Forums of the Megaverse®

One of my players wanted to get optic package inserted into is helm. So I asked him if he has the optic systems skill under the communication to use it. They question if it was required to use it or not. Just seem like the main use for the skill to me. If you answer NO, please give me an example when you would use the optic systems skill.

I voted no, and for both personal and factual reasons.


Personally, requiring a person to have a skill that has both a low chance of success and a low increase per level just to use a piece of head-gear is dumb.

That and optics systems is for holographic and video-display usage, as well as understanding why or when you need polarized lenses, nightvision, etc...
But to require a skill to use this piece of equipment would be rendering the equipment useless - as there are easier ways to get a +1 bonus to strike.

Another way I can put this is you wouldn't require a character to have optics systems to use nightvision goggles, a telescope, sunglasses/shooting-glasses, or a thermo-scope, so why would you with a pair of goggles that does all these things?

Dog_O_War wrote:Another way I can put this is you wouldn't require a character to have optics systems to use nightvision goggles, a telescope, sunglasses/shooting-glasses, or a thermo-scope, so why would you with a pair of goggles that does all these things?

I have always required the skill to use these items save sunglasses. What is the point of a skill if you just allow using it without? I never made a person roll to use it under normal conditions including combat. Like driving a car you only would if the for some reason you needed to.

gadrin wrote:Not neccessarily, since the Skill provides "professional training" (if you like tricky wording)

If the guy just "wants to see in the dark" then he can probably figure out how to use the helmet/visor.

If he wants to know all the principles behind the technology, then he's probably going to need to have the skill.
For instance he might not know that IR can't see through clear glass, it becomes opaque. You can look on the
web and see IR photos of people with glasses and you can't see their eyes. So setup a bad-guy sitting behind a
clear shield and he may not see anything.

Same with IR and fog. Can't see squat thru the moisture. However Active IR (using a special IR beam or flashlight)
can be calibrated to eliminate the fog or rain or snow over a range.

It might also behoove him to avoid light sources while he's using light amplification (it'll blind him). There are probably others.

You might look at the cybernetics section or the bionics section and look at the visual upgrades for eye balls. I don't think it mentions that a guy that had regular eyes and got them replaced with IR or multi-optics or Nightvision had to go thru any training. My guess is that after a while he figures things out. But the actual science behind the device(s) is probably staggering.

YMMV...


>

I think I like this point. Basically, you don't need the skill to use the optics under normal conditions, but if anything tricky is thrown into the mix then you will fail unless you have the skill to check against. That seems consistent with the Palladium piloting skills at least.

So you say anyone can pilot any vech without the skill has long has they don't have to do anything with it. I always seen it has you need the skill you just don't have to roll enless their some reason to do so.

Mouser13 wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:Another way I can put this is you wouldn't require a character to have optics systems to use nightvision goggles, a telescope, sunglasses/shooting-glasses, or a thermo-scope, so why would you with a pair of goggles that does all these things?

I have always required the skill to use these items save sunglasses. What is the point of a skill if you just allow using it without? I never made a person roll to use it under normal conditions including combat. Like driving a car you only would if the for some reason you needed to.

To use nightvision?! It's a matter of turning it on.
As well, a telescope is a matter of looking through it, as it is a glorified magnifying glass.

The thermo-scope might take a trained eye to identify the shape of a humanoid heat-sig, but really this product is a matter of turning it on as well. Not one of these systems are complicated enough that you couldn't teach a savage to use them in a matter of hours. But to require a roll every time they are in use is ludicrous.

And yes, I do believe the optics systems skill is pointless. There are too many requirements for proper use of it, and generally you have to basically focus on using optics systems in order to make any proper use of the skill.

Mouser13 wrote:So you say anyone can pilot any vech without the skill has long has they don't have to do anything with it. I always seen it has you need the skill you just don't have to roll enless their some reason to do so.

So without optics systems, my gun-scope or nightvision goggles are pointless.

