For Rhys he set an Academy record for most time in the simulation. Ten and a half hour ship battle before his ship and the Maru itself were destroyed by the last two bird of preys. He did not win but he set an endurance marker for the Academy.
Not even sure if you are sarcastic right now.
The situation is NOT solvable. If it were it would be obsolete.
And thread.... what is that supposed to proof? We are dealing with fiction and fictional tech, fan fantasies do not proof anything.
A test designed in Kirk's time with TOS tech applied to 2409? That's not obsolete? :P
As for proof, what I posted at least was not a 'fan fantasy' like, for instance, my Starship Captain Archi T. Dux (my main character - huzzah!!!1!!1) heroically saving the day would be: it was a systematic approach to a problem, intended to adapt to the few changes that could reasonably occur within said problem and come out ahead at the end, relying on as few variables as possible, all while following the rules of the Star Trek universe. Basically, a canonically palatable 'solution.'
Which brings up this: if a solution is framed in such a 'fan fantasy' as you say, and is based on sound logic that follows the rules of the fictional universe, does the 'fan fantasy'-ness of it make it any less of a solution?
I would think it would have to depend of the race we're dealing with. I think I would go with the idea of full diplomacy, really. I want to show that we're not gun-toting nutcases. At the same time, I'd like to know if what we're doing isn't suicide even more than it is: is the crew of the Maru dead or alive? What's the cargo? Who's part of the crew? A lot of things could change the situation.
Guess what: It's been over a century in-universe since Kirk. How many cadets do you think have passed through SFA since then?
The Maru scenario is a computer program, and the one thing a programmer cannot account for is sapients' ingenuity (or stupidity, as various tech support issues I've seen demonstrate). I don't have a problem with believing that over the course of that century, others have managed to find strategies the Maru's dev team didn't consider. To use the case of Nog, who the hell would have expected a Ferengi to turn up in a Starfleet cadet uniform in the first place? I just figure that the team congratulates them on their innovation and then bangs out a patch to stop anybody else from trying it.
I'm sorry if you think it takes away some of the magic of the vaunted Kirk to have others duplicate his achievement through creative thinking. No, actually, I'm not sorry. Go cry in a corner at the death of the franchise if you want; the rest of us will be having fun over here.
Amen to that. Also, IIRC, at some point in time, it became less about how a captain responds to a scenario in which there is no positive outcome, and more about coming up with unorthodox solutions to a scenario where standard tactics just won't cut it. I like to think you're expected to play it straight the first time around, get your humbling, then take it again with the intent of being a tricky *******.
Likely only canon to the novels, but who cares, right?
STO in a shellnut. "I always hope for the best. Experience, unfortunately, has taught me to expect the worst."
-Elim Garak
I'm of the mind that the Kobayashi Maru scenario may show much greater variability as to what the actual scenario IS, for each cadet, to keep them from recognizing right away that they are in the no-win.
My Cardassian toon, Admiral Berat, did not take the Kobayashi Maru, since he was an exchange officer. Likely in his "cadet" days (or whatever the Cardassian equivalent of a cadet is), the test he was subjected to would have been more along the lines of trying to find out how much you would sacrifice for the state and if you were politically acceptable. (This was pre-Dominion-War.) He is quick to point out that the method has changed post-war, though the principle of "how much personal sacrifice can you handle" is still a part of it.
I SO cannot wait for an LC opportunity to show the Kobayashi Maru test that my Devidian was subjected to. "Unpleasant" is the most mild description I can think of for what he endured.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
It does seem likely to me that the purpose of the test is to see what the cadet will do when faced with overwhelming odds. Will he/she/it succumb to the inevitable? Fight on using standard techniques? Find some oddball tactics that might or might not work? Cheat? (Figure that every time someone finds a way to cheat or finds an exploit, they get congratulated, and then the programmers fix that particular method...) It also seems likely that the details of exactly what happens should vary from test to test, with the only constant being the Kobayashi Maru herself.
