First of all, paragraphs. Grammatical errors and spelling mistakes are fine, everyone makes them. Run on sentences and walls of text are just uncomfortable to read though.SNIP
The turning ability of the Type 45 is effective when you turn your entire tech as well, especially on a larger and more cumbersome tech. The slightly offset barrels help to ensure that at least one shot in 3 would land, and you can indeed hit hovercraft with the Type 45. Overall, the weapon design is good, and as I've said, there is no reason for it to out damage 3 MK3 guns.
My argument was that using cell space to justify why the Type 45 should be superior to its contemporaries is not a valid argument due to the tremendous advantage offered by rotational capabilities. While the weapon should have a bit more in the way of vertical targeting (especially downwards), I think that the size/cost of the Type 45 makes its raw DPS fair.
I think that the purpose of the Type 45 is to offer a more sustained source of damage, as opposed to the heavily alpha-strike oriented HE corporation, and while I like the rapid firing, I do agree that its DPS needs to be redistributed between RoF and Damage/Shot, and that explosions need major buffs. Other than that, I trust that with such buffs, the Type 45 would be a totally solid weapon.
As for the scale of these buffs, I think that quadrupling damage and quartering RoF may be extreme. That would ruin the rapid fire feel which makes the weapon relatively unique among other cannons (barring venture rapid cannon) in the first place. There's no way around making the explosions the same size as an HG1/Gigaton/Cruise Missile blast though, it would just not be effective otherwise.
Ultimately, I'm saying that 3 smaller barrels inevitably means less damage than 3 MK3 cannons, saying that you could fit X MK3s or Y Venture Cannons in that space doesn't make sense. Although without a proper explosive punch, Type 45 is indeed underwhelming.