I don't see any point in where I EVER would put a 35cm railgun as a 4-shot version over three single shot versions when the latter have three times the damage output... no one cares about the slightly reduced PD capability of such weapons in any way. There is not a choice here. Even if you change the distribution of the damage output to be less... you put these large guns on a ship for the ability to deliver damage at range not for PD. Railguns already have the highest DPS per power used so they already fill that niche to begin with. No matter how you do it you probably are better of with reduced sized large guns combined with small short range ones for PD no matter how you design it.
Balance is still quite important to a certain degree even for RP purposes otherwise we could just pretend everything and just write stories.
This 100%.
I'm sorry Iceranger but at this point SS large caliber railguns are SO good there's basically no reason to use other beam weapons for range damage. It's simply too much.
Plus Steve already said it was completely intentional on his parts. Because of this, as far as I am concerned this is simply a bug.
Beam fighters are already in a niche role after the meson nerf, shield buff, and the general buffs to large ships. And now we are adding a niche weapon to a niche role. I don't really see what the SS railguns are supposed to achieve after the nerf. If we examine various beam roles on fighters/FACs:
PD: 4-shot railguns or max tech gauss fulfill this role the best
DPS: again 4-shot railgun excel in this category, after the proposed nerf (usually doesn't matter for fighter caliber unless at extremely low tech where fighter themselves are questionable due to the lack of proper engine boost tech)
Alpha strike: reduce-sized laser is the go-to choice here
Penetration: again reduce-sized laser is again the go-to choice here. A non-reduced 10cm laser has the same penetration as a 35cm railgun, and a SS 35cm railgun is larger than a 10cm laser.
Range: laser wins again.
After the nerf, the SS railgun will be 35% size of a full-sized one, 50% of the cost, and 25% the recharge rate. Translate it into DPS (which is Railgun's advantage), it is 71% DPS per HS (note lasers have 75% DPS per HS compared to railguns), and 50% DPS per BP. I don't see how this is 'balance' by giving an already weak class (fighters) a new weapon that is not better than what it already can use.
As I mentioned earlier, it can be possible to not nerf it to the ground, while making it still stand out. Let's consider the following possibilities before simply dismissing them:
- SS railguns are 35% size, 50% cost, and 25% recharge rate compared to the full-sized gun. This means it is 71% DPS per HS, 50% DPS per BP. This is the current proposal.
- SS railguns are 35% size, 50% cost, and 35% recharge rate compared to the full-sized gun. This means it is 100% DPS per HS, 70% DPS per BP. It is still inferior to the full-sized one, this at least give me a reason to use SS railguns on fighters/FACs
- SS railguns are 35% size, 50% cost, and 40% recharge rate compared to the full-sized gun. This means it is 114% DPS per HS, 80% DPS per BP. This will give SS railguns a trade-off: higher cost for higher DPS per HS.