Right, got'cha

I see the skill as equivalent to the Field Armorer skill. It doesn't take extensive training to use these device's, but if you want to be able to maintain the system, then this is the skill for you.

Dustin Fireblade wrote:I see the skill as equivalent to the Field Armorer skill. It doesn't take extensive training to use these device's, but if you want to be able to maintain the system, then this is the skill for you.

This - I can agree with. Unfortunately the skill description doesn't support it. I really really hate this skill due to the utter vagueness of it.

I voted no as like was said before it doesnt take much skill to be able to slide a pair of goggles on and press a button to change IR/NV etc.. modes.

As for being able to figure out if thats a human or an alien or a big hot rock in the middle of a room thats not so much optics skill as maybe alien identification, or observation or perception type skill. or a matter of experience. I personally have not required the optics skill except for dealing with laser communications, flash semaphore, or other optically related communications stuff.

So unless you are communicating with your multi-optic goggles then no I would not require optics skill to use them.

and as for doing somethign without the skill anyhow I let people try it but still have to make rolls as even driving a car in a straight line in an empty open parking lot can be a challenge for some people (try teachign a teenager to drive a car when all they have driven before is a riding lawnmower or a playstation....)

I voted "no". Even if they can't read the owner's manual, they should figure it out fairly easily.

Uses of the skill would involve such things already mentioned - particularly, the science and physics of the devices. It might even include a little bit of repairs knowledge, too; it would depend upon what the character is actually attempting.

Dog_O_War wrote:And yes, I do believe the optics systems skill is pointless.

Yep....It's not all that hard to hand a pair of NVG's to a grunt freash from ITB and show him how to use them.

Dog_O_War wrote:There are too many requirements for proper use of it, and generally you have to basically focus on using optics systems in order to make any proper use of the skill.

If at all the Optic Systems skill should be used to repair/calibrate NVG's, thermal imagers, laser range finders and so forth.

Gypsy-Dancer wrote:I vote yes, but you only need the skill if things are trickier than "daily use" would be. Same with the sensor systems skill, most things have basic intructuions for what you use every day, you just need the skill for complicated things.
My husband runs it that the instructions with your equipment give you an 80% skill level on standard uses, but you need the skills for anything past the basic use.
I hope this helps.

Oh yeah! the instructions that come with the product I pulled off of a dead body!
Or bought used from the market in Old Bones!
Or still-in-box from the manufacturer's outlet, despite me not being able to read!

Or that the basic use of the product is; see in the dark; see heat sigs; see far away; reduce glare; give +1 to strike with ranged weapons by matching up the targetting sinqs - all pretty basic.


What I'm saying is that your post basically makes zero sense in the context of both Rifts and the item. The uses of it are all on/off funtions, and the majority of buyers can't read to glean that unnecessary and arbitrary 80% off of it.

Gypsy-Dancer wrote:I have seen the "dummy instructions" for some of the stuff soldiers use, and they have pictures so I could use them without training.
So you don't have to read.
They do this on purpose, because not all of America's allies read English.
He runs it that this other equipment has the same kind of intructions.
So, instead of making me look foolish... guess who is the fool now?
Keep your flames to yourself, dear.

Dog_O_War wrote:Oh yeah! the instructions that come with the product I pulled off of a dead body!
Or bought used from the market in Old Bones!

This is where the majority of player-owned equipment comes from. Bodies. Black Markets and "shops". These places likely don't have instructions, and you didn't even address the other part of my post.

The part where I stated that you wouldn't need instructions as all the functions are on/off. They are either affecting you or they're not.

Additionally; as hot as I run a response, I don't single people out to flame. I only point out the illogical and flawed ideas of a post. I may use unhealthy amounts of sarcasm, but this only shows through when I feel little thought or effort has been used in a post.

If you feel offended, then I appologise for everything, except the following.

Gypsy-Dancer wrote:So, instead of making me look foolish... guess who is the fool now?

You.
You didn't even bother to consider what I had written. I wrote my post with purpose and thought, but you didn't bother to think of the equipment, the funtions, who uses it, and where it is used. The functions are so simple that in your own post you contradict yourself (or rather, your husbands' rules contradict itself).

