Aside from everything that was said by the others I would like to lay down the theoretical framework for a generalized solution (any speed, any mass, any charge, any distance, as long as the "balls" don't fall into a singularity).
There are 2 ways of looking at this problem.
The easiest one is to choose special relativity if the masses of the charges are relatively small, in which case we can neglect the gravitational effects. In such a situation we can use
$$ \frac{d(m_{0}U^\mu)}{d\tau} = - e (F'')^\mu_\nu U^\nu $$
with
$$ (F'')^\mu_\nu = \Lambda^\mu_\alpha(-v_{rcv}) \Lambda_\nu^\beta(-v_{rcv}) (F')^\alpha_\beta $$
and
$$ (F')^\mu_\nu = \Lambda^\mu_\alpha(v_{src}) \Lambda_\nu^\beta(v_{src}) F^\alpha_\beta $$
(for the rest of equations, what is which, how to combine them, see here)
We use this eq for each of foam-balls, and then we solve (using retarded positions) "orbits" at speeds close to the speed of light.
We vary $q_1$, $q_2$,draw graphs, deduce what happens.
Of course we need to define some border (surface) conditions, that are very important because they define what happens when the 2 balls collide.
Will they scatter ? Will they combine ? Will charge density combine to form peculiar new (kind of) matter ? Will they annihilate to create lots of EM waves or other kind of radiation ?
That is why it is very important to have the proper definition of what is under the exterior surface of the ball.
Simply assuming that is just a singularity under the exterior surface may disagree when it will came to compare with real life experiments.
The other way is to use general relativity.
There are two paths we could take here.
The simpler one is to assume that one of the ball has the charge and mass far far smaller than the other one : $m_1 >> m_2$ and $q_1 >> q_2$.
For such a case @Void provided here an answer in the framework of Reissner-Nordström metric, but I will try to answer from a bit different perspective the one of the theory of the bridges.
Einstein derived the metric in case of spherical symmetry for combined electrity and gravity a little bit different; he choose the sign of the energy tensor in such a way that by solving the field equations we obtain the metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ :
$$ ds^2 = (1 - \frac{2m}{r} - \frac{q^2}{2r^2}) dt^2 - \frac{1}{1 - \frac{2m}{r} - \frac{q^2}{2r^2}}dr^2 - r^2(d\theta^2 + \sin^2{\theta} d\phi^2) $$
So for such a metric the event horizon will be defined at
$$\left(1 - \frac{2m}{r} - \frac{q^2}{2r^2} \right) = 0$$
This means that even without the help of mass we can get an event horizon.
Since we used the square of charge implies that it does not matter which sign has the charge.
For this using traditional black hole analysis we will came to the conclusion that anything that passes the event horizon will have no way to get out, no matter how close to the speed of light we go.
On the other hand Einstein suggested a change of variable that would help us get rid of the singularity of the event horizon.
The first step would be to choose $u^2 = r^2 - \frac{q^2}{2}$, set mass $m = 0$ and then apply it to the metric to obtain:
$$ ds^2 = - du^2 - \left(u^2 + \frac{q^2}{2} \right) \left(d\theta^2 + \sin^2{\theta} d\phi^2 \right) + \frac{2u^2}{2u^2+q^2} dt^2 $$
So as we can see if $u$ varies from $-\infty$ to $+\infty$ but $r$ will only have positive values between $\sqrt{\frac{q^2}{2}}$ and $+\infty$. Our smaller ball will move from one spacetime sheet to another.
The last way and the most complicated way but which will give answers for general cases, no matter how big/small, how many, how fast/slow the "balls" are.
We have $p$ singularities. We enclose each singularity denoted by $s$ in a closed surface.
$$ \int^s{(\Phi_{\mu k} + 2 \Lambda_{\mu k}) \cos{(x^k \cdot N)} dS } = 0$$
We assign to each singularity $s$ the position $\overset{s}{\xi}$ with $\xi^k(x^0)$ being actually a 3-vector.
A distance from $s$ singularity will be defines as:
$$ \overset{s}{r}^2 = (x^1 - \overset{s}{\xi}^1)^2 + (x^2 - \overset{s}{\xi}^2)^2 + (x^3 - \overset{s}{\xi}^3)^2 $$
The generalized field equations are:
$$ \Phi_{\mu \nu} + 2 \Lambda_{\mu \nu} = C_{\mu \nu} $$
where
$$ C_{mn} = - \sum^p_{s=1}{\left( \left(\frac{\overset{s}{C}_m}{\overset{s}{r}} \right)_{,n} + \left(\frac{\overset{s}{C}_n}{\overset{s}{r}} \right)_{,m} - \delta_{mn}\left(\frac{\overset{s}{C}_k}{\overset{s}{r}} \right)_{,k} \right)} $$
$$ C_{00} = - \sum^p_{s=1}{\left(\frac{\overset{s}{C}_k}{\overset{s}{r}} \right)_{,k}}$$
$$ C_{0n} = - \sum^p_{s=1}{\left(\frac{\overset{s}{C}_0}{\overset{s}{r}} \right)_{,n} + \left(\frac{\overset{s}{C}_n}{\overset{s}{r}} \right)_{,0} }$$
having
$$ \overset{s}{C}_{m} = \frac{1}{4\pi} \int^s{ 2 \Lambda_{mn} \cos{(x^n \cdot N)} dS }$$
$$ \overset{s}{C}_{0} - \frac{1}{3}\overset{s}{C}_{k}\overset{s}{\dot{\xi^k}} = \frac{1}{4\pi} \int^s{ 2 \Lambda_{on} \cos{(x^n \cdot N)} dS }$$
We can now apply an approximation method such as one defined here and as stated here we can use this for charged particles in electromagnetic field.
We now want to find the distance for which the two singularities become inseparable, in the sens that none of them can get out of that distance.
We call that the event horizon(if there exists such a thing) $ r_H(x^0_j) = \sqrt{(\overset{i}{\eta^k} - \overset{s}{\xi^k})(\overset{i}{\eta^k} - \overset{s}{\xi^k})} $ such that $ r_H(x^0_c) \le r_H(x^0_j) $ for all $ x^0_c > x^0_j$ (here $x^0$ is obviously the time component).
We are therefore looking for a field that which is max of $|C_{\mu\nu}|$.
By either simplifying the assumptions or by using different methods of approximation suitable at each stage we could come to an answer - or we could setup a supercomputer and wait for a result.
There is one more note. To really generalise we need to consider the influence of all the other fields from all the energy in the universe ($10^{53}$ Kg), which as it turns out, will manifest itself at very small distances in the form of cosmic range Casimir effect or vacuum energy/entanglement, having values and influences in the range $ \Delta x \Delta p = h/2$. If this influences are small as compared to local fields we can rely on our result for having experimental observance, we can predict same thing as the experiments.