Random notes on and ramble about Sci-Fi tech(part 1. the energy shield).

Right, this is just going to be stream of thought mess about SF tech. See title above...

First off for cliche SF technology: Energy Shields.
I've noticed a weird(-ish) trend at least among SF readers(viewers, gamers, etc). That the most common working assumption is that kinetic weapons are bad verse energy shields. Some type of energy weapon is better.
This seems to come from a fantasy inspired magic-counters-magic trope. Early (non-hard)SF followed this because the projectile based weapons were supposed to be 'primitive' weapons tech, which was assumed to be disadvantage against the more advanced blaster and shield users...
It's a little bit off when you stop treating the shield tech as space-magic and make the Science part of Sci-Fi a little 'harder'. Here are some example bare-bones tech assumptions:

1. Pure electromagnetic or plasma-containing electromagnetic.
These to related types most resemble modern SF depictions of energy shields(the plasma one specifically). Also the most realistic in concept(but not depiction). A very strong magnetic field that may contain charged particles(often an ionized plasma). In principle this should work against particle radiation(i.e. from solar storms or fired from a particle beam). In the case of Particle Beams it would cause the beam to de-focus, and deflect or trap a some of the particles. This is what it hypothetically works best against.
Making the opacity(of a plasma) great enough to meaningfully affect Lasers is fairly unlikely. A Maser (that is micro-wave based cousin to lasers) is a bit more doable though. So not so good here, aside from the Maser this is the least affected form of attack. Note this goes both ways and will interfere with various types of EM sensor.
Projectile munitions that use electronic arming or detonating mechanisms (if not sufficiently hardened) could be overloaded causing failure or premature detonation(if explosive). Most other projectiles will be only mildly affected... Low velocity perpetrators(that have ferro- or para-magnetic properties) could be forced to strike at non optimum angles and that is about it. Meaningful deflection(even partial deflection) would require absurdly powerful EM fields(i.e. like a spinning neutron star or black hole; with an electrical charge!).
Note that less powerful versions of this have been considered(hypothetically) for radiation shielding for large space habitats by NASA since the late 60's through 70's for L-point stations in the real world. Also in Russian anti-radar stealth research(radar uses Micro-waves; plasma can make a working stealth field against such).

2. Gravity-based shields.
A soft-SF idea; though it has reasonable hard SF implications. Use for example in a number of David Weber stories(such as his Honorverse works); and in the Mass Effect series of games(the setting fluff does a fantastic job with the implications of gravity/mass manipulation). Right; how well it works is totally dependent on how strong the fields are... entirely based on deflection(anything with mass) or refraction(in the case of Particle beams and any EM beam).
Any thing attempting to defeat such a defense would benefit from more energy(i.e. Velocity for projectiles). Not much else to say- its magic-tech with realistic implications that are hard to judge aside from specific variants in concept. I.e., a strong field around and an object for deflection purposes(Honorverse, Mass Effect) vs. temporary pin-pint black holes as barriers(some fluff on Warhammer 40k void-shields; also Webers novel Fury; Defunct Star Wars New Republic lore...)

3. manipulation of the Strong or Weak nuclear forces
Pure handwavium magic-tech. Found in some classic SF and in some interpretations of Star Trek force fields(not generally a starships shield though). Some old SF variants were disintegration fields; not traditional barriers, So they were pure anti-physical object. No reasonable hypothesis to make about the rest of it.
Nope, no much to say here :-P