Insanity: Screening elements in the HV

penny wrote:Moriarty is a system of platforms that was deployed throughout Solon on its first use. It consists of a main platform about the size of a heavy cruiser receiving information from many other platforms deployed through the system. It provides ~ 25,000 control links, give or take a link. But that system was pre-placed. Making it useless in enemy territory.

But Moriarty only had that many control links because:
a) Essentially the entire platform was fire control "four hundred thousand [tons] wasn't a lot . . . unless all of it was dedicated to fire control"
b) It relayed that fire control through a bunch of pre-placed platforms that were "in effect, a less capable, simpler minded version of the RMN's own Keyholes"


That second is what let it control that many missiles without wedges cutting all it's control links.

A mobile ship would not only need to carry all the normal ship things, plus all the CM launchers, plus magazines for CMs (and so be able to fit far, far, far, fewer control links per ton) but it wouldn't have all those fire control relays to disperse that fire control across and allow it to maintain the necessary lines of sight to each of its swarm of CMs.

Oh, and even with pods you can't get the kind of numbers of missiles that Moriarty enjoyed with its shoals of widely separated pre-deployed pods -- because a ship rolling pods still runs into limits on how many they can roll between incoming salvos and needing to spread them enough to provide clearance around each missiles's multi-km wide wedge. Moriarty also gets to take advantage of the fact that all its missiles were widely dispersed across predeployed shoals of pods around the system -- giving all kinds of room so wedge clearance wasn't a significant concern.


All that said, if you took an SD(P) and dedicated it to defensive fire it would be more capable and fleet defense than a normally balanced SD(P). But probably only somewhat more capable. I'd guess less than 50% more effective -- a current SD(P) can already throw and control a crazy number of CMs -- to the point where if you had two Invictus-class armed with Mk23s they'd likely be unable to land a single hit on each other. A quad-stacked salvo would sent 240 missiles at the other SD(P), which could respond with 8 full salvos from its 206 CM tubes; so 1648 CMs, nearly 7 per incoming missile!

But even if it's twice a good defensively, to get that you're giving up 100% of its offensive firepower -- firepower that helps more quickly reduce the number of platforms that are shooting back at the fleet. And it'd cost basically as much time and money to build as normal SD(P) so you're shrinking your offensive firepower significantly since you're limited in the number of ships that size you can build and operate. Every SD(CM) you has in one fewer SD(P).

Now if you were able to actually build something the size and cost of a heavy cruiser that gave you the defensive firepower of a SD(P) then it might start to make sense to build a dedicated anti-missile escort. But the way RFC set up his Honorverse I don't see how you could possible do that.

Jonathan_S wrote:

penny wrote:Moriarty is a system of platforms that was deployed throughout Solon on its first use. It consists of a main platform about the size of a heavy cruiser receiving information from many other platforms deployed through the system. It provides ~ 25,000 control links, give or take a link. But that system was pre-placed. Making it useless in enemy territory.

But Moriarty only had that many control links because:
a) Essentially the entire platform was fire control "four hundred thousand [tons] wasn't a lot . . . unless all of it was dedicated to fire control"
b) It relayed that fire control through a bunch of pre-placed platforms that were "in effect, a less capable, simpler minded version of the RMN's own Keyholes"


That second is what let it control that many missiles without wedges cutting all it's control links.

A mobile ship would not only need to carry all the normal ship things, plus all the CM launchers, plus magazines for CMs (and so be able to fit far, far, far, fewer control links per ton) but it wouldn't have all those fire control relays to disperse that fire control across and allow it to maintain the necessary lines of sight to each of its swarm of CMs.

Oh, and even with pods you can't get the kind of numbers of missiles that Moriarty enjoyed with its shoals of widely separated pre-deployed pods -- because a ship rolling pods still runs into limits on how many they can roll between incoming salvos and needing to spread them enough to provide clearance around each missiles's multi-km wide wedge. Moriarty also gets to take advantage of the fact that all its missiles were widely dispersed across predeployed shoals of pods around the system -- giving all kinds of room so wedge clearance wasn't a significant concern.


