So, people might snear at this, but I ask you to hear me out.
It just seems wrong to me that an Akira, or a D7 can mount cannons when they were never shown to have any in the tv series or movies. Birds of Prey had cannons, and I have no trouble with them. Something like the Armitage looks like it has cannons, you can see them on the hull, so I don't have a problem with that. But take the Chimera for instance. I take one look at that and the entire thing screams phaser beam strips, or at least TMP-era style phaser beam arrays. But it can mount cannons, and the msot damage comes from cannons, so everyone puts cannons on it. And the sames goes for single cannons and turrets. They're some of the best weapons in the game for tac cruisers, but do you thinkthe Excelisor came with them? Cryptic ships, sure if you want cannons, then I can see it, more so if the ship model looks like it has cannons, but most of the other ships in the game, sorry, but no.
I suppose that I just feel that cannons don't belong on as many ships as they do now, and that it takes away the "trek-ness" of the game. Or I wish that the different weapon systems were more equal so that I could fit what I at least, felt was a "proper"fit for my ships at least without everyone in an STF telling me that I was "doing it wrong."
I agree, I hate having cannons and turrets on my Excelsior mostly becasue it just looks so wrong!
But with the way that the beam powers work, cannons are just better weapons for most of the endgame content, or if your ship is maneuverable enough then all of the end game content. If you took away the ability to mount these weapons then the game would become even more escort heavy.
Maybe in future STF's will stick you in a situation where you're swarmed by much smaller and more manuverable ships, beam arrays and fire at will would then shine brighter. I think a lot of the balance issues in this game are caused by lack of content or lack of diverse endgame missions.