Gaming this out for peer adversaries is mostly moot, right? The post-Cold War strategic balance has mostly hung on MAD. And Russia, in particular, has responded to any attempt at building missile shields with more capable missiles.

It's likely more relevant for asymmetric conflicts that involve conventional weapons, and would enable an otherwise less resourced adversary to become a near peer.

Dennis Bushnell from NASA presented this deck in 2001, and is quite prescient about UAVs and distributed warfare.

https://alachuacounty.us/Depts/epd/EPAC/Future%20Strategic%2...

Eh, he threw so much random stuff at the wall that some of it is bound to stick. An early slide in his presentation says there will be "no pixie dust," but that's 90% of what follows.