All that said, if you took an SD(P) and dedicated it to defensive fire it would be more capable and fleet defense than a normally balanced SD(P). But probably only somewhat more capable. I'd guess less than 50% more effective -- a current SD(P) can already throw and control a crazy number of CMs -- to the point where if you had two Invictus-class armed with Mk23s they'd likely be unable to land a single hit on each other. A quad-stacked salvo would sent 240 missiles at the other SD(P), which could respond with 8 full salvos from its 206 CM tubes; so 1648 CMs, nearly 7 per incoming missile!

But even if it's twice a good defensively, to get that you're giving up 100% of its offensive firepower -- firepower that helps more quickly reduce the number of platforms that are shooting back at the fleet. And it'd cost basically as much time and money to build as normal SD(P) so you're shrinking your offensive firepower significantly since you're limited in the number of ships that size you can build and operate. Every SD(CM) you has in one fewer SD(P).

Now if you were able to actually build something the size and cost of a heavy cruiser that gave you the defensive firepower of a SD(P) then it might start to make sense to build a dedicated anti-missile escort. But the way RFC set up his Honorverse I don't see how you could possible do that.

Perhaps. Maybe. I understand your dissent. Basically it is hard to sell a single use purpose built warship; and for every one of these built is one less SD. True. But, for every one of these is one or more SDs that are not destroyed in enemy territory. The Peeps surprised Honor at Solon. The Peeps threw 11,000 missiles at her and she was shocked. And that was less than half of their capability. What kind of numbers do you think the MAN will put up when they roll out the red carpet?

I'm not saying CM warships have to be built in enormous numbers. Heck, they could simply be used in Grand Fleet when Grand Fleet makes a call in enemy systems.

The logic of having as many offensive platforms available to reduce the number of enemy ships shooting back at you is prudent . . . against wedge based ships that you can see. Against the MAN, a completely different approach is needed. You can't shoot back at an enemy you cannot see. I cannot stress it enough, the conventional book of tactics will be thrown out the airlock.

Almost inevitably the GA can count on the MAN getting in the first launch fleet to fleet. Against the MAN at Darius, the GA must survive that first launch, and subsequent launches. The GA will have to buy itself time to localize / find this enemy.

Brigade XO wrote:

penny wrote:Rereading Storm from the Shadows. One of my favorites.

Anyway, I proposed a CM warship laden mostly with CMs and control links. I couldn't sell any of you any of that stock. But I'm more convinced of it now that I'm rereading SftS.

Moriarty is a system of platforms that was deployed throughout Solon on its first use. It consists of a main platform about the size of a heavy cruiser receiving information from many other platforms deployed through the system. It provides ~ 25,000 control links, give or take a link. But that system was pre-placed. Making it useless in enemy territory.

A CM warship would always be there with the fleet. Something the size of an SD should be able to supply much more than the capacity to control 25,000 control links. And an SDCM(P) could be stuffed to the gills with CMs, making it an inter-system platform giving much more tactical depth.

Having a nominal CM only warship with a fleet going into action could provide a thickening and probably layering of CMs within the effective CM range of the fleet but that part it was close enough to get the CMs between the fleet members and their attackers missile weapons. But would it be enough of an advantage? Your covering part of a fleet and if you somewhere near the center of mass in the wall you are still limited to a firing solution in cone (probably) from the CM ship in the direction of the incoming fire and constrained how close you can plan for your projected intercepts.
Having a CM warship as an in-system platform- not accompanying a fleet ---probably puts it out of range with it's CM unless you are able to preposition it to cover an attack vector and the enemy's missile flight paths. Not being the size of a LAC, but close enough to intercept the passing missiles with CM you are going to be a wonderful target for anything that incoming wave that lost lock and certainly get noticed and get some enemy attention as large warship targets that's closer that the fleet they are firing at.
At that point you are probably better scattering swaths of CM carrying pods and or mines but if you can guess that well on how an attack is going to develop your pods should be loaded with Apollo compliant ship-killers and start making your enemy have to defend themself and start using munitions and maneuvering before they get into engagement range of your warships. Every single early hit you make on them at that point should start degrading on thier both offense and defense capabilities Make them burn CMs and maneuver and deal with damage.

The firing solution of the missiles was not affected at Solon. It should be less so with CMs, no? Several CM ships should be worth their weight in control links. Having seen the MAN's CM design, if the GA were to deploy a CM warship utilizing the MAN's own CM design, it would make it even more formidable. It would be an unbreachable defense I'd wager.

penny wrote:Perhaps. Maybe. I understand your dissent. Basically it is hard to sell a single use purpose built warship; and for every one of these built is one less SD. True. But, for every one of these is one or more SDs that are not destroyed in enemy territory. The Peeps surprised Honor at Solon. The Peeps threw 11,000 missiles at her and she was shocked. And that was less than half of their capability.