Hmm. Maybe I should toss that into the LC pool. I've already started to consider what Cadet Grunt did during his KM test...
A freighter out in the neutral zone sending out a distorted distress signal?
No other ships arround (apparently)?
It smells like a trap, so I will just inform the Federation of the situation. As far as I'm concerned, freighters out in that zone are taking the chance that they may be assaulted by pirates, and this ship could be a pirate trap designed to lure in Federation ships. And I'm pretty sure there are ships out there cloaked and ready to engage anyone who tries to rescue the ship.
So I contact HQ, give them my assessment of the situation, then follow their orders. If it was MY decision, I'll just leave.
*sings* "I like Gammera! He's so neat!!! He is full of turtle meat!!!"
"Hah! You are doomed! You're only armed with that pathetic excuse for a musical instrument!!!" *the Savage Beast moments before Lonnehart the Bard used music to soothe him... then beat him to death with his Fat Lute*
It does seem likely to me that the purpose of the test is to see what the cadet will do when faced with overwhelming odds. Will he/she/it succumb to the inevitable? Fight on using standard techniques? Find some oddball tactics that might or might not work? Cheat? (Figure that every time someone finds a way to cheat or finds an exploit, they get congratulated, and then the programmers fix that particular method...) It also seems likely that the details of exactly what happens should vary from test to test, with the only constant being the Kobayashi Maru herself.
Hmm. Maybe I should toss that into the LC pool. I've already started to consider what Cadet Grunt did during his KM test...
Exactly.
I find funny that some people are actually saying that there are solutions in this thread since none of us know what the program would devise to counter any of these ideas. It's as simple as "emergency power to shields" and you get a power failure. Or "set a collision course wih the klingon cruiser" and the helm console blows up with a klingon torpedo hit. Etc, etc...
It doesn't matter, the test is not to save the Maru and return to Spacedock for celebrations.
A test designed in Kirk's time with TOS tech applied to 2409? That's not obsolete? :P
As for proof, what I posted at least was not a 'fan fantasy' like, for instance, my Starship Captain Archi T. Dux (my main character - huzzah!!!1!!1) heroically saving the day would be: it was a systematic approach to a problem, intended to adapt to the few changes that could reasonably occur within said problem and come out ahead at the end, relying on as few variables as possible, all while following the rules of the Star Trek universe. Basically, a canonically palatable 'solution.'
Which brings up this: if a solution is framed in such a 'fan fantasy' as you say, and is based on sound logic that follows the rules of the fictional universe, does the 'fan fantasy'-ness of it make it any less of a solution?
Well if the test is too renown as a "no win scenario" it looses its purpose.
See WOK, Saavik clearly wasn't aware that there was no solution. If every cadet knows its "the no win scenario" they will kind of "automatically cheat", which means, they will go in there attempting to look good while failing instead of trying to solve it.
There is probably ANOTHER NEW No win scenario.
And yes it makes it "less of a solution".
Because its a fictional universe and the fiction writer if taking that serious will always find let the simulation find a way to beat you.
Again "NO WIN".
And we do not know how exactly things work in Star Trek. A writer can always simply write a gap into your plan. If he doesnt, he fails. Because its a NO WIN scenario. No sulution.
And the scenario is NOT FAIR. And probably not consistent. Probably the simulation will adapt to your approach to solve it.
In variant 1 its full of innocent civilians, especially if you shoot it.
If you then decide to do something like.... extending shields around it in approach 2 it will possibly be full of Klingon boarding partys.
The test IS NOT about solving the scenario. Its a test of character.
How does the cadet react? Will he cry? Will he complain about how unfair it is? Will try again and again (Kirk tried it at least 3 times, not sure any more he cheated ON or AFTER his third try), will he give up at some point and go on (which is an important question, a good officer will have to know when to stop). Thats what it is about.
