Kroom's Forge (0.15.11+)
@Kroom Maybe the larger twin cannon could take inspiration from the 5/38 mount guns? Barrels more closer together, a less visible cockpit, etc.
Created an account just to thank you for the awesome work 
The "hold fire" options for missile\torpedo launchers are particularly amazing. I can understand if you don't want to modify the vanilla parts, but would you be able to clone the vanilla launcher and add the hold-fire ability to it?
Thanks again!
BattleCruiserCommander It's a good idea, I will think about it.
last_misadventure Thank you! I'm glad you like it. I will add that option for the next update.
Having so much fun with this mod! My fleet consists of 9 of these and a few supply ships to rearm them--while I can't figure out how to get the landing pads to work, the teleporters are amazing.
Any plans on adding different types of torpedoes or missiles (from your launcher)? I was thinking an anti-shield missile might be interesting, and an "inferno" torpedo that trades damage for more penetration and chance to cause fires?
And I'm definitely looking forward to more Homeworld weapons. You rock!
Vectoring thrusters are OP. 
Kroom To dock ships, first, place them over the center of the landing pad, then select the ship with the landing pad and press the docking button at the bottom left (disable collision avoidance in gameplay options or use X key when issue the move order so the ship dont try to avoid be close to your landing pad.).
Im planning to add a EMP missile and probably an anti phase-shield missile, not sure about torpedoes yet.
ResExsention Can you explain why do you think so? do you have any recommendation to make them not op?
Kroom well, whats the major differences between stock thrusters and Vector thrusters (besides the angle thruster bits that the left and right ones have)
Kroom Can you explain why do you think so? do you have any recommendation to make them not op?
A fighter can literally have no unarmoured parts but still have complete maneuverability. That's overpowered in itself.
IMO it's not really a big thing, but perhaps vectoring thrusters shouldn't have backwards acceleration.
BattleCruiserCommander well, whats the major differences between stock thrusters and Vector thrusters
Vectoring thrusters can maneuver in every direction.
ResExsention Well, do they have the same power consumption as stock?
- Edited
BattleCruiserCommander Doesn't really matter tbh. You could have it orbit an enemy ship and there would be no forward-facing thruster weak points to exploit.
I don't battle competitively but atm there's literally no reason to use regular thrusters for fighter drive systems with these vectoring thrusters around.
ResExsention I mean, you can do that with Star Wars too
ResExsention Also, it'd be better to use those manuvering thrusters, as those can be completely buried within ships. Just have those and you would basically be unkillable
ResExsention IMO it's not really a big thing, but perhaps vectoring thrusters shouldn't have backwards acceleration.
I don't think that removing backward thrust will change much, as you can still have a protected vector thruster placed at the sides of the ship to have backward thrust.
Kroom I guess putting them in the side is better than putting them in the back only. I wonder where the side thrusters = reverse thrust game mechanic (or bug) came from...
BattleCruiserCommander You'd need a lot though
ResExsention It was around during 13.6-ish, but it got removed around 14.0.
ResExsention Vector thrusters are much less efficient. A small thruster has 200 kN thrust while a small vector has only 100kN. The medium thruster has 600 kN to the medium vector's 330 kN. RCS structure appears to increase power consumption (it provides the same buff as the overcharger, which I'm pretty sure increases power consumption) so you're looking at half the power efficiency on the small vector and 55% of the efficiency for the medium vector compared to the medium thruster even if you have 20 or 16.36 tiles worth or RCS structure respectvely to get the thrust per engine to match the standard thrusters.
Vector thrusters also do not allow fully frontally armored engines on fighters. Even maneuvering thrusters don't do that because Vanilla 3-ways already let you hide your engines. . There's some dead space, but if you were to try to get the same thrust out of vectors you'd need another 4 tiles of engine and probably another reactor to pull off the same forward thrust with vector thrusters alone.
Vector thrusters are pretty, but they're not particularly strong unless you're using them to get internal transverse thrust in a space too narrow to fit paired small thrusters (or even in some cases a bank of maneuvering thrusters) or using enormous banks of medium vector thrusters when you absolutely must have thrust with no ramp up time, though really the agility of no ramp up time is more a side benefit of the aesthetic benefit of not having any visible engine nozzles in that case. Something with a narrow nose like this could not otherwise get adequate transverse thrust near the front.
That only really comes up at somewhat larger scales than fighters, though. On fighters vector thrusters really only get you a lack of ugly engine bells where they don't look good.