[ChronoReverse]

I'm pretty sure I wasn't imagining it; the Original Balor had terrifying damage as well negligible energy usage.  It did damage so quickly that I dropped my favored Prom-S without a second thought.

[General Battuta]

It was better than the Kayser for lower energy use than any other weapon and that was a problem.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

I'm pretty sure I wasn't imagining it; the Original Balor had terrifying damage as well negligible energy usage.  It did damage so quickly that I dropped my favored Prom-S without a second thought.

I don't think you're supposed to do that. The Balor was meant to be mass-produced in the same manner as the Subach HL-7, and was meant to be distributed in the same manner as the Subach HL-7. The Prometheus S is a mid-high tier weapon, a decent stand-in for the Kayser, which is still considered a prototype in BP.

Even after nerfing the Balor, I still think it is a marginally more effective weapon than the Subach. The only reason why I don't use it that much is because there's always the Maxim, Prometheus and/or Kayser around, and those are still my guns of choice.

The cycle flag on the Balor does not alter damage. However, if you were to mount the Balor on a gun mount with more firing banks, the fire rate of the Balor will be a lot higher, as the gun attempts to fire one shot from each bank within the small window of time it takes to fire two shots. In BP, the ships with the biggest number of firing banks to a gun mount are the Myrmidon (2 and 4) and Erinyes (4 and 4), but think of what will happen if you tried to mount on another ship, such as the Keres (8 and 8), or even the Shai (32).

[blowfish]

A cycle weapon will output the same number of shots in a given period of time compared to a non-cycle weapon, regardless of the number of gunpoints.  The difference is, normal weapons fire from all points at the same time whereas cycle weapons stagger the shots.  However, the refire rate for any individual gunpoint will always be the same.  So, all things being equal, a bank of four cycle weapons will do no more damage than a bank of four normal weapons.

Staggering the shots does have its advantages though...

[-Norbert-]

Would be nice to have something like in X-Wing (or Tachyon, I found her, and many more), were you could switch between staggering and group fire simply by pushing a button.

I think the reason why the Erinyes aces were lost and the Myrmidon and Perseus are feared is, that an ace is just one person. While it doesn't mention so in the prose in FS2 main campaign we usually had very few elite fighters and many standard ones. Myrmidon and Perseus are standard fighters, so there are going to a lot more of them, most likely outnumbering the UEF counterparts.

[Klaustrophobia]

all else being equal, the perseus can run circles around the ery, so the ery's rediculous firepower doesn't mean much.  i'd prefer an ery to a myrmidon in a dogfight though.

[The E]

I think the reason why the Erinyes aces were lost and the Myrmidon and Perseus are feared is, that an ace is just one person. While it doesn't mention so in the prose in FS2 main campaign we usually had very few elite fighters and many standard ones. Myrmidon and Perseus are standard fighters, so there are going to a lot more of them, most likely outnumbering the UEF counterparts.

The reason why the Eri turned out to be ineffective against the UEF is simply that the UEF has different priorities in fighter construction. The GTVA goes for mission endurance, reliability, and ease of maintenance.
The GTVA routinely deploys its fighters far away from their motherships. They have no qualms about sending a fighter wing through an interstellar node to fulfill an objective, and the pilots are trained to expect it and deal with it.
The UEF, on the other hand, has different priorities. Since they are bound to one system only, and have a large and well-developed infrastructure, their fighter corps is built around ships that are focussed on high performance, sacrificing everything toward combat performance. The average sortie rarely takes more than an hour to complete, and since repair stations are never more than a jump away, maintenance and logistics become incredibly easy.

As a result, the GTVA fighters are simply outperformed by their UEF counterparts, and while the GTVA has an edge in pilot skill levels, the better hardware the UEF can field more than levels the playing field.

[NGTM-1R]

Simplest terms: GTVA fighters are developed to fight Shivan craft. UEF fighters are very much superior to Shivan ships. The goalposts got moved.

[Dilmah G]

As a result, the GTVA fighters are simply outperformed by their UEF counterparts, and while the GTVA has an edge in pilot skill levels, the better hardware the UEF can field more than levels the playing field.

