The universe of capital-sized weapons is both fairly small and fairly balanced, so it's amenable to being analyzed all at once. Given that I've been constructing a bunch of designs over in
Aerospace Fan Designs, I thought I'd do some number crunching. Note that I won't be including sub-capital weapons or mass drivers, as those are much more limited in availability and play differently.
Each weapon will be analyzed on a few derived stats.
- Damage per effective kiloton, which adds 10 rounds of ammunition and all necessary double heatsinks to fire the weapon,
- Damage per million C-bills, which will give a sense of if it's cheap or expensive, and,
- The maximum number you can mount in a single bay(for ballistic/energy only), which determines how well it can bracket and how much peak damage you can get for thresholding.
Those will then be used to discuss what sort of use cases are best for the weapon.
Energy WeaponsNaval Laser 353.5(35) damage, 700 tons, 52 heat, long range, $500,000, can switch to fighter targeting mode
4.82 damage/kton, 7.0 damage/$M, 20 max per bay(=70 damage).
Naval lasers are decent dual-purpose weapons that can both defend against fighters and warships, though they probably shouldn't be your main weapons in either role on larger ships. Because NL/35s have a shorter range than the other NLs with no better efficiency stats, they're definitely weaker against warships. However, the smaller size means they're less prone to overkill than other NLs against fighters, so if your NL mounts are anti-fighter first and anti-warship second, NL/35s are a strong choice.
Naval Laser 454.5(45) damage, 900 tons, 70 heat, extreme range, $850,000, can switch to fighter targeting mode
4.81 damage/kton, 5.3 damage/$M, 15 max per bay(=67.5 damage).
Much like NL/35s, these are good dual-role secondary weapons. Can be used fairly interchangeably with NL/55s, depending on available weight. On lighter ships where fire control is not an issue, these can make a very good primary battery, as they're just as weight-efficient as NPPCs while also having an anti-fighter option.
Naval Laser 555.5(55) damage, 1,100 tons, 85 heat, extreme range, $1,250,000, can switch to fighter targeting mode
4.81 damage/kton, 4.4 damage/$M, 12 max per bay(=66 damage).
Use these just like NL/45s, as they're basically identical.
Light Naval PPC7 damage, 1,400 tons, 105 heat, long range, $2,000,000
4.82 damage/kton, 3.5 damage/$M, 10 max per bay(=70 damage).
These suffer somewhat by comparison to NL/55s, as they don't do much more damage, are no more efficient, have less range, and lose the anti-fighter targeting option. The best use for these is probably getting a maximal 70-point bay, as they're the only energy weapons aside from the NL/35 that can do so, and they use less fire control in the process(and a 70-point bay is gross overkill for anti-fighter work, so the lack of an anti-fighter mode is no problem).
Medium Naval PPC9 damage, 1,800 tons, 135 heat, extreme range, $3,250,000
4.82 damage/kton, 2.8 damage/$M, 7 max per bay(=63 damage).
These save a noticeable amount of fire control slots compared to NL/55s, so on ships that are likely to fill their slots up, these can be a good primary battery. Also, a lot of heavy bays do 60 damage, so any metagamers who build their ships with 610 armour per facing will hate you for making 63-damage bays.
Heavy Naval PPC15 damage, 3,000 tons, 225 heat, extreme range, $9,050,000
4.82 damage/kton, 1.7 damage/$M, 4 max per bay(=60 damage).
The biggest energy weapon, these provide all the usual no-ammo, long-range joy with very low fire control usage. A 4x HNPPC bay is a monster, able to fully bracket if needed, threshold almost anything, and keep firing forever while leaving lots of room for other guns - there's a reason the McKenna used so many of them. These are best suited to heavy ships that need serious long-range smashing potential where fire control is a real issue.
Ballistic WeaponsNaval AC/1010 damage, 2,000 tons, 30 heat, long range, $2,000,000(ammo = 0.2 tons, $30,000)
4.96 damage/kton, 4.3 damage/$M, 7 max per bay(=70 damage).
