- Edited
That is an excellent point about adding in resource cost into the balance equation, if ammunition is going to require resources. Under that premise, you would think energy weapons are cheapest to run in PvE, followed presumably by ballistics with missiles sucking the most resources.
I'm not convinced it is a good idea to add ammunition resource cost tbh, as it will throw the current balance out of whack in almost a step ladder fashion, and if there is intended to be research/specialization branches of technology (think i saw that in trello somewhere) then the separate weapons trees need to be able to perform at all stages of the game.
On that note, i would say all the weapons trees currently perform well in early/mid game. What i find though is that railguns fall behind ions and nukes at the end game when ships grow beyond certain size. Ion stacking is great, nukes alpha strike hard and chew through ships if they survive after initial volley, but i find the railguns struggle to keep up. With that in mind, after a first play through, no one would run ballistics. Missiles would see play at late game when resources are abundant, and there would be no incentive to leave the laser tree of technology.
Edit: There is also no method of disrupting shields in the cannons category, this could be considered a game breaking balance hole if doing weapons trees/specializations