I'd have to disagree with the bolded point. It very much depends on the individual dogfight, and pilot skill, in my opinion. Keep in mind UEF pilots are in a do-or-die, backs against the wall situation, with pilots being thrown into spacecraft, expected to have the "Fighter Pilot Gene" or die. Their ships do excel in some aspects in comparison to their GTVA counterparts, but I daresay years and years of flying the Perseus in combat has taught Gunnery Schools to teach pilots streamed to the Perseus how to exploit the greater energy reserve and engine power in combat.

As opposed to the UEF pulling people out of nowhere to fly fighters, who most likely haven't been through gunnery school (where's the time during a war?), and thus don't know the limits or the 'feel' of the craft their flying. Sure, you have pilots in the UEF who are talented pilots, who've either learned very fast or had time before the war to hone their skills, but my point is, I don't think many of the replacement UEF pilots will, or know how to, take advantage of the superior UEF hardware. Or at least, not fully.

EDIT:

Simplest terms: GTVA fighters are developed to fight Shivan craft. UEF fighters are very much superior to Shivan ships. The goalposts got moved.

What he said.

[-Norbert-]

The UEF may have pilots with inferiour training to the GTVA, but on the other hand they have the moral highground. You can reason and justify all you want, but for most GTVA pilots there will always be this nagging in the back of their minds asking if it is really the right thing to do.
The UEF pilots on the other hands are protecting their lifes and loved ones from invaders who attacked without provocation (I doubt the UEF citicens know the reason why the GTVA attacked them).

So the UEF will have more pilots willing to go all the way. If a GTVA fighter is heavily damaged, the pilot is will most likely try his best to get out of there alive and screw the mission.
The UEF pilots are much more likely to keep fighting untill they simply can't fight anymore.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

The UEF may have pilots with inferiour training to the GTVA, but on the other hand they have the moral highground. You can reason and justify all you want, but for most GTVA pilots there will always be this nagging in the back of their minds asking if it is really the right thing to do.

Not to mention that UEF pilots are trained to stay near and assist their warships. You might not think that this helps morale a lot, but I honestly do believe that UEF pilots feel safer when they have a warship to count on.

[Inglonias]

As a result, the GTVA fighters are simply outperformed by their UEF counterparts, and while the GTVA has an edge in pilot skill levels, the better hardware the UEF can field more than levels the playing field.

What about anything cruiser-sized or larger? We saw the Temeraire outrange Shivan Beams, surely it can outrange projectile weapons. For that matter, why does the GTVA send fighters if the warships are superior, as they appear to be very easily? (Although the use of TAG missiles could be for that very reason: To allow warships to compensate for inferior fighter designs.)
For that matter, how does the UEF NOT have Prometheus cannons? It was very clear that Earth was the main source of resources until the gas miners could get enough stuff to make more cannons! They should have Prometheus cannons!

[General Battuta]

GTVA warships significantly outpower their UEF counterparts on a ton-for-ton basis. For this reason, GTVA tactics in Sol tend to be warship-heavy.

Of course, the counter to this is that the UEF maintains large stockpiles of antimatter and a powerful bomber corps. There's a delicate balance of power in the Sol theater, and while it generally favors the GTVA, it does prevent the Tevs from simply steamrolling Earth.

And the UEF has a successor to the Prometheus called the Rapier.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

Rapier, eh? I'd like to try that once WiH comes out...

Is it a blue peashooter, by any chance?

[Qent]

IIRC the heavy railguns actually out-range beams. And the GTVA's long-range weapons are singly launched torpedoes that won't connect as long as UEF point defenses are up.

[General Battuta]

Yep.

[The E]

Basically, the UEF fleet performs very well against Corvettes and Cruisers. However, Destroyers are a different matter entirely.

The GTVA sends fighters because even with their drawbacks, fighters are still cheaper than Cruisers and Corvettes, as well as more flexible. And if they are properly escorted, they can unleash all kinds of hell.

We saw the Temeraire outrange Shivan Beams, surely it can outrange projectile weapons.

