Math Says: Don't use the Super Weapons

[Xkill]

So the point is the Super weapons serve for you to go to the bathroom do a and then throw at that suck "Super Weapons".

So if these weapons are that weak so why the developers don't delete them and put more casual weapons?

[Rustyallan]

So if these weapons are that weak so why the developers don't delete them and put more casual weapons?

The point of this thread was to bring the problem to their attention. They were designed with tradeoffs that make them supposedly better, but it's just not working out that way as far as the players are concerned.

You can certainly say the Death Star's main beam has low DPS, but when it hits a ship (or planet), that ship is GONE.

But that one beam takes a lot of space/power which could be put to better use with smaller weapons that produce greater overall DPS.

[taltamir]

ORIGINAL: Xkill

So the point is the Super weapons serve for you to go to the bathroom do a and then throw at that suck "Super Weapons".

So if these weapons are that weak so why the developers don't delete them and put more casual weapons?

They most likely only compared absolute damage (by itself) and then invented values for everything else with what "felt" right. they did not actually calculate initial salvo damage per space unit, initial salvo per money unit, initial salvo per energy unit, DPS per space unit, DPS per money unit, and DPS per energy unit. Most likely an unintended oversight.
The reason I believe that is what happened is because a ships "firepower" is simply the sum of the damage per single shot of all its weapons. (it should be the sum of the DPS of all its weapons)
Not only is DPS (per unit of cost in space, energy, or money) significantly more important then initial salvo damage (since shields are cheap and powerful enough so that an initial salvo is extremely unlikely to one shot a ship), initial salvo should ALSO be taken in terms of cost (in space, energy, or money) if you measure it...
Since there is no limit on how many weapons you may place on a ship...

If there was a hard limit of only 5 weapons per ship or some such, then a weapon with inferior values of all of the above would have superior "overall DPS per weapon component" (since weapon component is now limited to 5, it has become a measurable cost...) as of right now, you can have an infinite amount of weapon components, meaning that it is not a measurable cost. Only measurable costs are energy (just build more reactors; but that does take a little bit of space), space (most important! slows down your speed, and there is a hard limit on how big you can go), and money (can only afford so many ships).

The second reply to this thread is by Erik, a developer. And he said they will take a look at weapon balance at v1.0.5

[Axefire]

ORIGINAL: taltamir

Explain how they charge outside of battle then? or why they consume static amount of power outside of battle or in it?

Where do I see how much static energy usage or whatever energy the shields use? The shield descriptions on the design window does not show it.