"Solving" it means dealing with defeat in a good way, not beating the scenario.
Spock sacrificed himself to save the ship, (albeit it the real Enterprise and not a simulation) Troi don't know.
g
Well thats not "the Kobayashi Maru". Thats "just" another seemingly futile situation.
And if thats what he referenced he probably means that Commander test with troi, which was something completely different. The simulation Troi did was about making the decision to send someone to death, which is something every officer has to learn, but it wasn't a "no win" scenario. It just had a cruel winning condition, killing Geordie.
Assuming the scenario is still more or less the one Kirk faced...
I'd probably try sending shuttles to rescue the Maru's crew, while I occupy the Klingons attention with the ship.
It seems odd to me that there would be just a single mine floating around out there; I'd assume there to be a minefield nearby and look for more. If I find any, try and get the Klingons good and mad at me and get them to chase me through the minefield. No guarantee I'd make it out the other side (though there's always a chance in theory), but at least I might save the people on the Maru.
If I can't find more mines, then I guess I just keep fighting; and hope the shuttles can do their job and get clear before my ship blows up.
So yeah, if the idea is that you can't save both the Maru and your own ship; then my attempt to beat it would basically come down to division of labour, so that I don't need to try and do both of those things myself. In fact, I'd be getting the simulation itself try to resolve half the problem (not that I expect that would work out well; but I'd have to at least pretend I didn't know the sim was determined to make me fail by any means necessary, otherwise what's the point of even trying?).
Well if the test is too renown as a "no win scenario" it looses its purpose.
See WOK, Saavik clearly wasn't aware that there was no solution. If every cadet knows its "the no win scenario" they will kind of "automatically cheat", which means, they will go in there attempting to look good while failing instead of trying to solve it.
Agreed, that's why we need:
ANOTHER NEW No win scenario.
its a fictional universe and the fiction writer if taking that serious will always find let the simulation find a way to beat you.
Again "NO WIN".
And we do not know how exactly things work in Star Trek. A writer can always simply write a gap into your plan. If he doesnt, he fails. Because its a NO WIN scenario. No sulution.
That's the whole reason the test works: the writers. Without them, people will eventually find the loopholes, because without them the test doesn't change. Anyone here making changes to the test itself, because they are not the writers, makes those changes just as valid/invalid (depending on your opinion) as the players' solutions.
And the scenario is NOT FAIR. And probably not consistent. Probably the simulation will adapt to your approach to solve it.
In variant 1 its full of innocent civilians, especially if you shoot it.
If you then decide to do something like.... extending shields around it in approach 2 it will possibly be full of Klingon boarding partys.
That's why I said beam out surviving crew - sensors would be able to distinguish them; even if they couldn't, and I was unsure about who/what I was beaming up, I could always just put forcefields around/seal off wherever I beamed them to in my ship. Also, no amount of smart AI will be able to predict beforehand anyone's entire strategy - unless we break some fundamental rules, which isn't beyond the Star Trek writers, but what I said about the writers still applies.
But that's not the point of this post:
The test IS NOT about solving the scenario. Its a test of character.
How does the cadet react? Will he cry? Will he complain about how unfair it is? Will try again and again (Kirk tried it at least 3 times, not sure any more he cheated ON or AFTER his third try), will he give up at some point and go on (which is an important question, a good officer will have to know when to stop). Thats what it is about.
"Solving" it means dealing with defeat in a good way, not beating the scenario.
Yes, absolutely - this is exactly what a no win scenario should be. I simply don't see the Kobayashi Maru being this without writer intervention.
If I recal, in the episode where Wesley applies to go to the academy, there was some kind of fake earthquake done as a test to the unanticipated (I forget if he passes or fails, but I think he fails) so it may indeed be that a cadet gets hit with several such test throughout their tenure at the academy so they can be tested in situations which they know are simulations, and which they think are real at the time...