It's not that simple. FS2 ships are very large, very slow moving targets. Shooting at them with ballistic projectiles (which cannot be shot down), accelerated to humongous speeds makes a lot of sense, especially when you don't have beams. Note that we never said that Beams were inferior to mass drivers, in fact, quite the opposite is true. The UEF has the luxury to be able to use technology that the GTVA has deemed as awesome and impractical for their mission profile. In addition, the UEF simply didn't have all the shivan wreckage to reverse engineer beam technology from, not to mention that they just didn't have the need to spend much on military R&D.

IIRC the heavy railguns actually out-range beams. And the GTVA's long-range weapons are singly launched torpedoes that won't connect as long as UEF point defenses are up.

Yes, but in terms of DPS, system reliability and accuracy, Beams come out on top.

[-Norbert-]

Not all destroyers are as bad as you would think. Just out of curiosity I tried setting a Karuna up against a Hecate. The Hecate took the Karuna down to 70% with a single shot from it's main beam, but that was the only shot it ever got out. Because two seconds later a full torpedo salvo impacted on the front of the Hecate taking out both beam cannons.
The side slasherbeam fared a bit better getting off two shots before being taken out. All in all the Karuna still had 58% hull left after it took down the Hecate.
I only remember the percentages of the last try, but I let that mission run three times, each time the Karuna won easily.

I though something alike would happen with an Orion, but for some reason the Karuna didn't stip away turrets fast enough (and began with the blob turrets), making it a rather short battle.

As far as the torpedos go my money would also be on the Karuna, unless the Titans have longer range torpedos. Where the Titans shot one torpedo at a time, the Karuna puts out salvos of them, making them much more likely to actually hit.

As for why the GTVA even uses fighters. Because they need something to stop the UEF fighters from stripping their warships bare of weapons. Sure they got some nice anti-fighter weapons, but those alone just don't cut it if the enemy fighers can concentrate fully on destroying turrets. Even if the GTVA fighters are just distracting the enemy it gives the warships valuable time to shoot them down.
That would be if the GTVA fighters were totally outclassed to uselessness. But while the GTVA fighters are inferiour, they are still far from useless I'd imagine. Otherwise the UEF pilots wouldn't be afraid of the Balor.

the UEF simply didn't have all the shivan wreckage to reverse engineer beam technology from

That piece doesn't make sense. The Lucifer was the only vessel in the great war that had beams. And there was not a single part of the Lucifer in GTVA space. The GTI cracked beam technology purely form scans of the Lucifer. Maybe the shivan wreckage from the secend shivan incursion helped improve the GTVA beams to their current (blue) strength, but they had beams before they ever got their hands on shivan ones.
If there was any wreckage from the great war that contained beam cannons it could only have been in Sol, since at least the front half of the Lucifer (were all beams are located, including the sidewards facing) came through the node before blowing up.

[General Battuta]

In BP canon, Sol never even invested effort in developing beam cannon technology - it did not have the resources or inclination during the post-war collapse. (We have a dossier on post-war Sol that hasn't been posted yet.)

The GTVA developed beams from scans of the Lucifer and analysis of other Shivan weapons. The Shivan Megafunk turret, for example, is basically a severely hobbled beam weapon.

As for the Karuna vs. Hecate issue, you're neglecting a critical component of the two ships, which is the fighter complement. The Hecate carries more than hundred fighters; the Karuna can launch eight to twelve.

It's absolutely true that Karunas excel at stripping turrets. As a result a lot of GTVA ships have had their turret shielding upgraded. (We got a special SEXP added to the SCP to accomplish this.)

Neither side will be stupid.

[Droid803]

Torpedoes/Railguns being awesome at stripping off turrets is simply a side effect of how the game targets with projectile weapons vs. beams by default. Projectile weapons are always fired at subsystems (at random, mostly), whereas beams are fired at vertexes of the model or something.

Beams can be just as good at projectile weapons at stripping turrets if you change their targeting method through ai_profiles.tbl.

Wait, why did you need a SEXP to increase turret health? Couldn't you just change it in ships.tbl? Or is this going to happen halfway through the campaign, and would require duplicating ship entries otherwise?