly hitting rocks and trees as the platoon and its generator moved, and it's anybody's guess whether it would fell those trees or get stuck in them. Certainly a field that malleably "amoebaed" its way through the forest would be unlikely to resist bullets or shrapnel. And even a field that temporarily hardened against bullet impacts while allowing for the softer bumps with trees would be a great hindrance to troop movement.
All this on top of the fact that we have never seen a platoon huddle behind a mobile shield. Now, the fact that we have rarely seen a platoon, period (because it's damn expensive to get fifty extras for a movie scene, let alone an episode), allows us to argue that the non-mobile shield might still exist. And indeed the TNG Tech Manual claims that it does. But the only place we'd have seen it in action would be AR-558, and that particular unit was low on materiel anyway and could have lost its shield generator (or generators, if the unit originally was 150 people and thus probably at least 3-4 platoons strong).
Personal shields no doubt do exist as well - in addition to Worf's little technology demonstration in "A Fistful of Datas", we saw them in TAS and heard them mentioned in "Homefront"/"Paradise Lost". But everything we've seen or heard (and not seen and not heard) indicates that such shields are not combat gear - that they are at best riot gear, and probably just rudimentary environmental protection for the most part.
Timo Saloniemi
IIIRC, one of the TNG eps (I think it was Chain of Command) had a portable single-direction forcefield, and there was a similar unit in Insurrection. We've also seen how personal shields work in Trek. Whenever a bad guy's got a magic personal forcefield, he isn't bouncing around the walls.
A shield wouldn't need to be bubble-shaped either. We've seen forcefields of many different shapes and makes in Trek - cylinder-shaped, dome-shaped, etc. Anything you can carry on your person is mobile.
We've really only seen Starfleet operations from a starship-centric point of view. This is like saying Marines don't have any kind of body armor just because the MPs on a Navy ship don't. Sure, it's not proof of it, but it does not utterly rule out the possibility beyond a shadow of a doubt.
A shield wouldn't need to be bubble-shaped either. We've seen forcefields of many different shapes and makes in Trek - cylinder-shaped, dome-shaped, etc. Anything you can carry on your person is mobile.
We've really only seen Starfleet operations from a starship-centric point of view. This is like saying Marines don't have any kind of body armor just because the MPs on a Navy ship don't. Sure, it's not proof of it, but it does not utterly rule out the possibility beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Similar threads