These have slightly better efficiency than the energy weapons, and they can create 70-damage bays, but they lose range in comparison. If you want the ability to fully bracket and long range, these might be your pick, but energy weapons will give it a run for its money.
Naval AC/2020 damage, 2,500 tons, 60 heat, long range, $5,000,000(ammo = 0.4 tons, $60,000)
7.89 damage/kton, 3.6 damage/$M, 3 max per bay(=60 damage).
Compared to NAC/10s, these are dramatically more efficient - the only thing they lose is the ability to fully bracket. If you expect to be rolling on 12s a lot, these might not be your pick, but otherwise they're a really solid all-around choice.
Naval AC/2525 damage, 3,000 tons, 85 heat, long range, $7,500,000(ammo = 0.6 tons, $75,000)
8.20 damage/kton, 3.0 damage/$M, 2 max per bay(=50 damage).
These suffer by comparison to their neighbours - they're not as efficient on tonnage or fire control as a NAC/30, and can't bracket to -2 like a NAC/20. These shouldn't be used unless you have very particular amounts of remaining tonnage, or you're metagaming against an enemy with ~240 armour on a facing.
Naval AC/3030 damage, 3,500 tons, 100 heat, long range, $10,500,000(ammo = 0.8 tons, $90,000)
8.43 damage/kton, 2.6 damage/$M, 2 max per bay(=60 damage).
The most efficient guns in their range bracket by far, these are a great all-around choice for tonnage efficiency combined with decent range. They suffer somewhat from bracketing rules, but they're still solid.
Naval AC/3535 damage, 4,000 tons, 135 heat, medium range, $14,000,000(ammo = 1 ton, $105,000)
8.58 damage/kton, 2.3 damage/$M, 2 max per bay(=70 damage).
These lose the range of the NAC/30, but they gain the ability to create 70-damage bays. They're probably the best single option for creating gigantic holes in enemy armour in a knife fight.
Naval AC/4040 damage, 4,500 tons, 135 heat, medium range, $18,000,000(ammo = 1.2 tons, $120,000)
8.73 damage/kton, 2.1 damage/$M, 1 max per bay(=40 damage).
These don't have the ability to bracket at all, and have both the shortest range and smallest bay size of any capital weapon. But they're the single most tonnage-efficient and fire control-efficient guns in the game. If you want to get in close and peel armour off as quickly as humanly possible, these are the guns for you.
Light Naval Gauss15 damage, 4,500 tons, 9 heat, extreme range, $20,300,000(ammo = 0.2 tons, $45,000)
3.33 damage/kton, 0.7 damage/$M, 4 max per bay(=60 damage).
In Mechs, gauss weapons are good because they don't need heatsinks, but in a WarShip, heat sinks are just added tonnage - there's no space limitations. As such, these lack any role I can imagine. A HNPPC with full heat sinks(even if they're singles!) will have the same range and damage with the same number of fire control links, but weigh over a thousand tons less. Never use these, outside of house rules.
Medium Naval Gauss25 damage, 5,500 tons, 15 heat, extreme range, $30,350,000(ammo = 0.4 tons, $75,000)
4.53 damage/kton, 0.8 damage/$M, 2 max per bay(=50 damage).
These are substantially more efficient than the LNGauss, and are better on fire control space as well. They're slightly less efficient than NPPCs even so, but if you're in a really heavy ship where fire control is a concern, they can be usable.
Heavy Naval Gauss30 damage, 7,000 tons, 18 heat, extreme range, $50,050,000(ammo = 0.5 tons, $90,000)
4.27 damage/kton, 0.6 damage/$M, 2 max per bay(=60 damage).
These lose a bit more efficiency compared to MNGauss, but gain a bit more fire control efficiency and a bigger bay size. They have similar use cases overall.
Missile Weapons (Note that I'm ignoring tele-operated variants of the standard missiles for simplicity - they're nearly identical)
Barracuda2 damage, 90 tons, 10 heat, extreme range(or better), $90,000(ammo = 30 tons, $8,000), -2 to hit
5.06 damage/kton, 11.8 damage/$M.
