You don't need to be a modder or developer to suggest or balance a weapon or anything else for that matter, otherwise, we might as well delete the entire suggestions thread. Being a modder or being Alex isn't an indicator of being able to balance a weapon anyways. We can all suggest weapons and how to balance them to a specific balance wish.
Taking Greivous69's thoughts, I think that range isn't a neccessary component of being antifighter. Vulcans do well enough against weaker missiles and fighters that execute the surround over a ship pattern. Though it will not be able to attack a bomber. However that suggestion is closer to a beam weapon other than that it deals hard flux. Long range, high accuracy, low DPS. Could be useful, but takes away from the unique role of the beams as long range pressure, depending on the increase in range you have in mind. Do you have a rough ballpark for those values or the size of the mount? If you wanted it to be a medium mount, you've practically described the Thumper.
Taking bobuncles thoughts, I feel like that a soft flux AoE energy damage is straying too much into energy weapon territory. But the focus on AoE, raises a question if that AoE effect is desirable in itself. Should the AoE be sufficient to be discriminate and to ideally be able to counter large groupings of fighters, whether they are the interceptor types or bomber types. Should it be priced at a certain level where it would be ineffective against a single fighter left from a single wing, or have a similar level of performance to a similar weapon against that single fighter that is left? Would soft flux be desirable? Would that not create tipping point situations, or is it desirable that the anti-fighter weapon still needs a supporting weapon to deal with fighters?
Taking those two examples, there is the question of both damage type. What would be the most desirable damage type against fighters? Fighters have a wide variety in defences, though they do have minimal armour, with the highest value being the Warthog of 200. Which could be somewhat resistant to fragmentation damage depending on dps and shot damage. Or should concern be over mainly those fighters that have shields? In which case Kinetic should be preferable. Afterall once armour is depleted, most weapons behave similarily. Should the weapon be able to damage large amount of fighters as once at the detriment of being able to target a fighter singly? What exactly is the weapon intended to fight against? To design a weapon to counter Talon, or to counter sparks would have different approaches.
How should an anti-fighter weapon be designed? Any anti-fighter weapon can be used against frigates, especially with Safety Overrides hullmod. If that's a concern, the HE damage should hopefully alleviate that as a concern. Should an anti-fighter weapon also be a PD weapon? So as to be able to shoot down a bomber's payload? Nothing can stop sabots. The flak weapons shoots down masses of Piranha's bomb and Khopesh's missiles rather handily.