Bolter + Burst VS Gatling

So, in your experience, what do you prefer? A burst-enabled Bolter or a Gatling? Or a combination of them? Why?

After many experiments I came to conclusion that I stuff my ships with Burst Bolters up to full. Bolters may have drawbacks, but being burst-enabled and in big number, they effectively create a wall of fire on approaching targets - missiles as well as fighters and are rather precise. Also, their range is greater and they seem to have a bigger hitbox and.

This to me is a simple question the bolsters is too precise when it comes down to defense against missiles just put one upgrade into hull damage and one into burst and they take down any missile shoot at them often I find the gatling to be too unreliable to be useful as missile defense and since you don't use PD to take down ships that often the spray they do aren't worth investing in

The problem lies not in one missile - those are easy. The trouble is in groups. Bolters tend to overkill one target and permit others to pass, while gatlings - though you take a risk - have a better chance of taking down two or three missiles, when multiple guns bear down on point defense.

Though Gatlings are more expensive to start, they are also cheaper to upgrade to best effect than bolters, requiring fewer upgrades. Gatlings are relatively effective out of the box, and one hull-damage upgrade each is all they really starve for.

I tend to go bolter more for ships that are likely to rely on close-in weaponry, like the early game where I don't have much long-ranged gear, or if I have no drones.

I've tried a few variants for pdw and always come back to the bolter (1 burst, 2 damage). It is very versatile, affordable in the early game, and scales well. The only reason why I like it over the gatling is because I think it's better all-around.