Beam fighters does have it's purpose as do any other weapon type and platform. Missiles are best use when you are able to overwhelm the enemy but if you can't it is going to be very costly to use missiles. Likewise would beam fighters be suicide against an enemy that knows they are part of your doctrine and have weapon systems designed to counter them. It would be much cheaper to destroy the fighters than the cost of building the ships countering them, that is almost always the case with fighters due to them having very expensive engines in comparison with their size. Just adding some of the medium calibre laser cannons on turrets rather than normal mounts would directly kill any beam fighter strategy while not really increase the opportunity cost of the fleet very much. If the enemy fleet mainly uses rail guns it would definitely be a suicide strategy.

I do think that against certain AI races and strategies then beam fighters would work fine, but you would still need to consider a relatively high attrition rate in general. Likewise are missiles not free either but it is easier to carry more missiles than fighters so a missile fleet could likely have more endurance the beam fighters if there are high attrition rate on the fighters. Having expensive carriers running around with empty hangars is generally more expensive than commercial ordnance ships with empty magazines.

I would rate fighters and missiles to be on the same level of attrition rate. It can also be a question on the type of resources you spend on either. Both will require allot of Gallicite. I say you would get around 15 size 6 for every 300t fighter... roughly. I also think fighters would cost you the most Gallicite, so that might also factor in to the calculation as missiles will have most of the cost in Tritanium.

I do think that in general beam fighters is the worse option, especially against an enemy that knows how to counter it. But they still have a use, but not as a main hitter against enemy main capital warships but more against enemy scouts, fighters and other lightly armed and armoured targets.

The main issue I have with beam fighters is that once they are committed the cost of misjudging the enemy strength are likely greater than using missile fighters. With missiles you launch one volley, if it does too little damage you can likely just withdraw the fleet in peace. You only lost the cost of those missiles launched... with the beam fighters the cost of loosing the fighters will be much greater.

The result: T-58 main battle tank and the MT-LB armoured personnel carrier. They will be built in sufficient numbers to form a number of Tank companies, whose mission will be to perform counter-attacks once the static defences have worn down the Capitalist forces.

• A - shuttles equipped with short-range missiles, meant to engage all types of enemy shuttles in hit and run attacks
• B - shuttles equipped with long-range missiles, meant for strategic attacks against priority targets
• C - shuttles equipped for transport duties, whether troops, colonists or cargo
• E - shuttles equipped with Active Early Warning sensors, meant for battle management
• F - shuttles equipped with beam weaponry, meant to directly engage enemy combat shuttles and to protect friendly shuttles
• K - shuttles equipped for transporting fuel, able to refuel other shuttles
• R - shuttles equipped with passive sensors, meant for covert observation
• S - shuttles equipped with survey sensors, meant for NASA research
• U - shuttles equipped for utility work not covered by the other categories

And at 1000 km/sec, the Albatross could easily outrun older Soviet Krivaks, albeit it was now clear that the Soviets had already mastered this new engine technology and any new enemy armed shuttles could prove a deadly menace to the Albatross.

Thanks to the economical F-4 engine, the shuttle could reach even the recently discovered gas giant Minerva, far into the icy depths of the outer system.

With nearly three hundred thousand litres of fuel onboard, each Hippo would be a juicy target for the Soviets and thus will require appropriate protection.

The C-7 Penguin was not just an upgrade of the Ares Program. It was completely redesigned from ground up to allow quick disembarkation of the troops it carried, turning the lumbering transport Ares into a sleek landing ship Penguin. In essence, this meant that the US Army could conduct opposed landings on any body in the system.

The C-9 Wombat would handle colonist transportation. Its capacity had increased significantly when compared to the old Aphrodite Program.

To the dismay of the Air Force, the latter three would be Navy enlisted men while the former three would be Air Force officers or warrant officers, a mixture sure to bring joy and happiness to all.

the A-12 Banshee
[...]
the B-14 Havoc

Very very happy to see this getting updated!

Would it be possible to group "Neutral Contact Updates" by Race, e.g. "Neutral Contact Update: Vorpaller Conspiracy"? That way we could hide notifications for races we're not concerned about and not hide ones we're keeping an eye on?