I remember reading somewhere that Sulu's solution was to not even enter the Neutral Zone, thus avoiding the conflict with the Klingons. If I was an instructor, that would've been an immediate 'no further command training' result, as ships are supposed to respond to distress calls (wether real or staged) so by taking a course of action which seems to be 'above' the situation, is actually going against a fundamental requirement in rendering assistance to ships in distress...
If I recal, in the episode where Wesley applies to go to the academy, there was some kind of fake earthquake done as a test to the unanticipated (I forget if he passes or fails, but I think he fails)
No, Wesley did pass that portion of the exam, but lost out to one of the other potential cadets due to a low score in some other area; in that case, they were all competing for just one open slot.
As I recall, my own answers:
My "main" took it, failed of course; asked to retake it, thinking he could fix what he'd done wrong, failed again; and pretty near wrecked himself over the course of the next week, certain that the fault was entirely his, until his advisor found out and came by to patiently explain that everyone fails that one and why. (He didn't expect to end up in a center seat after that, and probably wouldn't have if there wasn't a war on.)
Another character, Science division, got VERY upset when she figured out the test was rigged. To her mind, there's a big difference between a situation where you don't have the tools, or the coin flip comes up against you, and you fail because of bad luck and physics, and one in which other sentient entities change the rules with a deliberate agenda. She'll take her chances with a fair and impartial universe, which might hand you a no-win situation by chance, but one where the "gods" play with loaded dice offends her*. It's no different in her eyes from the instructor saying "well, you would have passed this test, but I want you to fail; therefore, today all numbers are equal to 5, so you got every question wrong."
* as does distorting or falsifying data to fit an agenda or conclusion already decided on - not exactly what's happening here, but close enough to further raise her hackles.
No, Wesley did pass that portion of the exam, but lost out to one of the other potential cadets due to a low score in some other area; in that case, they were all competing for just one open slot.
He took too long because he stopped momentarily to help the Benzite--who wound up winning the slot.
Upon receiving distress call, I would send a couple of shuttles to broadcast Starfleet signals. Then I would fire a number of probes into the area broadcasting my ship's warp signature.
Some of you are questioning the test itself, in which you are ignoring what the purpose of the test.
The Kobayashi maru smells like an ambush to me, in this case I'd use Vulcan wisdom and decide that the needs of the many (my crew and ship) outweigh the needs of the few (the maru crew) and just back off and let the diplomats sort it out
"The meaning of victory is not to merely defeat your enemy but to destroy him, to completely eradicate him from living memory, to leave no remnant of his endeavours, to crush utterly his achievement and remove from all record his every trace of existence. From that defeat no enemy can ever recover. That is the meaning of victory."
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
Come in in a decent Scimitar cannon build with CSV3 and torp spread 3 quantum torps (what I use on my regular scimi). Alpha strike every wave and nuke them. Run RSP or aux2bat if you need a buff.
Three's solution: Assuming that the solution is hopeless, leave the ship rather than flying a suicide run. Alternatively, have her imprints take runabouts out of the danger zone, use definitely nonstandard "fire everything" buttons, and do a suicide run on the Klingons. Or just say "hey, it's me, the woman who can bench-press shuttles, you can all TRIBBLE me if you agree to let the Kobayashi Maru escape" and hope that the Klingons want to have the bragging rights of "I screwed a living weapon and survived".
I would simply make a hasty retreat! Who says you have to sacrifice a whole ship and it's crew for a lesser amount of people? You could always come back in force later to avenge them! I mean someone has to live to tell the tale, and who did it!
New Lunar Republic
"Where monsters rampage, I'm there to take them down! Where treasure glitters, I'm there to claim it! Where an enemy rises to face me, victory will be mine!" -Lina Inverse
That's the whole reason the test works: the writers. Without them, people will eventually find the loopholes, because without them the test doesn't change. Anyone here making changes to the test itself, because they are not the writers, makes those changes just as valid/invalid (depending on your opinion) as the players' solutions.
