I felt it was more useful to display damage/tube, since damage/rocket is already present in the stats and damage/tube is a useful way of comparing them. Does nobody else care what the damage/tube is? --[[User:Roguelazer|Roguelazer]] 16:35, 9 April 2006 (EDT)
Damage/tube isn't really a realistic number to compare rockets by, since rarely does one ever use a full tube of rockets on a single enemy(Exceptions being Hive, Capital ships, and pre-nerf Behemoth). One of the reasons one flies rockets is to end a fight as quickly as possible with as few hits as possible. In light of that, it's often better to have a set of rockets that have a high damage/rocket ratio, but a lower damage/tube ration(theoretically). Comparing two rockets by damage/tube is somewhat akin to comparing two cars by the amount of gas they can hold. --[[User:Calaihm|Steve]]
== The whole cannon concept. ==
I don't exactly see the difference between "cannons" and, say, "blasters". They're all energy based, as opposed to ammo-based(Most rockets) and hybrids(Screamers and railguns come to mind), no? And, on that note, I'd like to set a motion for changing Blasters/Cannons/Guns/Missiles/Rockets to Unguided/Guided with the subsections Energy-based/Ammo-based/Hybrid in each as necessary to make it a bit more intuitive overall. --[[User:Calaihm|Steve]]