StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Can someone explain the nature of shields in Star Wars? I don't really want to see a debate or "I think this" just some facts. And perhaps an example? Like: If this weapon is fired it will do x to the shield or blah blah. I tried using the search but for some reason regardless of selecting Pure Star Wars is searches EVERY forum and you can't choose to just look in Topics so I ended up with something like 22,000 and who would look through that? Not me.

Good place to start:

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tec ... ield2.html

Super-Gagme wrote:Can someone explain the nature of shields in Star Wars? I don't really want to see a debate or "I think this" just some facts. And perhaps an example? Like: If this weapon is fired it will do x to the shield or blah blah. I tried using the search but for some reason regardless of selecting Pure Star Wars is searches EVERY forum and you can't choose to just look in Topics so I ended up with something like 22,000 and who would look through that? Not me.

We can only go by example. We've seen turbolaser bolts deflect in a randomized shower (the bolt that would have passed Tantive IV but instead shattered against its shields and sprayed down onto its dorsal surface). We've also seen blaster bolts reflect cleanly off a shield (battledroid shots ricocheting off Anakin's Naboo starfighter shield), and we've seen blaster bolts being absorbed into a shield (lightsabre ricochets hitting shielded droidekas). Moreover, we've seen deep-sea water being repelled by a shield (the Gungan bongo and city), physical shells exploding against a shield (the Gungan theatre shield), slow-moving grounded objects passing through that same shield, and huge panelled areas of a shield flashing white when hit by an impacting starfighter (fighter hitting an ISD in ROTJ).

I'd say there must be a very wide variety of shields in SW, rather than just a Star Trek-style one-size-fits-all approach. This fits with the greater maturity of the SW civilization, and its more diverse character (6 million languages in 3PO's database, 20 million intelligent species according to the EU).

Well I guess I should have made my question a little clearer. What I am really after is how shields on capital ships work. I know they have Particle and Ray shields and their purpose but what I don't know is what actually takes them down. Do they recharge? Are they projected? People talk about overloading, I seem to have missed something that a lot of others know about.

Darth Wong wrote:, physical shells exploding against a shield (the Gungan theatre shield).

I believe those shots were from the Tanks' blaster cannon?

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:, physical shells exploding against a shield (the Gungan theatre shield).

I believe those shots were from the Tanks' blaster cannon?

Correct. The only time the AAT's warhead launchers were seen in action was after the shields fell. They appeared to be firing some sort of incendiary projectiles.

http://www.starwars.com/databank/techno ... index.html

Starwars.com wrote: Huge reptilian fambaa creatures carry the emitter and projector drums on their backs. The shield can deflect laser and artillery fire, but can be permeated by objects with less kinetic energy, such as battle droids on foot.

And lets not forget that some blasters ARE projectile weapons as well. So even then Darth Wong's point still is valid.

Connor MacLeod wrote:And lets not forget that some blasters ARE projectile weapons as well. So even then Darth Wong's point still is valid.

Aha, you do have a point.

And Wong's point stands in that, regardless of the bolt's composition, they did react in a manner previously unseen.

I think it is kind of a leap to maybe some "coherent plasma" perhaps confined by a shield-generating projectile to physical shells, esp. in the case of the AAT, where I would assume Mike is refering to the true shell weapons on the "foot" of the AAT.

And the explosion affects were not unique. Observe the firey shield interactions around the Royal Cruiser escaping Naboo.

Its nice to know about the Gungan shield but can't anyone answer my question?

Illuminatus Primus wrote:I think it is kind of a leap to maybe some "coherent plasma" perhaps confined by a shield-generating projectile to physical shells, esp. in the case of the AAT, where I would assume Mike is refering to the true shell weapons on the "foot" of the AAT.

Plasmas contained by a projectile sounds like it fits the requirement of a physical shell to me. Besides which, even IF it is a physical shell, its not like its not the first time that a physical projectile resembles a blaster bolt

And the explosion affects were not unique. Observe the firey shield interactions around the Royal Cruiser escaping Naboo.

Going with that "one weapon type fits all" philosophy again arent we?

I remember a while back that many Star-Trek debators claimed the SW ships didn't have shields at all. Are there still a good many like this or is it limited to a select delusional few? (I would think EP1 would have destroyed any doubt, but you never know).

I know of nobody that makes such claims. Even RSA accepts SW shielding.

Connor MacLeod wrote:Plasmas contained by a projectile sounds like it fits the requirement of a physical shell to me. Besides which, even IF it is a physical shell, its not like its not the first time that a physical projectile resembles a blaster bolt

You're a fucking asshole. Since the AAT has a "blaster cannon" and multiple "energy shell" launchers, and Mike talks about "physical shell" attacks, I figure he is refering to the latter, not the former. Point was, the literal shell launchers sounded more like what Mike was talking about than "coherent plasma contained by a field generated by a projectile." Get it, asshole?