Her two SD(P)s with their screen were very good at intercepting 11k missiles. And the only reason she couldn't do better was that she only had two SD(P)s. Now let's suppose that one of them was an SD(P)-CM and let's assume that it would have much improved their defences. She would still have lost at Solon because she wouldn't have had the offensive power.

The problem is that either you have to trade off a regular SD(P) for a CM one, or you don't. If you have to trade off, I'm not sure it's a good trade-off. If you don't have to trade off because you can build a lot of ships anyway and you've had time, I don't see why you'd need a CM ship in the first place: if Honor had had a full squadron of regular SD(P)s at Solon (whether 6 or 8), she would have definitely won.

This boils down to: is an SD(P)-CM cheaper to build and operate than a regular SD(P)? Are the logistics simplified?

What kind of numbers do you think the MAN will put up when they roll out the red carpet?

What makes you think they will have the necessary fire control for a massive number of missiles? The technology seen at Galton was the pinnacle of their conventional military technology (minus the Ninurta, but that one was probably not in production in the first place). The numbers that they threw at the Grand Fleet were woefully insufficient and I don't think they had fire control for them all.

No, I take that back: they had no fire control at all, because Galton did not and the MAlign still does not have FTL control links. At 10 light-minutes action, there's no lightspeed control.

I've said this before and I'll repeat here: the MAlign cannot win by using the strategy that the RMN and the Grand Alliance are the masters of. The MAN can only hope to be second best, after all the navies inside the Alliance. No, they need to fight differently, using strategies that the Alliance is unprepared for, using technology that the Alliance does not know about.

I'm not saying CM warships have to be built in enormous numbers. Heck, they could simply be used in Grand Fleet when Grand Fleet makes a call in enemy systems.

And why would the Grand Fleet need them? The Grand Fleet has a core of 250 SD(P)s and 100 CLACs, so they'll have 1200 LACs to provide forward missile defence, and some 600 lighter units from destroyers to battlecruisers, for the inner defence. In the two engagements that the GF lost ships, the losses were not due to the massive number of incoming missiles, but to the lateness in which they were detected.

In any case, how many were you thinking of adding to the GF? If it's just 10, their contribution would be pitiful. If it's something like 50 to 100, it's a reasonably big investment in capital and resources to have a ship that is barely used, and will probably mean you can't have 250 SD(P)s in the GF.

The logic of having as many offensive platforms available to reduce the number of enemy ships shooting back at you is prudent . . . against wedge based ships that you can see. Against the MAN, a completely different approach is needed. You can't shoot back at an enemy you cannot see. I cannot stress it enough, the conventional book of tactics will be thrown out the airlock.

You can shoot at the dark and hope to hit something.

How does more defence help in this case anyway? There won't be 300 spider ships lurking around undetected and within 30 million km of a Grand Fleet formation, ready to fire 300,000 missiles (somehow 1000 missiles per ship, thus from pods). First, the MAN won't have that many capital ships; second, you can't get that many capital ships within this range without risking an accidental detection; third, deploying pods to fire that many missiles increases the chance of detection. If the ships are detected, not only is the surprise gone, the tables turn: the GF will be able to fire 100,000 missiles at those ships, which have no wedges and no screening fleet, and their missiles are far, far more accurate.

That strategy would be extremely risky: moderate rewards for extremely high risk. The MAN could lose all of its 300 capital ships for no kills at all.

Almost inevitably the GA can count on the MAN getting in the first launch fleet to fleet. Against the MAN at Darius, the GA must survive that first launch, and subsequent launches. The GA will have to buy itself time to localize / find this enemy.

I don't agree, see above. Now, the GF cannot count on that, they need to be prepared for being fired at first. Which is why they should arrive at an unpredictable location, so the chance that there are pods nearby is low. The MAN does not have FTL control links, so missiles from very far away are not accurate. In any case, missiles from very far away are tracked for a very long time, sufficiently long to go back into hyper too.

So long as they stay out of the hyperlimit, the number of missiles that the MAN can fire is irrelevant.

