In general, the major problem with the designs is that to be frank I don't see the point. What I mean is: you've got railgun fighters and railguns on the carrier, and you've got AMM fighters and AMMs on the carrier. While there is something to be said for redundancy, this is I think at too much of a cost to effectiveness. Carriers in Aurora in general just do not work well as "mutli-role" ships because it takes a lot of dedicated tonnage to maintain an effective fighter wing - this is a frustration when trying to model the large fleet carriers in many sci-fi universes, but is basically imposed by the heavier fighter classes Aurora forces on us, where most sci-fi fighters are probably 1% to 10% the size.
To make an effective carrier fleet, we must start with an effective fighter design and build around it. Usually this means a box-ASM bomber as these are the strongest use of carriers. In this case however it seems that PD fighters are the fighter we are basing the design around - presumably this means some other kind of ship will provide offensive throw e.g. a CG or DDG squadron. Therefore, we should commit to the PD fighters and mount minimal PD weapons on the carrier itself, if any.
Carrier: Remove the railguns as they are redundant with the fighters, and use the space for additional magazines. Additionally I would suggest aiming for a higher speed, ideally you would like a fleet speed of 4000 km/s minimum for missile-based fleets, however even using 100% EP modifier for the engines will get you up to 3750 km/s which is more competitive with likely enemy fleet speeds. The AMM launchers should be fewer and rapid firing with deeper magazines. If you keep the AMM fighters, a few (~6ish) launchers will be necessary to provide rapid fire when the AMM fighters need to reload. If you scrap the AMM fighters, which I would recommend as the carrier is a better AMM platform, then you want the rapid fire to be able to counter one large salvo or several smaller ones at more frequent intervals (even NPRs can launch ASMs every 15-20 seconds). Finally, you want a much larger RES-1 active sensor on the carrier, especially if you have invested in the missile tracking techs. Size 6 (300 tons) is the minimum I would suggest. Finally make sure you have enough fuel for your fighters plus deployment time, carriers in particular can expect to stay stationary away from a base running up the deployment clock but not consuming fuel so you want more deployment time. MSP is okay though.
Railgun fighter: While I get the appeal of using the new update features, 200 tons for a single-shot railgun is poor economy, you can easily put a full 4-shot railgun on a 400 or 500 ton frame instead and get more shots per ton. Also, while the smaller BFC seems better in reality you will get more efficiency from a larger BFC in terms of both range (accuracy) and speed (coupled with better engines). The major concept of railgun fighters is to have as much speed as possible to give similar performance to Gauss turrets of a similar tech level. To this end, and
especially because you are also using missiles, I would recommend teching to a higher maximum EP modifier - at least 2.0x if not 2.5x (3.0x is impractical for a starting fleet, but 2.5x can be reached with 15k RPs and is viable).
AMM Fighter: I don't like it. Mounting missile launchers on a fighter means you give up a lot of throw weight, and the speed of a fighter doesn't matter for missiles. Unlike for box ASM launchers an AMM fighter for point defense does not need to fly in front of the fleet to launch an attack, so there's not a lot of reason for to to exist. I would rather put AMMs on the carrier instead.
Missiles: You need to be faster, at ion tech an AMM should be pushing over 40,000 km/s without a lot of trouble. The key for this is again a high EP modifier which you already need for the railgun fighters. Even with your posted techs I can reach 35,000 with MR=12, however with 2.5x EP modifier tech over 40,600 km/s with MR=14 is possible which is a large improvement.
Techs: As a general rule I advise against taking any techs at the start of the game which do not contribute to component designs, as you can research these at the start of the game with no problems. For example, you have taken Wealth Generation 120 and Construction rate 14 BP, which could instead be used to take the 2.5x modifier. If you research those techs after the start of the game, they take effect immediately, however if you research 2.5x EP modifier after the start of the game you must re-design and re-build all of your fighters and missiles which use that tech - which means your outdated ones were a big waste of starting BPs. The same applies for the research rate, shipbuilding, and shipyard operations techs - these could have been for instance the next level of BFC techs which are highly valuable (note that with the BFC techs you have, max range is only 128,000 km/s which means you will have about 30% base accuracy for your 15 cm railguns at maximum range - not ideal if you end up in a running battle). Composite Armour for 5k RP is also a good investment especially for your fighters as fighters suffer disproportionately from the need to have armor.
Summary: Main points are
- Carrier task force needs to have a more focused design, I would stick with railgun fighters + fast-firing AMMs on the carrier only. Scrap the AMM fighters for this concept.
- Get up to at least 2.5x engine boost tech, you can do this with minimal trouble. Make everything faster.
- Fighter needs to be bigger, faster, and have a longer BFC range (even 48,000 km is an improvement).