These are nice anti-fighter defences, but they really suffer in an extended fight due to the extreme ammo weight. In an era before heavy AMS coverage, these were good jack-of-all-trades weapons, with the ability to crit at extreme range even without thresholding and the ability to attack fighters alike, at the cost of staying power. In an AMS-heavy battlefield, these get a lot weaker.
White Shark3 damage, 120 tons, 15 heat, extreme range(or better), $130,000(ammo = 40 tons, $14,000)
5.68 damage/kton, 11.1 damage/$M.
Much like a Barracuda, except with far better crit rolls instead of anti-fighter bonuses. These are the best friend of an outnumbered force - fire a few dozen from your cruiser at a
McKenna and pray for a golden BB. Not bad on efficiency, either. Like other missiles, these suffer badly from long fights and abundant AMS.
Killer Whale4 damage, 150 tons, 20 heat, extreme range(or better), $150,000(ammo = 50 tons, $20,000)
6.06 damage/kton, 11.4 damage/$M.
The high-damage option of the capital missiles, though with no particular gravy to go along with it. These are the most efficient extreme-range weapon in the Star League era, even with their huge ammo weight. Also, even in the high-AMS era, these can get through more firepower than most, due to their higher HP - it takes 14 AMS systems to guarantee that you'll knock one of these down.
Kraken-T10 damage, 220 tons, 50 heat, extreme range(or better), $500,000(ammo = 100 tons, $55,000)
8.03 damage/kton, 9.5 damage/$M.
A monster on efficiency, and the missiles are strong enough to get through the AMS firepower of even a
Leviathan. It's like a Killer Whale, but more so. Definitely use these in preference to Killer Whales if they're available.
AR-10250 tons, $250,000, can fire any of Barracuda/White Shark/Killer Whale ammo.
These can suck up a ton of weight, because the game forces you to carry 10 missiles of each type if you want to be able to use them - if you want all three choices, the 250 tons becomes 1450, which is more than a LNPPC for half the damage and less staying power. But the versatility is very nice, and a few of these as support weapons will appear on most designs that can spare the weight. Note that you can mount both a Barracuda launcher and a White Shark/Killer Whale launcher for less total weight than an AR-10, allowing you to fire two missiles a turn if desired. Thus, you should only use these if you expect to use all three missile types, or if fire control limits are a concern.
Small WeaponsI won't go into the zillions of these that exist, but I want to highlight one in particular to use as a comparison:
ER Large Laser (Clan)1 damage, 4 tons, 12 heat, medium range(extreme in sub-capital terms is medium for capitals), $200,000
100(!) damage/kton, 5 damage/$M.
While the NAC/40 is massively efficient by capital standards, these are over
eleven times better, with the same maximum range(though they do take higher range penalties for being standard-sized). Mech-sized weapons are actually fearsomely effective in a capital-sized fight, and it's mostly the lack of fire control slots that prevents them from dominating everything.
Summary- For versatility, NL/45, NL/55, AR-10, and maybe NAC/20 are your friends.
- For anti-fighter weapons that can double as light anti-WarShip weapons, use NL/35 and Barracuda.
- For raw smashing power at extreme range, use MNPPC or HNPPC, or maybe MNGauss if you're short on fire control.
- For raw smashing power at closer ranges, you want some combination of NAC/30, NAC/35, and NAC/40.
- If you expect short games with low levels of AMS, missiles are incredibly strong. If everyone is bristling with AMS and you expect to go 30 rounds, don't bother.
- If you're metagaming with bay sizes, anything goes, but the old saying of "play stupid games, win stupid prizes" comes to mind.
- Load up on small weapons as best you can. Fire control weight makes them inefficient after a while, and their ranges are short by capital standards, but they're vastly more efficient than anything else within their ranges, and they also do nasty things to fighters.
It should be noted that this is pure theorycrafting - I haven't had much chance to play actual games with WarShips, so it's possible I'm missing something here. Corrections are welcome, along with any other comments you may have. Thanks.