Another minor inconsistency: every missile has its ammo count displayed in the 'no flux cost to fire' field, while pilums do not, and have an entirely separate 'max ammo' field down below - actually fooled me into thinking they are infinite for a while, same as salamanders.
They're not?! Whelp.
Uh, yes they are. Pilums can pump out infinite missiles, given a theoretical ship with infinite CR. What it
can't do is fire at its maximum rate for an infinite amount of time: Pilums fire faster than the missiles can regenerate, and at some point in time you run out of ammunition in your ready-rack, you're "throttled" and can only pump out Pilums as fast as you can regenerate them (which is about half its maximum fire rate).
This is one of the reasons (arguably the biggest one) I prefer missiles to regenerate.
I can see some missiles being reworked with regeneration mechanics, but not all (or even most). I certainly wouldn't want to see the current Sabot or Reaper racks becoming reloadable, those types of missiles are simply too powerful to add regen mechanics for existing racks, and would need serious consideration and new weapon variants to see non-game breaking ones at all.
Other vanilla missiles that are a bit less high-value, though? Sure. Especially ones whose role is undermined by finite reserves.
Ex: Swarmer SRM. It's not a terrible
missile weapon, but it's a poor
anti-fighter weapon. Swarmer ammo doesn't regenerate, while dead fighters replace. Most fighter types also replace faster than Swarmer Batteries can kill them, even when assuming unrealistically-high hit rates for the Swarmer SRM. This makes them quite underwhelming in their intended anti-fighter role. (This appears to remain true when running 0.95's buffed Swarmer SRMs; they're cheaper with a bit more killing power but the critical ammunition concern remains). I'm currently experimenting with a reworked Swarmer with regenerating mechanics to see how/if that changes things.
IMO, missiles intended for a primary anti-fighter role or PD role could be considered candidates for regenerating mechanics, as their intended targets either may (missiles) or will (fighters) replace themselves indefinitely. Not to say that
every anti-fighter/anti-missile missile should regenerate indefinitely (SWP's ultra-cheap Flare Launcher PD is a good example of a non-regenerating PD solution), but certainly things like the Swarmer SRM and Proximity Charge launcher (why is
this the most expensive medium missile? Do people really use it?) could be considered for re-imagining as ammo-regenerating anti-fighter/PD options.