ah thanks for the reply wouldn't it make sense to display the double fire rate as double damage, then? or possibly redo the whole display and show more like a "dps" value that factors in the cooldown / fire rate?

In yesterdays dev stream Paul mentioned they are reducing the mass a little bit. But don't miss out the the modules that increase rate of fire and range. 

and are short range and require far too much mass

Instead if guessing it is pretty easy to take a look at the file and do the numbers and then judge...

The basic truth is this... where Value is taking DPS, range and mass into consideration

Beam weapon Tier 1 (not the tier 0 one)

Cost 32, Accuracy 100%, Damage 3, Cool down 5, Range 800, Mass 14 DPS 0.6, Value 13.68

Kinetic weapon Tier 1

Cost 7, Accuracy 80%, Damage 1, Cool down 4, Range 600, Mass 24 DPS 0.2, Value 2

Durantium Driver

Cost 23, Accuracy 80%, Damage 8, Cool down 4, Range 600, Mass 24 DPS 1.6, Value 16

Missile weapon Tier 1

Cost 30, Accuracy 90%, Damage 6, Cool down 8, Range 1100, Mass 18 DPS 0.68, Value 16.8

Please make your own judgement...

Adding modules that make any type better is not worth considering since they all get those modules in some way and they are not really balanced well either. There is a significant different in cost between the weapons but it is very hard to believe this will make much impact, you are still in most cases going to pay for defensive components, engines and so on anyway so the cost can still be relatively close.

I have to say, Kinetic weapons, especially Durantium-based ones, can be a whole lot of fun.  Use the cooldown reduction component and they'll tear through anything.  Two 0/0/24 ships firing once every 2 seconds will take down a starbase in a hilariously short time.  That requires 4 Durantium, (using non-prototype Durantium drivers) but it's the easy one to find.

As for the regular Kinetic weapons, I usually avoid them for a military campaign.  But why's that a bad thing?  Missiles and beams are good choices for waging war, Kinetic however can be a fine choice for defensive ships.  You don't have to worry about other components, so fill them up with weapons - cheap weapons.  They can be replaced quickly - unlike fleets fighting dozens of tiles away.

I've noticed people posting a lot of numbers.  But those numbers don't apply the cost difference.  When the cost difference is applied, Kinetic falls into line with the others.  I know Kinetic isn't a good choice for those times we are sending fleets off the conquer distant planets, but does it need to be?  Can Kinetic fill a role as a good defensive weapon for those empires who aren't focused on conquering the galaxy by force?

I think I'm going to try this.  I'm now very curious to see what I can do with Kinetic weapons.

I think part of the reason is that defense is not well understood yet. Its clear that defense decays over the battle, but the decay rate is not been posted. I agree that the extra fire of kinetics should wear down the expensive armor defense quicker...and might make it more competitive.

Yeah, playing with Kinetics I can't help but feel I would be much better off with Missiles.

None of the above takes into consideration range.  You could have a billion point Kinetic, but if it won't fire until its in short range, and its going against an enemy with strong missiles, you'll never get to fire that billion point Kinetic gun because you'll get taken out by their long range weapons.

I don't think nerfing missiles to be nigh-useless is the answer, though -- maybe reduce their damage a hefty amount, but let missiles do other things other than pure damage, such as perhaps an EMP that damages the target's targetting computers and thus their accuracy in lieu of lots of raw damage, or somesuch.

How many of you use Carriers? they seem pretty strong and my main ships dont get hit. I havent really tested but the small ships that come out seem to be replenished each fight so these fleets never wear down form multiple battles.  

Not twice -- their default rate of fire is only 20% less than lasers. Their boosted rate of fire certainly is twice, but that comes at a cost of them now having 40% less accuracy than lasers.

Also, the AI and the default schematics don't use Rapid Reload, so when the AI uses kinetics, or you decide to use a kinetics ship that you didn't personally design, it universally sucks.

Agree completely. Mass Drivers got hit too hard with nerf bat.

Carriers and small ship fleets tactics notwithstanding the abundance Durantium can be a bit of an equalizer in standard gunship fights.  It’s easy to put a support ship in every fleet with an Accelerator Field and an Internal Field Projector, as well as field a fair number of gunships with Rapid Reload, Armor Pricing and Kinetic Accelerators.

The ability to field significant numbers of armor piercing gunships is the key.  I’ve found that ships with good defenses and fully augmented and supported Kinetics rip through other ships because your heavy hitters are largely ignoring enemy defenses, and most opposing ships still have to dig through yours.  There simply isn’t enough Antimatter and Elerium to field a significant number of support ships and defense penetrating  gunships simultaneously.  I usually have one extremely defended spearhead fleet with all armor penetrating ships that often takes no damage at all in a fight.

 I’m no expert but my mid and endgame Kinetic fleets typically have the following kinetic specific buffs:

• Rapid Relod: +50 ROF
• Kinetic Accelerator (on many but not all ships) +.5 range -15% accuracy
• Armor Piercing:  (on many but not all ships)  Treats armor as normal hit points
• Accelerator Field: +25% range (Support)
• Inertial Field Projector: +25% damage (Support)

Throw in targeting and defensive support and you have a mean fleet.

I don't find mass to be an issue mid to late game because I play dense use a lot of miniaturization, and you don't want so much firepower that you overkill every volley.