That's why I said beam out surviving crew - sensors would be able to distinguish them; even if they couldn't, and I was unsure about who/what I was beaming up, I could always just put forcefields around/seal off wherever I beamed them to in my ship. Also, no amount of smart AI will be able to predict beforehand anyone's entire strategy - unless we break some fundamental rules, which isn't beyond the Star Trek writers, but what I said about the writers still applies.
But that's not the point of this post:
Yes, absolutely - this is exactly what a no win scenario should be. I simply don't see the Kobayashi Maru being this without writer intervention.
Well I see that absolutely,
We actually do not know that much about the scenario in detail, but it usually ends with the cadets ship beeing faced with 3 warships, each one, depending on source, equal or superior.
There is not much arround that, no matter how creative you are.
If you are locked into a room with 3 guys as strong or stronger and as smart or smarter... And they won't to beat you up, you get beaten up. Period.
There is no magic trick to solve every situation. Not in Star Trek, although Kirk believes that, and even less in real live.
And a simulation can adapt to any thing the cadet decides, and even if the cadet has a super mega tactic to beat them then simulation can work arround that, if nothing every one of your shots miss because of a sudden malfunction, and every shot of the Klingons hits. A simulation can be programmed in a way to simply not allow winning.
See sto. Even there that applies. The devs can add a mission with 10 tac cubes with 10 times the hull for each. all with permanent criting spread III, a range of 15 km and 100 % cloak detection.
Comments
A test designed in Kirk's time with TOS tech applied to 2409? That's not obsolete? :P
As for proof, what I posted at least was not a 'fan fantasy' like, for instance, my Starship Captain Archi T. Dux (my main character - huzzah!!!1!!1) heroically saving the day would be: it was a systematic approach to a problem, intended to adapt to the few changes that could reasonably occur within said problem and come out ahead at the end, relying on as few variables as possible, all while following the rules of the Star Trek universe. Basically, a canonically palatable 'solution.'
Which brings up this: if a solution is framed in such a 'fan fantasy' as you say, and is based on sound logic that follows the rules of the fictional universe, does the 'fan fantasy'-ness of it make it any less of a solution?
Since the end result is pretty much guaranteed, any actions you take to get to that result are your solution.
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
Occidere populo et effercio confractus
Worse comes to worse, yeah, nuke 'em.
Amen to that. Also, IIRC, at some point in time, it became less about how a captain responds to a scenario in which there is no positive outcome, and more about coming up with unorthodox solutions to a scenario where standard tactics just won't cut it. I like to think you're expected to play it straight the first time around, get your humbling, then take it again with the intent of being a tricky *******.
Likely only canon to the novels, but who cares, right?
"I always hope for the best. Experience, unfortunately, has taught me to expect the worst."
-Elim Garak
My Cardassian toon, Admiral Berat, did not take the Kobayashi Maru, since he was an exchange officer. Likely in his "cadet" days (or whatever the Cardassian equivalent of a cadet is), the test he was subjected to would have been more along the lines of trying to find out how much you would sacrifice for the state and if you were politically acceptable. (This was pre-Dominion-War.) He is quick to point out that the method has changed post-war, though the principle of "how much personal sacrifice can you handle" is still a part of it.
I SO cannot wait for an LC opportunity to show the Kobayashi Maru test that my Devidian was subjected to. "Unpleasant" is the most mild description I can think of for what he endured.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Hmm. Maybe I should toss that into the LC pool. I've already started to consider what Cadet Grunt did during his KM test...
A freighter out in the neutral zone sending out a distorted distress signal?
No other ships arround (apparently)?
It smells like a trap, so I will just inform the Federation of the situation. As far as I'm concerned, freighters out in that zone are taking the chance that they may be assaulted by pirates, and this ship could be a pirate trap designed to lure in Federation ships. And I'm pretty sure there are ships out there cloaked and ready to engage anyone who tries to rescue the ship.
