Asenna Steam
kirjaudu sisään
|
kieli
简体中文 (yksinkertaistettu kiina)
繁體中文 (perinteinen kiina)
日本語 (japani)
한국어 (korea)
ไทย (thai)
български (bulgaria)
Čeština (tšekki)
Dansk (tanska)
Deutsch (saksa)
English (englanti)
Español – España (espanja – Espanja)
Español – Latinoamérica (espanja – Lat. Am.)
Ελληνικά (kreikka)
Français (ranska)
Italiano (italia)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesia)
Magyar (unkari)
Nederlands (hollanti)
Norsk (norja)
Polski (puola)
Português (portugali – Portugali)
Português – Brasil (portugali – Brasilia)
Română (romania)
Русский (venäjä)
Svenska (ruotsi)
Türkçe (turkki)
Tiếng Việt (vietnam)
Українська (ukraina)
Ilmoita käännösongelmasta
Keskusteluiden säännöt ja ohjeistukset
Ilmoita tämä viesti
Actually, in Star Trek, the preference around using phasers/disruptors is precisely around shields. You do not see the Federation heavily armouring their ships (apart from ablative plating) and ships like the Galaxy class were designed to have extremely powerful shield arrays so that armour wasn't needed.
Kinetic weapons and missiles are not effective against shields, deflectors can also contribute to this because they are design to push things out of the way when the ship is at warp, its why Kinetic weapons are barely used.
Btw, in before "But Dominion", the Dominion used a Phased Polaron beam to disable the Odyssey which the Federation had never encountered before, once discovered, DS9 augmented its shields to repel a HELL of a lot of Dominion firepower. As I said, shields reign supreme.
But then again, humans from the 21st Century, applying 21st century world logic to everything and our primitive state of warfare... fun.
you brought up "actual physics" first.
shields are very cool in fiction. but honestly i think even in fiction they will be replaced by drone swarms and active protection systems in the next few decades.
and as you said yourself: shields are strong is soft scifi, and barely exist in hard scifi.
Yeah, it annoys me that you can't build missile batteries on your planets and are forced into building ships as the only way to get power projection. It shows a lack of creativity from the developers.
Your ships are irrelivant if I can just release a biological/chemical/graviton weapon at your planet with a huge payload of cloaked missiles.
Starbases are too weak in this game too, they should have allowed us to alter their design, rather then building defense platforms and outfit them with larger weapons.
get gigastructures mod.
I love a good debate. Have debated shields against hull plating in the past with larger forums. Quite the fun experience learning what others think and collectively thinking hard about the subject matter.
I just got caught up on Star Trek Picard and something came to mind when typing up my previous reply this morning. The USS Titan, gets nailed twice without its shields and survives both times (Plot armor aside), the hull took the brunt of both hits. The first being a smaller starship (Ganges-Class maybe), a medical frigate, that was outright thrown at it. And the second being an asteroid, where they had so little power that it was either shields or life support, and they picked life support.
You say that shields are the true savior, but why not balance it? Shields AND Hull.
Most shows and movies where shields are a thing, every time the shields fail, (Regardless of the power source and weapons used), the hull takes the brunt of the incoming fire as well. UNSC ships are designed to take the hits (Reminds me of older Battleships), and were never meant to have shields. Just layers and layers of hull plating.
You also brought up the Dominion. That entire arc was entertaining, but I mentioned Enterprise, NOT DS9. The enterprise (NX-01) did NOT have shields as it were. They had hull plating. And managed to survive every engagement they were involved in. Even without the plot armor that little NX survived a war with the Romulan Star Empire. No shields. Just hull.
Starfleet, found a way to balance it out. Shields and Hull. Both have uses.
But let's get modern here. You know why there are so many ships in a Carrier Group? Why there's so many escorts for one or more Carriers? Those escorts act as a "Shield" for the main vessel. We call them screens. There's enough firepower in that grouping to render ANY attack pointless. Missiles fired at it get intercepted by Phalanx weaponry. Anything submerged gets intercepted by the Destroyers and escort Submarines. Anything firing off a cannon gets intercepted by missiles and once again Phalanx weaponry. Essentially combined stopping power by Point-Defenses. In essence, a Modern Day shield.
