Duckk wrote:While the CL usually has some edge over the DD in terms of armament, the difference is primarily in the level of endurance. CLs are built for longer cruisers and longer fights. A DD vs CL fight could actually be fairly close, all other things being equal. The disparity between types is a lot smaller than, say, a CA vs. BC or BC vs. BB.
Duckk -- my impression from a same peer generation DD v. CL fight was that the CL usually had more offensive weapons, more defensive weapons, deeper magazines for both AND bigger crews for damage control. So it can throw more for longer and defend more effectively than a same technology destroyer.
For example from the Companion:
Noblesse class DD -- 4 missiles, 3 lasers per broadside with 2 counter missiles and 3 PDLC
Courageous class CL -- 7 missiles, 4 energy weapons per broadside with 3 counter missiles and 3 PDLC
The CL has 1.5 counter-missile stations per destroyer missile tube, while the destroyer has less than 1 station per cruiser missile tube.
Culverin -- 5 missiles, 4 lasters, 5 counter missiles, 4 PDLC
Valiant -- 8 missiles, 8 energy weapons, 5 counter missiles and 4 PDLC
Culverin is slightly better defended against Valiant proprotionally than the previous example ( 1.1 counter missile stations per light cruiser missile tube) while Valiant is much better defended proportionally than Courageous at almost 2 counter missile stations per destroyer tube.
I agree completely, there are chances where a destroyer can beat its bigger cousin CL. Usually with ships that light, the first to score a few laser head hits will see its expected win probability increase dramatically, and if the quasi-random nature of missile exchanges allows for the destroyer to get the first few hits, then its odds are decent. But the light cruiser of the same generation of technology should have a significant advantage over a destroyer as it has more defenses to counter less incoming fire.