Dog_O_War wrote:

Gypsy-Dancer wrote:I vote yes, but you only need the skill if things are trickier than "daily use" would be.
My husband runs it that the instructions with your equipment give you an 80% skill level on standard uses, but you need the skills for anything past the basic use.

The uses of it are all on/off funtions

Gypsy-Dancer wrote:I have seen the "dummy instructions" for some of the stuff soldiers use, and they have pictures so I could use them without training.

You state that the equipment requires a skill roll for flipping a switch.
You then state that the equipment is so simple, that you can learn to use it from picto-grams, and that you basically need zero training to use it. So my question is; do you succeed only 80% of the time you try to turn on your kitchen light? I'm betting that it's 100% of the time and so pointless that it is automatic.

This is how easy it is to use the goggles. This is why I asked why there was a need for both a unnecessary and completely arbitrary skill use most people learned from the age of 2.

That you would call me a fool for this leap in logic is beyond me. That you would call me a fool for stating this (maybe not so clearly) throughout the thread is also beyond me.

Think of it like a digital camera.
You can take a photo with it, basically moving the slide and pushing the button. But you won't be able to use all of the features without some form of training/ getting used to it/ reading the directions.
So, yes, you can run its BASIC functions, but doing close-ups isn't going to be as easily figured out.
Now, if you're playing an illiterate hick, you might be able to figure out the BASICS of putting on a helmet, but will probably blind yourself with some of the features when you're just turning knobs and flipping switches.
And if the black market removes the instructions for operating equipment, they won't be selling much.
In fact, I'd say they probably print out instruction pamphlets to be user-friendly with whatever equipment they acquire to sell.
Even the CS soldiers probably keep their "dummy-pamphlets" most of the time.
Being overly sarcastic isn't needed, and tends to irritate people into flame wars.

if its the first time picking up a specific type of multi-optic helm, then Yes.
if its one you've been using for a while, the No.

[mini-rant]Why do half the polls here don't have an 'other' option.... its like the correct answer to most of them is somthing OTHER then the options they give.[/mini-rant]

jedi078 wrote:If at all the Optic Systems skill should be used to repair/calibrate NVG's, thermal imagers, laser range finders and so forth.

That's what I use it for.

The Beast wrote:

jedi078 wrote:If at all the Optic Systems skill should be used to repair/calibrate NVG's, thermal imagers, laser range finders and so forth.

That's what I use it for.

Do you use it for optical communications, too?

Natasha wrote:

The Beast wrote:

jedi078 wrote:If at all the Optic Systems skill should be used to repair/calibrate NVG's, thermal imagers, laser range finders and so forth.

That's what I use it for.

Do you use it for optical communications, too?

No, fiber optic systems fall under Laser Communications.

Yea, but what about the other optical comms out there?

Natasha wrote:Yea, but what about the other optical comms out there?

Like what?

The Beast wrote:

Natasha wrote:Yea, but what about the other optical comms out there?

Like what?

Optical telegraphs/semaphores
Morse code
Ship and aircraft lighting schemes
Free Space Optics

Natasha wrote:

The Beast wrote:

Natasha wrote:Yea, but what about the other optical comms out there?

Like what?

Optical telegraphs/semaphores
Morse code
Ship and aircraft lighting schemes
Free Space Optics

Morse code is covered under Radio: Basic.
Ship & aircaft lighting schemes... I must admit that this has never come up in any of my gaming sessions, and I've been playing since '89. If I ever felt the need to have a player roll on this, I likely would have made them roll under the appropriate navigation skill and not Optic Systems. The reason for this being that the Veritech Fighter Pilot OCC from Robotech can only select radio communications skills.
I don't know what Free Space Optics are.
Semaphores could be covered by Sign Language (the military part of it). Or it could be covered by Radio: Basic (like Morse Code is). Or perhaps the Cryptography skill (though I doubt it). The only setting I could see this being used in is PFRPG and it has no skill covering it, so I honestly don't know what to use for it. Looking at the Optic Systems skill, everything listed under the skill has some sort of lense built into it, so I personally wouldn't use this skill for semaphores.

