: Seth, there was already a Dune
example immediately above the one you entered. I have merged the two. More or less.
: "Film example: Star Wars, where, unhelpfully, the shield generator's power generator was outside the shielding radius." Uh, when was that? All the shields I can think of in Star Wars protected their generators just fine. Even the Death Star 2 shield looked like it protected its generator.
: Removed the wrong, wrong and more wrong line about it being "necessary for faster than light travel". For near
lightspeed travel, yes. Faster
would require new laws of physics, such as Teleporters and Transporters
, Subspace or Hyperspace
, or a Portal Network
, which means anything going faster than light isn't interacting with the normal universe where lightspeed is an absolute limit, and therefore have no obstacles to hit. You Fail Physics Forever
: ...or moving Elite-style, inside spatial anomaly (Alcubierre drive if you're in "true Riemann" GRT universe and possibly more elegant solutions in "resultant Riemann" universe). But then again, the very point of this approach is having Faster-Than-Light Travel
without FTL movement
, so locally it counts as sublight, So Yeah
. And anyway anomaly itself can do nasty things to whatever tries to cross it, though it's Disintegration Shield rather than Deflector.
Firefly: Koei's Warship Gunner games have these in two flavors: one optimized for projectiles (Gravity Shield), and another for energy (Energy Shield); one special item (High Gravity Shield) covers both. In both games' NewGamePlus
scenarios, enemies almost always have energy shielding (boss units do under all circumstances). Special note: in WG 1
the plasma guns (okay, the visual effects look more like Tesla weapons) are rebuffed by energy shielding; this is not
the case in WG 2
: I have a question: "a strong electromagnetic field really can be used to deflect particle beam weapons or railgun/coilgun slugs"...how?
I mean, I know about deflecting particle beam, but slugs are just like machine gun bullet or those stuff, just larger! How can EM shield deflect it?
From Force Field
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan
: Reluctantly admit that in most respects, keeping Deflector Shields
and killing this would be the sensible arrangement, since Deflector Shields
is a mature entry. This one does have the advantage of being in the singular, though, and of being slightly more general in theory. (That is, in theory, a Force Field
could also cover antimatter barriers and whatever makes a lightsaber cut
- energy walls that do things other than just deflect what hits them.)
: The singular thing is easily solved with a redirect. Also, we have Containment Field
and Tractor Beam
for the other uses.
: We can take this off the Cut List
, though. Delete page content manually, place a redirect to Deflector Shields
here in its place. It's a common term so we really need the redirect.
: Works for me. I'll do the redirect sometime tomorrow if there are no objections before then.
Is "Why don't we drop the defensive shields" correct? Googling for both:
"Why don't we drop the defensive shields" Kryten = 480
"Why don't we raise the defensive shields" Kryten = 6800
It makes much more sense, plus it makes much more sense. Now I realize that technically speaking that's only one reason, but I thought that it was such a big one that it was worth mentioning twice.