cbholmes

[quote who="Dizos" reply="23" id="3890859"] I agree with the sentiment that PD should be restricted to missile defense. I wonder if having damage to shields and armor vary based on specific beam, missile, and kinetic weapon types would add interesting strategic decisions. It certainly would make a weapon tech discovery more exciting and loudout decisions more significant than simply opting for the latest in a linear series. [/quote] This is what Stellari

[quote who="wbino3556" reply="8" id="3884206"] Quoting Daiwa, reply 4 Quoting wbino3556, reply 3 The man is a moron.</di

[quote who="Halicide" reply="17" id="3888433"] In the case of defenses, I understand it's hard to communicate how they affect the battle outcome. [/quote] Part of the problem here, as I see it (as a writer and Air Force Vet) is the misappropriation of words & terms. Point Defense, for example, exists specifically a counter to missiles. That is a concept that anyone can understand if they are familiar with the term "point defense" in even a cursory way. The idea that PD w