As I mentioned earlier, it's the science/technical knowledge that goes under Optic systems, but in a conversation it came up today that maybe the skill could be extended; the point being made was that you don't have to be a navigator, pilot, boat captain, intelligence officer, or a radio operator to know these specific things about those broader topics. Furthermore, as they involved light as the transmission media, put them under Optic systems. As far as knowing which way a plane is flying based on its exterior lights generally shouldn't require a skill roll, but it would require the knowledge that the skill imparts. So I was curious and asked tangential question. I kinda like the idea, but haven't given it a lot of thought.

Free Space Optics would definitely fit, however.
http://www.freespaceoptics.org/freespac ... efault.cfm

Yea, finding the balance is difficult. It's borderline micromanagement, and I'm not fond of that whatsoever. I've already decided that probably should be - if not already - a skill called Signals, which includes all these sorts of non-verbal communications systems, except Sign Language. But other skills like Streetwise and Intelligence might know some of the sign languages of gangs and what-not.

You still have said what free space optics are...

The Beast wrote:You still have said what free space optics are...

I provided a link that explains FSO (free space optics).
In there it says:

FSO is a line-of-sight technology that uses invisible beams of light to provide optical bandwidth connections that can send and receive voice, video, and data information.

My bad. I thought that was a sig line so I ignored it.

And now upon reading it, I''d have any player wantint to use such a system roll on both Optic Sytems and Laser Communications during setup. Using it once it's been setup though should at most require Radio: Basic.

I play it this way: anyone can use a piece of tech if it makes sense for their OCC. However, people with skills can more uses out of their tech.

So if you had Optic Systems, I would let you use your Multi-Optic helm to do cool stuff that someone without the skill would have a hard time achieving.

No reason to penalize the player for being unable to use a tech toy he bought and there is no reason not to reward the creative skill use of the player who spent the slot for the skill.

Honestly NVG's (night vission gogles) are easy to use unless your a complete idiot. The same should be said for any other optics system. But just because you can see dosent mean your used to moving around while looking through it. We are not used to those wavelengthes of sight and things might seem a bit off. Distance perceptions, shading, and objects may be perceived as compleetely different. Some formilization with how to opperate would be useful to not have any penalities moving around.

Properly using optics systems such as visors, scopes, power armor optics, etc definatly uses the optics system skill. That said for many cases I'd just tack on extra actions like this:

using optics with skill, skill check successful: 0 actions
using optics with skill, skill check failed: 1 action as you adjusted it wrong
Using optics without skill, Optics are user friendly (basic scope, binoculars, multi optic helm): 3 actions
using optics without skill, Optics are complex (Telescope, advanced scope, advanced themals) Impossible

There is a degree of skill needed to quickly and efficiently use the various optic options available in rifts, and it takes a hell of allot more than a screwdriver and some cheap rounds to properly attach a scope to a weapon so yes penalize the **** out of players who want to use something that they are not trained for. That said, allot of optics can be used by anyone if they have enough time.

RUE 305

Provides expert training in the use of special optical enhancement equipment such as telescopic lenses, laser targeting, thermal imagers, passive night light intensifiers, infrared and ultraviolet systems, polarization, light filters, optical scanners, video and digital cameras, holograms and related devices.

RUE 264

The multi-optics helmet is a special optical enhancement system built into a protective helmet. It includes the following features:
1. Targeting Sight
2. Infrared Optics Systems
3. Telescopic Monocular Lens
4. Thermal-Imager.

It seems pretty clear that the MOH is exactly the kind of thing that the Optics skill was intended to cover.