A spider-pushed missile pod (that is, a spider version of the Hasta) would be far more problematic for the same reasons that the Hasta were at Galton. That's why I have been advocating a battle in motion.

Further, the CM SD(P) does not help against spider torpedoes.

And finally, none of this explains why a dedicated ship is required. If the GA has CM pods, why not load them into regular SD(P)s as part of the loading mix? If the CM SD(P) has enough control links on its surface, why wouldn't a regular SD(P)?

ThinksMarkedly wrote:And finally, none of this explains why a dedicated ship is required. If the GA has CM pods, why not load them into regular SD(P)s as part of the loading mix? If the CM SD(P) has enough control links on its surface, why wouldn't a regular SD(P)?

Totally agree on your other points. But there are two interrelated ways where I could see that an SD(CM-P) might be able to squeeze in more control links.

But they wouldn't be on its surface; wedge "gunsmoke" already prevents an SD(P)'s hull mounted control links from being sufficient to handle every CM it can launch from its tubes. It needs the extra lines of sight a pair of Keyhole's provide in order to get the radical increase in controllable CMs that was seen at (IIRC) Solon.

But an SD that stripped out any ability to control offensive missiles could recover some hull surface area by deleting all the hull mounted offensive fire control links. And if its going to be dumping whole pods worth of CMs it can probably also afford to delete some of the hundreds of CM tubes. I don't see any point to cramming more CM control links into that freed up area; "gunsmoke" would prevent you from taking and significant any real advantage of them. But you might be able to free up enough surface area to squeeze in another pair of Keyholes bays/links. Those, if spread out from the original pair should give you the ability to talk to far more CMs simultaneously.

The second interrelated strand is that you should be able to shrink those Keyholes to make it more likely that the surface area you free up can fit a second pair of them. Because if it's not going to be controlling offensive missiles then it doesn't need the larger Keyhole IIs - even going back to Keyhole I would shrink the size of the docking recess in the SD's hull. But you can go farther and make a CM/PDLC only Keyhole, because stripping out even the lightspeed offensive fire control should let you make this CM-only SD(P)'s fire control even smaller.


I still don't think the trade-offs are worth it. But at least if you wasted an SD sized hull on a pure anti-missile design it should be able to throw noticeably more CMs than even a modern Keyhole equipped SD(P). But I'm still sticking with my guess of 50% more as an upper limit.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:
And finally, none of this explains why a dedicated ship is required. If the GA has CM pods, why not load them into regular SD(P)s as part of the loading mix? If the CM SD(P) has enough control links on its surface, why wouldn't a regular SD(P)?

To add to this - we discussed a few months ago a plausable tactic: have a handful of CM pods loaded at the stern end of the pod bay and roll them first and tractor them to the hull. Release them as needed to buff individual CM waves later in the battle. If never used, refurbish and reload into the bay after the battle.

And before anyone discusses wasting space, virtually all the SD(P) loses seen still had 20+ % of their pod load in them when destroyed. The only exception I know of was Zanzibar, when the Havenite forces, maneuvered the RMN forces into the outer system, then jumped to their fast reloaders, then jumped back to Zanzibar and re-engaged before the RMN ships could return to the inner system and reload, essentially forcing the RMN forces to fight 2 battles with a single pod load.

Theemile wrote:

ThinksMarkedly wrote:
And finally, none of this explains why a dedicated ship is required. If the GA has CM pods, why not load them into regular SD(P)s as part of the loading mix? If the CM SD(P) has enough control links on its surface, why wouldn't a regular SD(P)?

To add to this - we discussed a few months ago a plausable tactic: have a handful of CM pods loaded at the stern end of the pod bay and roll them first and tractor them to the hull. Release them as needed to buff individual CM waves later in the battle. If never used, refurbish and reload into the bay after the battle.

And before anyone discusses wasting space, virtually all the SD(P) loses seen still had 20+ % of their pod load in them when destroyed. The only exception I know of was Zanzibar, when the Havenite forces, maneuvered the RMN forces into the outer system, then jumped to their fast reloaders, then jumped back to Zanzibar and re-engaged before the RMN ships could return to the inner system and reload, essentially forcing the RMN forces to fight 2 battles with a single pod load.

