Fleet:
- One thing that struck me first was the greatly varying speeds of your designs, especially the carrier will render about half your fleet's engines useless. I'd suggest equalising your max speeds - This isn't necessary, but as long as you operate in the fleet all surplus engines are 'wasted' tonnage, since you can't fly faster than the slowest ship. Round speed and tonnage values help for this, but aren't mandatory.
- Your fleet is not jump capable. You might want to design an additional tender to guide the fleet through jump points, but with combat fleets I'd rather suggest putting a jump drive on the largest military ship (usually the carrier) and having sufficient numbers of these to jump the majority of your fleet in a squadron transit.
- You have weak ECCM and no ECM. Both of these can help greatly, especially in a missile based fleet that relies on range, but I take it that your tech just isn't that far advanced into the electronic warfare branch.
- Judging from the amount of MSP, you've added maintenace storages on top of a couple engineering spaces. Maintenance storages don't reduce the failure rate but merely keep more replacement parts stockpiled. They also take a lot of space - if you replace the storages tonnage with engineering spaces, you'll probably gain a longer deployment time by simply preventing the failure the storage would have fixed. (Sole exception being the carrier, that should carry some supplies for the entirely supply-less fighters)
Escort:
- Sufficient magazines to fire 110 volleys, but with a very low tube count. Unless you intend to field many escorts, I'd suggest upping the number of tubes (and perhaps the magazine). For five tubes, I think the magazine is large enough.
- Fire control is severly oversized for the missile range. You might want to consider saving space on the design with a smaller fire control.
Cruiser:
- A very strong sensor for a main combat ship. Sensors are both expensive, space consuming and a huge impact on the failure rates of a ship, so exchanging it for a backup or at least smaller sensor should save space and costs.
- Ten rows of armour. While I understand that the large sensor will probably guide enemy fire onto the cruiser first and it is supposed to be the main combat ship, I can't fathom the large difference between the other ship's armour and your cruiser. Your command ship or your carrier are both very viable targets (large sensors and largest tonnage), so allocating your armour more equally among your ships might help in the long run (as the AI *will* spread its fire across your fleet, although it prefers closer, larger, hotter and sensor ships first)
- Sufficient magazine space for 27 volleys. I'd rather increase the number of tubes (and the magazine) than field many of these cruisers, especially as they feature above mentioned large sensor suite and armour.
Command Ship:
- The sensors of your command ship are ill-suited for its purpose. You have one resolution 100 sensor that doesn't reach as far as your cruiser, no long range AMM sensor and no way to detect smallcraft (resolution ~20). That it's the only ship with passive sensors is the only reason for this design to even exist in your fleet.
- The maintenance supplies seem oversized for this ship, as it shows a four times longer deployment time possibility as the rest of your ship, unless it's supposed to double as a supply ship for the fleet?
- For a command ship I'd say the armour is a little low, although I've elaborated on this part in the cruiser section already. I'd put the large sensor into this ship and up it's armour quite some.
- The shields are quite weak. 8 points of shield strength might absorb two missile hits, or (which is more likely) less. They also take 400 seconds to recharge, and only seldomly does a battle in space last long enough for that to recharge your shields. I'd suggest either upping the shield strength significiantly (20-100 strength), or leaving it out entirely, depending on your shield tech.
Carrier:
- Your carrier carries very little fuel. Even if it wouldn't consume any fuel itself, it could refuel its 10-fighter squadron only twice before there's nothing left. Now, your fighters won't always use up their whole fuel reserve, but neither do you go in with 100% full fuel storages after flying to the battlefield. As your fighters are beam fighters, they'll stay out in space longer, though, and take more fuel than missile fighters.
- You have no reactors on the carrier to power your meson turrets. I'd suggest putting meson turrets either on a beam escort or your main escort design, if you wish to combine AMM and turret functions. Regardless, the turrets are entirely useless on this design as they have no power to fire.
Fighter:
- Your fighters are heavy, but this can hardly be changed with beam armed fighters. I'd suggest using missile fighters instead, but for beam fighters you could still downsize the laser and fire control, if you either use reduced size lasers, 10cm focals, or adjust the firecontrol some.
- As beam fighters tend to stay in space for quite a while, I'd add a fighter sized engineering space to them. It at least prevents any spontanous failures right after launch and allows them to actually stay in space comfortably.