Could you use one without a skill in it?
Sure, but not easily.
You'd have to default to attribute checks instead of skill checks when anything tricky happened, and since your IQ is probably going to be under 30, you'd be better off with the skill.
And a lack of familiarity with the equipment would probably require more skill checks to be made than for an unskilled person.
For example, somebody with the Optics skill would be familiar with the equipment, so they wouldn't need to make a check to turn any of the systems on. Somebody who had never used a MOH before would just be fumbling around fairly randomly, so they'd have to make an attribute check to try to figure things out.
Of course, if they have time to play around with it for a bit, they can probably figure it out on their own... to a point.

Going through the MOH capabilities:
1. Targeting Sight:
If it's a laser targeting system, then you'd need the skill in order to know how to use it properly (if only to calibrate the system to be accurate with your body and weapon).
If it's some sort of fancy visual overlay system, it might well require the skill in order to use it effectively at all.

2. Infrared Optics Systems:
Assuming that this is active infrared night vision, you might be able to turn it on without any skills, but you would lack some key information, such as the fact that the MOH is now flooding the area in front of you with infrared light- making you a shiny beacon for any creature that happens to have infrared vision. This is why the modern military doesn't use it much.
Also, it's a bit different from normal vision. Things aren't as clear, and without training you're going to have trouble telling exactly what's going on.

3. Telescopic Monocular Lens:
Adjusting the distance would probably take the skill (or require a check each time for the untrained).
Using while moving about would probably take the skill (or require a check for the untrained).

4. Thermal-Imager:
Straight "Predator-vision" type thermal imaging is pretty funky. Without training, you might be walking into things that are the same temperature as the background, or you might end up trying to dodge gusts of warm air. Everything looks pretty trippy, so I think there would be all kinds of problems for an untrained person trying to walk around (using thermal-imaging) in any adventure type setting, and especially in combat.


The thing is, Palladium needs better descriptions of each kind of optic system.
Looking around for examples of Infrared Vision, I found some FLIR footage on YouTube and places, but I can't tell if FLIR would be Palladium's "Infrared Optics System" or "Thermal Imaging."
Either way, it has some of the same problems that I've mentioned above.

For example, watch this video:
Link
After watching the video, ask yourself these questions:

Killer Cyborg wrote:The thing is, Palladium needs better descriptions of each kind of optic system.
Looking around for examples of Infrared Vision, I found some FLIR footage on YouTube and places, but I can't tell if FLIR would be Palladium's "Infrared Optics System" or "Thermal Imaging."
Either way, it has some of the same problems that I've mentioned above.

For example, watch this video:
Link
After watching the video, ask yourself these questions:

Spoiler:

-Did YOU see the shotgun the fugitive was carrying? I didn't, but the trained cop with the FLIR camera knew what was going on.
-Could you tell what happened when the guy blew his head off? Again, I couldn't. I figured the gun went off, and could have guessed what happened after moving around and getting a better view, but the guy with training didn't need to do that.
-Could you tell which white outlines were cops, and which were fugitives? Would you trust an untrained person on your team not to kill you with friendly fire if they were using FLIR?
I wouldn't, except in special circumstances (like all our guys are in a bunker looking out, or all of our guys have extremely unique silhouettes).

Those questions were pre-answered though.


I mean hell; the average 13year-old kid has looked through simulated night-vision dozens of times just playing COD-4 than the average 30 year-old has. The training is minor; use it a couple of times and you're done. Shape and movement are everything when using these equipment pieces though, as a person that gets spun around and even a vet. will require some time to get re-aquianted with what's what.

This skill (optics systems) is just a bad 80's remnant. I'm sure it does have its uses, but requiring training for something a 13 year-old kid can pick up playing a videogame is ludicrous.

Dog_O_War wrote:

Spoiler:

The police get a call about an armed(he's got a shotgun) suspect, and begin to track the suspect's vehicle. They know that the police are chasing him, so identifying his vehicle is easy. Seeing that he threw an object (looked like a block of wood or something - but pre-identified as a shotgun), the officer assumed (correctly, as he'd done this dozens of times) that he'd both threw into and picked it up in that backyard (I saw him both throw and pick it up). I didn't see any other warm shapes near or approach him while in the backyard, so when the flash went off, I knew he'd shot the gun. When I saw large bits, I knew it was "parts" of him, as I'd seen another video of a couple of military guys with a machinegun fire and kill three insurgents in Iraq before. That this guy had done it a dozen times has as much to do with knowing the thermals as any training does. This is the fourth FLIR video I've seen, and I knew who was who. I'm not military, and have never personally handled these systems before. It really doesn't take a precisely trained vet. to know what's going on with these systems.