And even that was against Medusas. The Invictus-class slightly more than doubled the number of pods carried (The Harrington to Harrington II jump wasn't quite as large, in part because the Harrington-class already got a jump with the "flatpack" Mk17 pods) -- so newer SD(P)s would be harder to pull a repeat Zanzibar by running them out of pods.

(Which, of course, means it'd be even less impact to carry some CM pods to pre-deploy)


Though there's one more thing about a theoretical CM-only podlayer that I didn't mention before -- CMs are smaller than MDMs (shorter certainly) and you might be able to develop a pod sufficiently smaller to let you squeeze in more than 6 pod doors on the aft hammerhead. (I still think the unbalanced design isn't worth it; but thought I should mention this since it occurred to me)

Jonathan_S wrote:

Theemile wrote:

To add to this - we discussed a few months ago a plausable tactic: have a handful of CM pods loaded at the stern end of the pod bay and roll them first and tractor them to the hull. Release them as needed to buff individual CM waves later in the battle. If never used, refurbish and reload into the bay after the battle.

And before anyone discusses wasting space, virtually all the SD(P) loses seen still had 20+ % of their pod load in them when destroyed. The only exception I know of was Zanzibar, when the Havenite forces, maneuvered the RMN forces into the outer system, then jumped to their fast reloaders, then jumped back to Zanzibar and re-engaged before the RMN ships could return to the inner system and reload, essentially forcing the RMN forces to fight 2 battles with a single pod load.

And even that was against Medusas. The Invictus-class slightly more than doubled the number of pods carried (The Harrington to Harrington II jump wasn't quite as large, in part because the Harrington-class already got a jump with the "flatpack" Mk17 pods) -- so newer SD(P)s would be harder to pull a repeat Zanzibar by running them out of pods.

(Which, of course, means it'd be even less impact to carry some CM pods to pre-deploy)
<snip>

In addition to CM pods, speciality pods could also be carried this way - for instance, ECM missile pods could be preloaded and "set aside" for later use by clinging to the hull.

The GSN built the Harrington II class with missile tubes so they could customize each salvo's ECM loadout. The ECM pod idea wouldn't be as flexible as the tube solution, but it also doesn't eat as deeply into the pod bay or counter missile suite as deeply as the Harrington II design had to pay.

Currently, the tube launched GSN ECM thickeners are not controlled by Apollo, so their timing advantages arn't as flexible or adaptable as their pod scattered cousins. Depending on the ECM Pod, and 8 ECM bird Pod could be Apollo Controlled, with all those advantages, while a 12 ECM Bird flatpack pod adds 50% More ECM per salvo.

penny wrote:Moriarty is a system of platforms that was deployed throughout Solon on its first use. It consists of a main platform about the size of a heavy cruiser receiving information from many other platforms deployed through the system. It provides ~ 25,000 control links, give or take a link. But that system was pre-placed. Making it useless in enemy territory.

Jonathan_S wrote:But Moriarty only had that many control links because:
a) Essentially the entire platform was fire control "four hundred thousand [tons] wasn't a lot . . . unless all of it was dedicated to fire control"

Sure. But we're talking about the difference in surface area between something the size of a heavy cruiser and a purpose built ship on an SD platform.

Jonathan_S wrote:b) It relayed that fire control through a bunch of pre-placed platforms that were "in effect, a less capable, simpler minded version of the RMN's own Keyholes"

Exactly! A task that I think would be well suited to the Apollo "control missile." Missiles that are already capable enough to control a brood of eight missiles at FTL ranges. Excess ranges that would not be needed for CM warfare. So the FTL ability could be stripped from the Apollo CM.

Jonathan_S wrote:That second is what let it control that many missiles without wedges cutting all it's control links.

A task that an Apollo control missile can be easily repurposed to accomplish; which means the task is being accomplished with already made off the shelf parts. No need to develop anything else!

Jonathan_S wrote:A mobile ship would not only need to carry all the normal ship things, plus all the CM launchers, plus magazines for CMs (and so be able to fit far, far, far, fewer control links per ton) but it wouldn't have all those fire control relays to disperse that fire control across and allow it to maintain the necessary lines of sight to each of its swarm of CMs.

See above. Dispersal is accomplished with the already existing Apollo control missile. And an SD platform which is a CM platform only, does not need oversized launch tubes for missiles. It does not need boat bays. It does not need escape hatches for escape pods, it does not need to worry about a tube to eject any reactors (if an SD does such a thing), which means it also does not need escape pods whose volume would be reclaimed. Along with the changes you suggested upstream.

