Jonathan_S wrote:I'd point out 2 things.
First, the hit rate is likely not independent of the target set. SD(P)s pack vastly more defensive firepower, ECM, and decoys than most of their tube-based predecessors. That makes them much tougher targets and should seriously reduce the hit rate against them. (So conversely Task force 34 with its heavy leavening of obsolete DNs should be much easier to hit that Honor's forces at Solon.
Yes, that is true and I thought about the effect of defending ships on the hit rate, but I have not found a way to include it in my calculations. On the other hand, even if the RMN anti-missile capabilities and doctrine was substantially improved at Solon compared to Marsh, the number of defending units was many times greater at Marsh (6 SD(P)s, 36 SDs/DNs, 4 CLACs and 36 BCs versus 2 SD(P)s 5 BC(P)s and a bunch of cruisers) against only a doubling of enemy SD(P)s (12 versus 6), so the defensive basket was much deeper (even if not quite so effective on a per CM/PDLC basis).
Jonathan_S wrote:(Further the RMN soft kill tech should have improved from Marsh to Solon so even against the same RMN ships you'd expect lowered hit rates as the RMN gets more experience fooling RHN MDMs)
Yes, but on the other hand the RHN must be improving their MDM seekers and doctrine as well. Admiral Theisman even boasts at the start of AAC that he expects their SD(P)s to increase their combat efficiency from 40%-50% of a RMN SD(P) during Thunderbolt to 67%-77% of that.
Jonathan_S wrote:Second it's hard to blame the chief of RHN staff for being unaware of the real world hit rates when the forces for Marsh were dispatched (before any real world RHN MDM fire had occurred)
Maybe he did not have a real meter-stick, but rates of 20%-30% were wildly optimistic. And again, if he envisioned such high hit rates, why waste 8 SD(P)s to attack 3 RMN SD at Maastricht ? Why not send 4 SD(P)s and 4 SDs at Maastricht and give two full SD(P) squadrons to the Second Fleet for the attack on Marsh ?