Connor MacLeod wrote:Going with that "one weapon type fits all" philosophy again arent we?

No asshole. My point was in response to this post:

Robert Treder wrote:Aha, you do have a point.

And Wong's point stands in that, regardless of the bolt's composition, they did react in a manner previously unseen.

Because the "manner of reaction" was previously seen in the chase seen. You propogated the strawman of single-type weapons for AAT blaster cannons and TF Battleship cannons. I simply noted they had similar affects and Treader was mistaken because the interations looked quite similar to me (ie. great fire balls).

But I don't know why I'm bothering since all you want to do is hijack and bring up off-topic insults and strawmen, and chase me through this board to flame me. Well you can go fuck yourself, asshole.

Illuminatus Primus wrote: You're a fucking asshole. Since the AAT has a "blaster cannon" and multiple "energy shell" launchers, and Mike talks about "physical shell" attacks, I figure he is refering to the latter, not the former. Point was, the literal shell launchers sounded more like what Mike was talking about than "coherent plasma contained by a field generated by a projectile." Get it, asshole?

Since he's talking about what we "see", I presume he's talking about what is o bserved in the movies (supported by the rest of his statements - you do remember how Mike tends to operate don't you?) Since we see only the primary cannon(s) of the TF tanks firing on that shield, one might presume he was referring to those cannons (which incidentally, were called laser cannons. There was one primary and two twin lateral secondary mounts.)

We only saw the energy shell launchers fire AFTER the shield comes down.

No asshole. My point was in response to this post:

<snip Treder's post>

Because the "manner of reaction" was previously seen in the chase seen. You propogated the strawman of single-type weapons for AAT blaster cannons and TF Battleship cannons. I simply noted they had similar affects and Treader was mistaken because the interations looked quite similar to me (ie. great fire balls).

Uh huh. I was asking a question, actually (since you have usually in the past repeatedly bitched whenever someone tried suggesting blasters/lasers were anything OTHER than massless phenomena) Since you apparently weren't going off on one of your rants, I can simply say I was incorrect and retract the statement.

But I don't know why I'm bothering since all you want to do is hijack and bring up off-topic insults and strawmen, and chase me through this board to flame me. Well you can go fuck yourself, asshole.

As if your opinion of me matters.

Thanks I really appreciate all the help. If it wasn't for you I would have...hang on, you just hijacked and started flaming each other Thanks. So could someone actually post something on topic? Answer to my question?

Connor MacLeod wrote:Since he's talking about what we "see", I presume he's talking about what is o bserved in the movies (supported by the rest of his statements - you do remember how Mike tends to operate don't you?) Since we see only the primary cannon(s) of the TF tanks firing on that shield, one might presume he was referring to those cannons (which incidentally, were called laser cannons. There was one primary and two twin lateral secondary mounts.)

We only saw the energy shell launchers fire AFTER the shield comes down.

No fucking way, you serious?

Maybe that is exactly why I made my reply in the form of a question because I couldn't be sure if Mike thought that it was the shells (since that's what he said and it exactly matches a weapon other than the blaster cannon) that were impacting the shield. Had the source in question not been an AAT, of course I would've assumed he was refering to the blaster cannon.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:, physical shells exploding against a shield (the Gungan theatre shield).

I believe those shots were from the Tanks' blaster cannon?

You replied like so:

Connor MacLeod wrote:And lets not forget that some blasters ARE projectile weapons as well. So even then Darth Wong's point still is valid.

Point taken, but since Wong said "physical shells exploding against a shield" and has supported the energy beam and shield-interaction theory for "flakbursts", I thought he thought that the initial bombardment on the Gungan shield was by the AAT's shell launchers, since he said "physical shells exploding." Alright?

Connor MacLeod wrote:Uh huh. I was asking a question, actually (since you have usually in the past repeatedly bitched whenever someone tried suggesting blasters/lasers were anything OTHER than massless phenomena) Since you apparently weren't going off on one of your rants, I can simply say I was incorrect and retract the statement.

Like I said, bringing up off-topic crap and hijacking the fucking thread because I fucking asked Mike for clarification, and you go off the wall for that and when I try to explain the question. Fuck you.

Connor MacLeod wrote:As if your opinion of me matters.

Nope. Just be nice if you didn't hijack the thread with flaming bullshit because I asked Mike a question, God forbid.

Actually, I think the canon visuals contradict the ICS description on this score, and the shots from the AAT main cannons are some kind of projectile despite the "laser cannon" labeling in the ICS. When they strike the shield, you can see discrete fragments falling away from the impact. Either the shield somehow converts a "self-contained plasma bolt" or "beam of lightspeed particles" (depending on which theory you subscribe to) into fragmentary objects which fall gently away from the impact, or it's some kind of projectile.