Ok, I had an hour of free time and went through all of those designs.
Everything below is, obviously, just IMO.
General:
As Charlie said, your missiles are darn slow, sitting ducks for any PD.
On ships with only PD turrets (i.e. no AMMs) I would mount a small (1 or 2 HS) res-1 active, not your standard res-1 active.
You are aware that your fleet scout would spot itself at just about 140mkm? (in response to your "covering 1 billion km with 2-3 scouts" scheme)
CIWS: I am not a fan of CIWS except for ships that are supposed to operate on their own. In squadrons, a system of mutually supporting PD-turrets is far supperior.
Your fighters seem pretty big (and therefore slow) Personally, I aim for fighter size below 300 tons.
Tribal Class:
Not sure the single 10cm Laser Turret is worth it. I perfere twin turrets. This is due to the fact that I need a firecon for a turret anyway. Adding up mass for the turret and the FC gives a total mass for the weapon system.
If you had 2+ turrets, linked to the same FC, the difference to a twin+ turret would be very small, but 1 barrel + 1 FC is not a very efficent use of mass, IMO.
Personally, I´d reduce the number of AMM tubes in order to get a second barrel into that turret.
I´d also reduce the size of the res-1 active by perhaps 1/3, as I would consider it strictly a backup system, in case my fleet scout buys it (Perhaps use the freed mass to upgrade the Small Craft ECCM to a full size ECCM?).
Edit: I see the Agincourt usees a GC turret for PD work there. As you have that technology, why use a laser turret on your DE? Rip it out and replace it by a GC turret.
Ark Royal:
Not sure what you inted the single 15cm laser to accomplish.
It´s tracking is too bad to of much use in a point defense situation and a single gun won´t have enough punch to slug it out at close range.
I´d probably replace it with a small turret and PD firecon.
I like the box launchers (I had a similar approach a few times and the massive alpha a squadron can do is realy something to be seen) Nowadays I am usually going with 25% reduced launchers and mag-space for 1 or 2 reloads. Yes, I can put fewer launchers in, but I can reload in the field from my colliers, after I have launched that alpha.
To each his own, I suppose.
Increase the range of the backup active (this is a backup sensor, yes?) to the range of the missiles (or a bit more range, so the next generation missile´s range is also covered)
Agincourt:
Too little armor for a sensor ship. It will be a prime target. Expect it to be hit, even if your missile defense is good (you will probably be able to walz over most AI oposition, but try to play two empires yourself and see how fast your defense gets overwhelmed).
Again, I am not sure what a single 10cm laser is supposed to acchieve. I´d remove it and put the mass in passive defenses.
Victory:
Too slow! It should have the same max speed as the Resolution or it will slow down the entire fleet.
As with the Ark Royal, I don´t see the point of the three 15 cm lasers. At that size, it is easily possible to build a mixed-armament war ship, but those 3 lasers won´t do a whole lot. I´d either reduce the number of missile launchers (and perhaps some mag-space) in order to put a few more lasers on or remove the lasers alltogether and increase the number of missile launchers.
Resolution:
Too little passives (and probably a bit slow).
Beam ships are supposed to slug it out at close range _and_ have to run the missile gauntlet. They need all the protection (active and passive) they can get. They also have to be able to close with the enemy which translate to: The faster the better.
I like the Box Launcher approach, but would rip out the regular ones. Perhaps increase the number of Box Launchers to 50 or 60 to give it a good alpha on final approach and still save enough mass (especially by removing the magazines) to increase the laser battery.
King George V:
If this ship is supposed to be the eyes of the fleet (and the only one per fleet to boot) it is not supposed to get into a slugging match! Remove the 25cm and the 15cm lasers as well as the CIWS and replace them with more armor/shields, GC turrets and perhaps some AMM launchers.
Are those actives max size ones? If not, I am not sure having both, res-180 and 360 actives is effective, as combing the mass of both in one double sized res-180 should give you a 1,500+m km range res-180 active.
And if they are, I am not sure I would use 2,500 tons just to spot 18,000+ ton ships further out than 800 mkm.
Trafalgar:
Nothing wrong with it, if you want to use only passives on your scout.
Illustrious:
If your carrier enters a situation, where it can use those 10cm turrets, you screwed up big time
IMO, a carrier should try to stay hidden as good as it can. This means, I will _never_ have shields on a carrier (EM emissions are to be avoided at all cost).
This also means, no offensive weaponry on a carrier. The offensive weapons of a carrier are the fighters - period.
The fighter complement is pitiful, I am afraid to say. A 30,000 ton carrier with just 5,000 tons of hangar space? Seriously?
Also, the entire space-wing has no offensive capability whatsoever (I am disregarding the Lightnings, see below), huh?
Lightning FAC:
Any enemy with any AMM capability at all will rip those appart before they even see the target. Total waste of resources IMO
Thunderbolt FAC:
Ok, an AMM fighter.
I´m not sold on that concept, but to each his own, I guess.
If, on the other hand, they are meant to use the AMMs in offensive mode, I´d use size 2 launchers with missiles with at least strength 4 warheads and a lot more range.
