What would be the consequences of dividing all parameters of all modules in two and multiplying the slots by the same amount?
I won’t post my opinion at first to avoid biasing the question.
It would make things worse. Shields, repair modules, and probably a few other things do not add with 100% efficiency. If you double the number of these items on the ship, then either the scaling value would have to change or you would end up with six shields with each one being 25% efficient.
Efficiency is one of the module’s parameters.
So two shields with a 90% efficiency wouls transform into four with 95%
10020.9 = 180 -> 5040.95 = 190
So efficiency would have to be changed in a different way than simply dividing by 2.
Are you also talking about range, tracking speed, rate of fire, damage, resistances, penetration, etc. etc. etc.? It would be an unholy mess, that much is for sure.
I understand what you are saying. This is what I would expect would happen:
[]You would double the resolution of how you wanted to divide things up. For example, you could have 1.5 armor and 2.5 guns (essentially). This would have the advantage of making ship designs more tweakable.[/]
[]You would half the minimum size of things. For example, the minimum amount of armor would no longer be a basic armor, it would be half of that. This probably wouldn’t be a bad thing, but it could make armoring cheaper (in case that minimum is all that you need).[/]
[]It would double the number of slots that the player needs to fill. I think this would be risky, because outfitting large ships is already a combinatorial nightmare. 22 slots and 14 hardpoints is an awful lot of choices.[/]
[]It might double the workload for simulation. You’d have twice as many module hitpoints to keep track of, twice as many turrets to pick targets and fire, twice as many projectiles, etc.[/]
I’m not saying it would be good or bad, just that that is what it would look like.
I’m liking where this idea is going. Currently, on the Figs and particularly on the Fighters there are some basic setups that just work. There’s little room for tweaking. I like a bit of micro managing so the more room for tweaking the better. Doubling the options might be a bit much, but I like the idea of adding more slots on the ships.
Big problems with this though:
-it would require a complete rebalance
-new graphics would need to be created as current ships show only so many hard-points on the model
-processor work load in large battles
I think frigates and cruisers are good the way they are but I think fighters should have more hard points… a current day F-22 has three internal weapons bays. Of course it doesn’t have unlimited ammo but you see what I’m saying I hope 
Maybe more hard points but less powerful weapons or maybe each fighter could get an extra hard point for a weapon that can only fire once.
I really like this idea. In real life, fighters will utilize two weapons, usually guns and missiles or bombs. It would make sense for fighters to be able to use a slower, less powerful weapon at medium range, then switch over to a more powerful weapon at close range. I imagine fighters that could slowly pick apart a large ship with rockets, but switch over to fast and weak lasers for defense in dogfights or for trying to weaken shields.