[Shadow99]

While I do agree that normal beam weapons (anit-proton beams, meson bLasters, & polarean beams) should do less damage to planets other direct fire weapons should not receive that kind of penalty. If we wanted to be realistic (like Commander G is implying) then other direct fire weapons (all high energy beams, graviton weapons, etc) would still inflict normal damage (after all they are weapons designed to do enough damage to effect palnets (& in the case of Quantum or Anti-Matter torpedo's would inflict more damage against planets).

I disagree about weapons platforms (& to a lesser degree satellites) & how they should be treated. For Weapon Platforms these things should require mega sized weapons (they do need to get into orbit after all) & they should (somewhat) have their power reduced, but Gas giants are inhabited near the edges of atmosphere & so aren't any worse than rock planets (to be honest all constructs on a Gas giant should be near space or float within the upper outer most atmosphere). As for Satellites they should also require larger sized weapons... After all who in there bloody right mind places itty bitty guns on satellites to defend their planets? (take a look at Bab5 to see who the satellite guns were near or greater in power than ship based systems, with only planet based guns being better.)

I'd suggest adding code so that planets are considered to have the type of armor plating that stops damage below a certain point & then set that point at ~50, 75, or 100 (based on planet size, larger planets being effected less).

[This message has been edited by Shadow99 (edited 17 November 2000).]