On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 12:44 AM, Ethan McKinney <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
It also depends on the shape of the weapons. If they're guns like those on wet navy battleships, a sphere will let you mount more of them for firing forward. You can't minimized exposed area and maximize mountable weapons at the same time, unless The weapons fire at right angles to their length (not impossible).

For lasers and partical accelerators (maybe fusion guns as well), you could "pipe" (via mirrors or magnetic channels) the beams to whichever side of the sphere was engaged (depending on whether you are the one chasing or the one being chased). For missiles, you could have a central magazine that feeds to launch tubes both fore and aft, at least if you are using relatively small missiles.

I'm not sure if such partially-duplicated arrangements would be more or less efficient (in terms of required volume and power) than dedicated directional mountings. But it may work out to be a wash. Given the ranges at which combat between *capital* ships (as opposed to cinematic fighters) take place, you aren't very likely to simultaneously engage targets outside a fairly restricted arc. So a certain percentage (as much as half) of your weapons aren't going to be usable in a given action. If you instead mount a single larger weapon but feed the output in opposite directions, you might come out with an effectively more powerful armaments array . . . at least for most battles. 

--
Richard Aiken

"Never insult anyone by accident."  Robert A. Heinlein
"I studied the Koran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as Muhammed." Alexis de Tocqueville (1843)
"We know a little about a lot of things; just enough to make us dangerous." Dean Winchester
"It has been my experience that a gun doesn't care who pulls its trigger." Newton Knight (as portrayed by Matthew McConaughey), to a scoffing Confederate tax collector facing the weapons held by Knight's young children and wife.