So I contact HQ, give them my assessment of the situation, then follow their orders. If it was MY decision, I'll just leave.
"Hah! You are doomed! You're only armed with that pathetic excuse for a musical instrument!!!" *the Savage Beast moments before Lonnehart the Bard used music to soothe him... then beat him to death with his Fat Lute*
Exactly.
I find funny that some people are actually saying that there are solutions in this thread since none of us know what the program would devise to counter any of these ideas. It's as simple as "emergency power to shields" and you get a power failure. Or "set a collision course wih the klingon cruiser" and the helm console blows up with a klingon torpedo hit. Etc, etc...
It doesn't matter, the test is not to save the Maru and return to Spacedock for celebrations.
-Leonard Nimoy, RIP
Spock sacrificed himself to save the ship, (albeit it the real Enterprise and not a simulation) Troi don't know.
Well if the test is too renown as a "no win scenario" it looses its purpose.
See WOK, Saavik clearly wasn't aware that there was no solution. If every cadet knows its "the no win scenario" they will kind of "automatically cheat", which means, they will go in there attempting to look good while failing instead of trying to solve it.
There is probably ANOTHER NEW No win scenario.
And yes it makes it "less of a solution".
Because its a fictional universe and the fiction writer if taking that serious will always find let the simulation find a way to beat you.
Again "NO WIN".
And we do not know how exactly things work in Star Trek. A writer can always simply write a gap into your plan. If he doesnt, he fails. Because its a NO WIN scenario. No sulution.
And the scenario is NOT FAIR. And probably not consistent. Probably the simulation will adapt to your approach to solve it.
In variant 1 its full of innocent civilians, especially if you shoot it.
If you then decide to do something like.... extending shields around it in approach 2 it will possibly be full of Klingon boarding partys.
The test IS NOT about solving the scenario. Its a test of character.
How does the cadet react? Will he cry? Will he complain about how unfair it is? Will try again and again (Kirk tried it at least 3 times, not sure any more he cheated ON or AFTER his third try), will he give up at some point and go on (which is an important question, a good officer will have to know when to stop). Thats what it is about.
"Solving" it means dealing with defeat in a good way, not beating the scenario.
g
Well thats not "the Kobayashi Maru". Thats "just" another seemingly futile situation.
And if thats what he referenced he probably means that Commander test with troi, which was something completely different. The simulation Troi did was about making the decision to send someone to death, which is something every officer has to learn, but it wasn't a "no win" scenario. It just had a cruel winning condition, killing Geordie.
I'd probably try sending shuttles to rescue the Maru's crew, while I occupy the Klingons attention with the ship.
It seems odd to me that there would be just a single mine floating around out there; I'd assume there to be a minefield nearby and look for more. If I find any, try and get the Klingons good and mad at me and get them to chase me through the minefield. No guarantee I'd make it out the other side (though there's always a chance in theory), but at least I might save the people on the Maru.
If I can't find more mines, then I guess I just keep fighting; and hope the shuttles can do their job and get clear before my ship blows up.
So yeah, if the idea is that you can't save both the Maru and your own ship; then my attempt to beat it would basically come down to division of labour, so that I don't need to try and do both of those things myself. In fact, I'd be getting the simulation itself try to resolve half the problem (not that I expect that would work out well; but I'd have to at least pretend I didn't know the sim was determined to make me fail by any means necessary, otherwise what's the point of even trying?).
Agreed, that's why we need:
That's the whole reason the test works: the writers. Without them, people will eventually find the loopholes, because without them the test doesn't change. Anyone here making changes to the test itself, because they are not the writers, makes those changes just as valid/invalid (depending on your opinion) as the players' solutions.
That's why I said beam out surviving crew - sensors would be able to distinguish them; even if they couldn't, and I was unsure about who/what I was beaming up, I could always just put forcefields around/seal off wherever I beamed them to in my ship. Also, no amount of smart AI will be able to predict beforehand anyone's entire strategy - unless we break some fundamental rules, which isn't beyond the Star Trek writers, but what I said about the writers still applies.