And if you hadn't seen similar videos?
I think trained people are going to have an edge in interpreting what they're looking at.

Granted, a lot of training is simply doing something, so an untrained character who uses something as clear as FLIR should be able to start picking things out better the more he uses it.

I mean hell; the average 13year-old kid has looked through simulated night-vision dozens of times just playing COD-4 than the average 30 year-old has. The training is minor; use it a couple of times and you're done. Shape and movement are everything when using these equipment pieces though, as a person that gets spun around and even a vet. will require some time to get re-aquianted with what's what.

This skill (optics systems) is just a bad 80's remnant. I'm sure it does have its uses, but requiring training for something a 13 year-old kid can pick up playing a videogame is ludicrous.

[/quote]

I think it's kind of silly to equate a 13 year-old playing a video game to actually using the real gear in person.
13 year-olds get to be snipers and Rockstars too, but I don't think they've exactly earned a proficiency.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
I think it's kind of silly to equate a 13 year-old playing a video game to actually using the real gear in person.
13 year-olds get to be snipers and Rockstars too, but I don't think they've exactly earned a proficiency.

I dunno. The US military is continually working on and improving computer training systems that are apparently a lot like video games, in a effort to reduce the amount of training time needed.

Dustin Fireblade wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:
I think it's kind of silly to equate a 13 year-old playing a video game to actually using the real gear in person.
13 year-olds get to be snipers and Rockstars too, but I don't think they've exactly earned a proficiency.

I dunno. The US military is continually working on and improving computer training systems that are apparently a lot like video games, in a effort to reduce the amount of training time needed.

America's Army, anyone?

Dustin Fireblade wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:
I think it's kind of silly to equate a 13 year-old playing a video game to actually using the real gear in person.
13 year-olds get to be snipers and Rockstars too, but I don't think they've exactly earned a proficiency.

I dunno. The US military is continually working on and improving computer training systems that are apparently a lot like video games, in a effort to reduce the amount of training time needed.

Something that I approve of, btw.

But the net result of success in that area is just that the video games will be actual training.
It doesn't mean that you can operate such stuff without the appropriate skill; it just means that if you play enough of the right video games, you can earn the necessary skill.

This was actually one of the themes in The Macross Saga, actually. The humans had video games designed to simulate veritech combat, so their pilots ended up with superb skills because they had effectively been piloting since they were kids.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Something that I approve of, btw.

But the net result of success in that area is just that the video games will be actual training.
It doesn't mean that you can operate such stuff without the appropriate skill; it just means that if you play enough of the right video games, you can earn the necessary skill.

This was actually one of the themes in The Macross Saga, actually. The humans had video games designed to simulate veritech combat, so their pilots ended up with superb skills because they had effectively been piloting since they were kids.

Yes, but this does not equate to the problem of, "Does it really require a skill-check to use the night-vision on my multi-optics band"?

See, because one funtion is tied to a piece of technology, and that technology could require a roll for some of its more "advanced" uses, people lump it into a "the technology requires a roll for all uses" category.

While it might require a check to get an active zoom going for a heated battle, it really is as simple as I had described to use Nightvision goggles. The training required is so minor that it might as well be a WP (as in "automatic"). There is really is no reason to impose a 35% success rate (or whatever the percentage) for something that simple.

Dog_O_War wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:Something that I approve of, btw.

But the net result of success in that area is just that the video games will be actual training.
It doesn't mean that you can operate such stuff without the appropriate skill; it just means that if you play enough of the right video games, you can earn the necessary skill.

