Hi Alex,
I wanted to throw my 2 cents into the ring as far as these balance changes go as they are the 1st change you've made to the game that I feel the need to comment on. I have not had a chance to read every single comment so if im repeating anything, my apologies.
Combat balance pass:
Spoiler
Removed energy weapon bonus damage from high flux level
Increased damage values for non-beam energy weapons by roughly 25% to compensate
This makes sense to some degree (although i'm sure the numbers for beam weapon damage will need to be tweaked later). While granting damage bonuses at higher flux was an interesting idea, I don't think the game offers enough control over flux management to make it a major mechanic. I still like the idea of having some ways to differentiate the weapon types beyond their damage vs shields, hull, armor but this may have not been a great way to do it.
Beam weapons:
Spoiler
Standardized range to 1000 for most non-PD, from Tactical Laser to HIL
Increased range for PD Laser and LR PD Laser
Slightly reduced OP cost for all beam weapons
Tactical Laser, Graviton Beam, and Phase Beam are no longer interrupted by missiles
Greatly reduced fade in/out time for most beams
This seems primarily like a balance change. I'm sure it will be tweaked again at some point.
Missiles:
Spoiler
Salamander: both versions have unlimited ammo and require 20 seconds to reload
Hurricane MIRV: regenerates 1 ammo every 20 seconds
Pilum LRM: regenerates 1 ammo every 10 seconds
This makes a lot less sense to me for a few reasons. First, a system where missiles have ammo while most other weapons don't already seems arbitrary. I understand it from a gameplay standpoint (missile spam and all that) but it may not be intuitive for a new player. Having to keep track of missile ammo only carves out an exception in the combat mechanics that is not obvious. This is not a major issue but something to consider. The bigger issue is that some missiles regenerate. This does not make a ton of sense thematically (why can a ship produce one type of missile in the middle of combat but not another?), nor does it make sense intuitively (a new player who runs out of missiles will likely not know about this mechanic). Most significantly in my mind however is that this carves out another exception in the combat mechanics. The way I would have to describe the combat rules to someone would now have to go something like this: "There is no ammo in the game for most weapons except missiles and bomb bays. With those weapons, once you run out, your out. unless its a particular type of missile. Then you get more at a set interval or another special missile that has unlimited ammo, but just that one". This is unnecessarily complicated for a new player, can't be easily explained in a tutorial, and makes it more difficult to understand combat. New players tend to focus on the minutia of things. There are a few lets plays on Youtube of StarFarer where the first time someone gets into combat they focus on things like their number of command points or looking for objectives because thats what they remembered from the tutorial, even though those things have a minor impact on the actual gameplay. If there is a need for this change due to AI then something like a "onboard missile manufacturing" hull mod makes more sense. It can be added to the stock ai ships and the player will get the necessary information from the hull mod description when they install it (if it is available to them at all).
Ballistic weapons:
Spoiler
Now have unlimited ammo, except for Bomb Bay
Reduced OP cost of Light Dual MG
This is another change that I struggle to understand. The reasons given for the removal of ammo seemed to be that A: Ammo didn't matter much except in large battles, and B: the system could be abused. I have a few thoughts here. I have never felt like ammo does not matter, and have had several of my engagements (including the afformentioned large ones) affected by a lack of ammo (certainly many more than by a mechanic like command points). This may be relevant only to my play style but I did feel the need to say that ammo as it exists now is not useless, atleast for some weapons.
It seems to me that reducing ammo count for most weapon would make ammo more relevant more often, expand choice (by allowing for the creation of specialized ships, skills, and hull mods that address ammo) and generally improve the combat experience. Additionally, this would help to further differentiate various weapons using non standard methods (such as damage or OP cost). Making a weapon with say, 8 total ammo, gives you a unique way of balancing that weapon that is different from all others and allows you to maintain greater variety and flavor through-out. I will add my comments on the abuse point below.
Ships
Spoiler
Destroyers and cruisers now have a peak effectiveness timer like frigates
Roughly 5-7 minutes for destroyers and 7-9 for cruisers
High-tech/faster ships have shorter timers
These changes don't bother me as I rarely run into these timers, however I don't like the idea of designing systems around folks who choose to min-max. If someone wishes to kite a fleet for 45 minutes, I think we should let them. Starsector is a single-player game without any impact on the real world, there are no accounts to sell, no gold to farm for someone else, no rare items to ebay etc. In such a case, I say let folks play how they want to play. As long as the min-max approach is not the
clearly superior one, and it is not given the fact that it is substantially slower most of the time, I don't mind. Balancing the game around min-maxing simply adds unnecessary complexity and complicates gameplay.
On to Peak efficiency timers specifically. These timers make sense from an intuitive standpoint (crews tire, guns wear down, etc.) but they have no impact on gameplay in a real sense (the reason given for removing ballistic ammo) except in very long battles or when people choose to play the game in a way that does not make sense to you. The real impact of these timers is that they are too long to matter to most people so they have no effect on gameplay for most people but add another layer of complexity to learning the combat system. As I mentioned before, if you sat a new player down and asked them to go through a tutorial, they will notice things like peak efficiency timers (as they don't come across such mechanics in other games, and as such will seem important) in a manner that is disproportional to the mechanics actual impact on the game. I may be wrong but it seems that that is what I would do.
If you do wish to keep them, then I say lower the timers, create tiers of efficiency and make their effects get progressively stronger. Keeps us on our toes, makes the mechanic mean something to most of us, and gives you a stick to whack those min-maxers with.
Spoiler
Sunder: increased top speed, acceleration, and flux capacity. Reduced shield efficiency.
Brawler/Shepherd: increased burn level by 1 (to 6)
Condor: reduced supplies/day by 1 (to 4)
More balance stuff, meh.
TL:DR;
Keep ammo, reduce the quantities. No regen on missles without a clear communication to the player that such a thing is happening. Kill peak efficiency timers or make them shorter and tiered. Make the mechanic mean something to everyone, not just the min-maxers.
Thanks, and apologies if what is written above does not make sense. I'm very tired.