But that's not the point of this post:
Yes, absolutely - this is exactly what a no win scenario should be. I simply don't see the Kobayashi Maru being this without writer intervention.
I remember reading somewhere that Sulu's solution was to not even enter the Neutral Zone, thus avoiding the conflict with the Klingons. If I was an instructor, that would've been an immediate 'no further command training' result, as ships are supposed to respond to distress calls (wether real or staged) so by taking a course of action which seems to be 'above' the situation, is actually going against a fundamental requirement in rendering assistance to ships in distress...
He passed that particular test.
Thus, taking away any glory and honor of the kill from the Klingons.
Ahh, it was the other one he failed, I just remember Picard telling he'd failed his first application...
As I recall, my own answers:
My "main" took it, failed of course; asked to retake it, thinking he could fix what he'd done wrong, failed again; and pretty near wrecked himself over the course of the next week, certain that the fault was entirely his, until his advisor found out and came by to patiently explain that everyone fails that one and why. (He didn't expect to end up in a center seat after that, and probably wouldn't have if there wasn't a war on.)
Another character, Science division, got VERY upset when she figured out the test was rigged. To her mind, there's a big difference between a situation where you don't have the tools, or the coin flip comes up against you, and you fail because of bad luck and physics, and one in which other sentient entities change the rules with a deliberate agenda. She'll take her chances with a fair and impartial universe, which might hand you a no-win situation by chance, but one where the "gods" play with loaded dice offends her*. It's no different in her eyes from the instructor saying "well, you would have passed this test, but I want you to fail; therefore, today all numbers are equal to 5, so you got every question wrong."
* as does distorting or falsifying data to fit an agenda or conclusion already decided on - not exactly what's happening here, but close enough to further raise her hackles.
He took too long because he stopped momentarily to help the Benzite--who wound up winning the slot.
Some of you are questioning the test itself, in which you are ignoring what the purpose of the test.
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
step 2: eat an apple
Come in in a decent Scimitar cannon build with CSV3 and torp spread 3 quantum torps (what I use on my regular scimi). Alpha strike every wave and nuke them. Run RSP or aux2bat if you need a buff.
Three's solution: Assuming that the solution is hopeless, leave the ship rather than flying a suicide run. Alternatively, have her imprints take runabouts out of the danger zone, use definitely nonstandard "fire everything" buttons, and do a suicide run on the Klingons. Or just say "hey, it's me, the woman who can bench-press shuttles, you can all TRIBBLE me if you agree to let the Kobayashi Maru escape" and hope that the Klingons want to have the bragging rights of "I screwed a living weapon and survived".
Three isn't a very sane person.
A realistic solution: Unplug the holoprogram.
"Where monsters rampage, I'm there to take them down! Where treasure glitters, I'm there to claim it! Where an enemy rises to face me, victory will be mine!" -Lina Inverse
Well I see that absolutely,
We actually do not know that much about the scenario in detail, but it usually ends with the cadets ship beeing faced with 3 warships, each one, depending on source, equal or superior.
There is not much arround that, no matter how creative you are.
If you are locked into a room with 3 guys as strong or stronger and as smart or smarter... And they won't to beat you up, you get beaten up. Period.
There is no magic trick to solve every situation. Not in Star Trek, although Kirk believes that, and even less in real live.
And a simulation can adapt to any thing the cadet decides, and even if the cadet has a super mega tactic to beat them then simulation can work arround that, if nothing every one of your shots miss because of a sudden malfunction, and every shot of the Klingons hits. A simulation can be programmed in a way to simply not allow winning.
See sto. Even there that applies. The devs can add a mission with 10 tac cubes with 10 times the hull for each. all with permanent criting spread III, a range of 15 km and 100 % cloak detection.
Even power creeps will not win that.