This was actually one of the themes in The Macross Saga, actually. The humans had video games designed to simulate veritech combat, so their pilots ended up with superb skills because they had effectively been piloting since they were kids.

Yes, but this does not equate to the problem of, "Does it really require a skill-check to use the night-vision on my multi-optics band"?

See, because one funtion is tied to a piece of technology, and that technology could require a roll for some of its more "advanced" uses, people lump it into a "the technology requires a roll for all uses" category.

While it might require a check to get an active zoom going for a heated battle, it really is as simple as I had described to use Nightvision goggles. The training required is so minor that it might as well be a WP (as in "automatic"). There is really is no reason to impose a 35% success rate (or whatever the percentage) for something that simple.

For a person trained in the use of the device, the 35% check would only be needed under unusually tricky circumstances; the rest of the time success would be automatic.
Or a person untrained in the device, I'd say that anything they did that required fiddling with controls or used specialized knowledge (correctly interpreting thermal imaging) would require a check, defaulting to IQ.

So if nightvision goggles are already on, somebody unfamiliar and untrained with the technology could pick them up and use them.
But they wouldn't know (and would be unlikely to guess) that any bright lights are going to knock out their vision completely for a while (if they're using standard night vision), and they might have a bit more trouble detecting tricky targets.
If the goggles are off, then the person should have to make an IQ check to turn them on (Unless they have been shown or told how, or the device is turned on by a simple switch and there are no other controls present).
If the goggles need any sort of adjustment to compensate for light intensity or other circumstances, another IQ check would be required.

Dog_O_War wrote:

Dustin Fireblade wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:
I think it's kind of silly to equate a 13 year-old playing a video game to actually using the real gear in person.
13 year-olds get to be snipers and Rockstars too, but I don't think they've exactly earned a proficiency.

I dunno. The US military is continually working on and improving computer training systems that are apparently a lot like video games, in a effort to reduce the amount of training time needed.

America's Army, anyone?

I'm soirry did you just compare sitting at a keyboard and hitting keys to being in the military?

rat_bastard wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:

Dustin Fireblade wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:
I think it's kind of silly to equate a 13 year-old playing a video game to actually using the real gear in person.
13 year-olds get to be snipers and Rockstars too, but I don't think they've exactly earned a proficiency.

I dunno. The US military is continually working on and improving computer training systems that are apparently a lot like video games, in a effort to reduce the amount of training time needed.

America's Army, anyone?

I'm soirry did you just compare sitting at a keyboard and hitting keys to being in the military?

If that's all it takes, I'm a pornstar!

Being in the U.S. Navy is like hitting the keyboard with my head.

But seriously, I voted 'no'.
With time for trial and error, you could flip it on and switch some functions.
You may end up hitting the wrong buttons though, so you would need the skill to recalibrate the settings, levels or focus.
Using it without the skill is possible but it's a crapshoot.

rat_bastard wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:

Dustin Fireblade wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:
I think it's kind of silly to equate a 13 year-old playing a video game to actually using the real gear in person.
13 year-olds get to be snipers and Rockstars too, but I don't think they've exactly earned a proficiency.

I dunno. The US military is continually working on and improving computer training systems that are apparently a lot like video games, in a effort to reduce the amount of training time needed.

America's Army, anyone?

I'm soirry did you just compare sitting at a keyboard and hitting keys to being in the military?

I'm sorry, did someone say that a field manual must be written in a book provided by your DI instead of an interacitve computer simulation so that a person can better get a grasp on what a situation might likely entail?

Or did someone just say that seeing through nightvision on a video-screen is so completely and radically different from real life that the two have nothing to do with each-other, and thus the example provided are completely useless as they don't simulate anything?

Or better yet, did someone just say that the US army - who has pushed computer simulation on top of field exercise to the point that they had a game created (America's Army), doesn't use these tools?

Nemo235 wrote:

rat_bastard wrote:America's Army, anyone?

I'm soirry did you just compare sitting at a keyboard and hitting keys to being in the military?

If that's all it takes, I'm a pornstar![/quote]



Awesome.