But you say that Anti-Matter could sustain them indefinitely. Prove it. I want you to prove to me, that shields cannot and will never fail based on a single power source. Because I know that you can't. Shields fail. Always do if put under enough stress. Every Sci-Fi has proven this. Hammer a shield long enough and it breaks.
Armor had to be brought in line to be balanced.
/thread
We won't mention E. Given Picard used it like a battering ram against the Scimitar.
Because like I said, Armor is primitive compared to shields.
dunno man. if you wanna talk about antimatter level tech there are some pretty cool exotic materials you can make your armor from.
even something like a carbon nanotube material with perfect molecular lattice can get to the point where the weakest link is the actual bonds between the atoms instead of the molecules.
and ofc in theory anti-matter reactive armor is also possible, especially if you wanna use star trek levels of containment technology. can probably cram way more energy into that than you ever could in a shield.
also more fun stuff: do shields work against particle beams?
Going to respond to a few points and try and do this in a non-rude way because surprisingly, I don't want to offend people.
1. You mentioned the Romulan War. By that point, United Earth was part of the Coalition of Planets (which existed before the Federation) and the NX Class had shield technology (as well as a fancy new refit) because they were given the designs by the Andorians when they joined.
2. Antimatter cannot sustain shields indefinitely, only against certain weapons (such as Nuclear Missiles or High Energy Lasers). This is why the Romulans, Klingons etc, all use plasma or disruptor based weaponry because of the popularity of shield technology. Antimatter produces so much energy that you cannot penetrate shields by conventional means.
3. Star Trek: Picard is not a good example because its NuTrek and they tend to follow a completely different set of rules and don't elaborate on how technology works because that would detract from all the crying and emotional stuff. Season 3 is better but its nowhere near the heights of the franchise, which is TNG, DS9 and VOY.
I'm not saying there is not a place for armour in the game, but there is room to really expand on shields, give them different types, so you need to choose between increased deflector shields for physical mass drivers or missiles or electromagnetic shielding to resist electrical weapons.
The weapon and defensive options in this game are really limited and starbases suck compared to Earth Spacedock, you arn't going to attack that with a small fleet and win, are you? So why can't you upgrade starbase and outpost weapon slots the same you can with ships?
Well yes, shields are pretty good against particle beams, because disruptors and plasma are particle based weaponry. But in higher yields, they can struggle.
In my opinion, the best way to do armour is to have it be a supplementary equipment for ships. The Borg are actually one of the best examples I can think of as a species that doesn't use shields, they use a regenerative electromagnetic field which assists in regeneration through the collectives neural network and build in bulk to give plenty of time for regeneration and adaption to kick in. That's why Borg ships are so large.
disruptors/plasma are heat weapons. particle beams are way scarier, think using that CERN collider as a weapon.
the core dilemma is: they are a combination of kinetic and energy weapon: they are shooting physical particles but at relativistic speeds/energy. (and ofc any good one shoots eclectically neutral particles, or god forbid neutrons thats even scarier). so presumably they can exploit shields weakness against kinetics?
yeah cause you think armor is primitive. but it's really not. the problem with armor is that the amount/quality of it you need scales poorly compared to increasing weapon power. it's pretty intuitive afterall, if you need 1meter of armor to stop a 1MT round, you need 2 meters to stop a 2MT round, but you need it all over your ship so it adds up.
the thing is, shields have the same problem. the stronger your shield needs to be, the bigger you reactor needs to be, the bigger your ship needs to be, the bigger your shield needs to be, etc.
the other big advantage armor has is that it's pre-made. you can build a massive factory building very advanced very energy intensive armor, but your shield can only ever be as good as the one you can generate locally.
the one thing shields do have going for them is that you can shunt energy to engines instead of shields, which you can't do with armor. but that's only useful out of combat, and out of combat you can just use tow boats to move your armored ships.
as for on TV, i think hullbreaches etc always make more sense in the shows that don't have shields. in shows with shields i always wonder why the hull breaches aren't catastrophic once the shield fails.
like in star trek, you have weapons taking off 20-30% of shields per hit, but then once the shields are gone the ship can still survive several hits? bit silly if you stop to think about it.
Shields are absolutely possible, but thank you armchair physicist. We just lack the sufficient level of technology to make them because we've been set back a good few thousand years by constant issues in our history.