No, I'm not saying that DB missiles have shields. I'm saying that they could have shields just as much as a non DB-armored missile. So the question whether shields are better than DB armor is rather moot.FTeik wrote:There were shields on the DBM? You're sure you don't confuse them with the missiles of the galaxy-gun?
How about the quote from the Broadside-class which proves DBMs were phased out, as well as the fact it's 300 times more expensive than regular CMs? Plus Shadows of the Empire, in which it was first described and already then it was made clear it never came beyond a special case weapon only. I'm not saying the Empire ceased to use DBMs 100% - I'm saying whatever they had must have been an extremely tiny quantity compared to the number of regular missiles, especially after Endor.FTeik wrote:As for "the empire stopped using them":
Note that the TIE Defender was considered too expensive for widespread use already at its conception, just like the other advanced TIE models. This has to be viewed in light of Imperial fighter policy (lots of cheap disposable fighters without hyperdrives) to make sense, because Defenders really aren't that more costly than X-Wings. If anything, the development after Endor increased the use of Defenders due to the different policies introduced by Thrawn, even though the Imperial economy was in the scrapper.FTeik wrote:Since the DBM was only deployed shortly before ROTJ, i would have blamed the fall-out of the battle of Endor and not necessarily the costs for the DBM not seeing wide-spread use (similar to what happened to TIE-Avenger and TIE-Defender).
Seriously, how often do we see capital-missile-use by the empire in the post-ROTJ-era to be able to claim, that the empire stopped using them?
As for capital missile use... we don't see it explicitly mentioned, but everytime a VSD is in combat in the EU, which is a lot, you can expect missiles flying. Teradoc's and later Cronus/Daala's 112 VSDs for example.