Sectional Defense Field (Abwehran)

You say that this can only be used on larger vessels because of the number of units required. But that is vague. The impression from the article is that there is a ratio of units to the size of the object. So theoretically that would not prevent a smaller ship from using them.

Perhaps you should say something about the amount of energy required to power all those units is the limiting factor.

You make an excellent point and I will gladly add a power consumption requirement to it as well.

But I'm mostly taking the number of units into account for volume, rather than total ship size. A warship after all has weapons, living quarters, and other important pieces of equipment. Adding multiple defense field generators to the mix would overwhelm any smaller vessels or would force designers to scrimp on something else in their design.

Either way, it is edited.

Could you give some information on what the shield actually is? Is it a gravimetric thing, a force field, etc.

Sorry, I thought the description of how it worked would make it apparent. I edited a small bit to say it's a force field.

...And a force-field is what, exactly?

Why an EM barrier of course.

It's been a little over a week since any comments were made, so I was just checking in to see if there was anything left to modify or change.

By the way, sorry for the double post.

This review is for: Sectional Defense Field

The submitted article is/has…
[x] A general topic sentence under the title header
[n/a] Artwork (illustrations are strongly encouraged for all spacecraft and handheld items)
[x] Needed and/or useful to the setting
[x] In the proper format/template
[x] Proofread for spelling and grammar
[x] Easy to read and understand (not a lengthy mass of technobabble)
[x] Wikified (terms that could be a link should be a link)
[x] Reasonably scientifically plausible
[x] Reasonably neutral point of view

The submitted article is/does not…
[X] Overpowered (or cutting tech for a faction with little or no roleplay)
[x] Obtusely redundant
[x] Contain copy pasta descriptions of systems or interior compartments
[x] Unauthorized by faction managers or player-controlled corporation
[x] Contain references to IC events that have not occurred (SM must authorize retcons)
[x] Use second-person language (“you” or “your”) unless it is an instructional guide aimed at players.
[x] Use bombastic language (“virtually immune,” “nearly indestructible,” “insanely powerful,” “horrible effects”)
[x Use an unbalanced header/text ratio (many headers but sections are one-liners)
[x] Use major unapproved sub-articles that should be submitted separately
[x]Lacking Detail

The article has…
[n/a] Speeds in compliance with the Starship Speed Standard, if applicable
[x] Damage Capacity and Damage Ratings in compliance with the DR Guidelines
[x] The in-character year of creation/manufacture. (Should be current year. Future years not allowed).
[x] The Standard Product Nomenclature System, if applicable.


Note here if any minor issues are present. These are issues you would like to see changed but will not necessarily hold up approval
** Short description of the issue. If a longer explanation is needed, put it in Notes.

No issues with the submission at this point, earlier points have been addressed. This represents the reasonable advancement in shield tech for their larger ships.

Status: Approved.