Jonathan_S wrote:Oh, and even with pods you can't get the kind of numbers of missiles that Moriarty enjoyed with its shoals of widely separated pre-deployed pods -- because a ship rolling pods still runs into limits on how many they can roll between incoming salvos and needing to spread them enough to provide clearance around each missiles's multi-km wide wedge. Moriarty also gets to take advantage of the fact that all its missiles were widely dispersed across predeployed shoals of pods around the system -- giving all kinds of room so wedge clearance wasn't a significant concern.

A fact that the MAN will take advantage of as well with its hordes of predeployed pods. But an SD can tractor a lot of pods inside its wedge from the outset. And it can be purpose built to shit pods out of the reclaimed orifices... boat bays, escape hatches and the many CM tubes on a platform the size of an SD that wastes no volume on huge missile tubes. An SD(CM-P) can literally tractor pods all over its hull! A hull that would look like a ship infected with chicken pox! An SD(CM-P) does not waste hull volume on a lot of things like antennas, grasers, etc.

Jonathan_S wrote:All that said, if you took an SD(P) and dedicated it to defensive fire it would be more capable and fleet defense than a normally balanced SD(P). But probably only somewhat more capable. I'd guess less than 50% more effective -- a current SD(P) can already throw and control a crazy number of CMs -- to the point where if you had two Invictus-class armed with Mk23s they'd likely be unable to land a single hit on each other. A quad-stacked salvo would sent 240 missiles at the other SD(P), which could respond with 8 full salvos from its 206 CM tubes; so 1648 CMs, nearly 7 per incoming missile!

A current SD(P) can't throw and control a crazy number of CMs while also engaging the enemy. Honor was able to accomplish what she accomplished at Solon with defense plan "Hotel." Hotel stopped firing at the Peeps and went totally to defensive mode IINM. A regular SD(P) needs to share its control links with its missile salvo. And it would not be able to come close to the number of CMs that a CM(P) could shit out if it isn't also dumping huge missiles.

Jonathan_S wrote:But even if it's twice a good defensively, to get that you're giving up 100% of its offensive firepower -- firepower that helps more quickly reduce the number of platforms that are shooting back at the fleet. And it'd cost basically as much time and money to build as normal SD(P) so you're shrinking your offensive firepower significantly since you're limited in the number of ships that size you can build and operate. Every SD(CM) you has in one fewer SD(P).

Now if you were able to actually build something the size and cost of a heavy cruiser that gave you the defensive firepower of a SD(P) then it might start to make sense to build a dedicated anti-missile escort. But the way RFC set up his Honorverse I don't see how you could possible do that.

See other post. If those SDs are space debris because they can't find a target in enemy space where there are hordes of missile pods scattered throughout the system, then you are putting the cart of missiles before the donkey carrying the load of CMs! Firepower is secondary to surviving to localize a target against an enemy whose stealth makes yours look like you're a girl scout. I can't seem to get the point across that tactics and strategy is going to be turned on its ear against the MAN!!!

CASE IN POINT: Against conventional navies, predeployed pods are susceptible to proximity losses. Use them or lose them. Against the MAN, the same goes for your warships! Your ships are susceptible to proximity losses. Use them or lose them.

You can't use them if you don't have a target!

The MAN has plenty of targets. And those missiles from the MAN will be launched from insanely short ranges because they will not be detected. Interspersed with unseen g-torps launched with a time on target.

Another point. Another reason the Peeps were able to lay down so many missiles was because some of those alleged SDs identified by the GA were actually minelayers. Upon what platform are minelayers built?

penny wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:All that said, if you took an SD(P) and dedicated it to defensive fire it would be more capable and fleet defense than a normally balanced SD(P). But probably only somewhat more capable. I'd guess less than 50% more effective -- a current SD(P) can already throw and control a crazy number of CMs -- to the point where if you had two Invictus-class armed with Mk23s they'd likely be unable to land a single hit on each other. A quad-stacked salvo would sent 240 missiles at the other SD(P), which could respond with 8 full salvos from its 206 CM tubes; so 1648 CMs, nearly 7 per incoming missile!

A current SD(P) can't throw and control a crazy number of CMs while also engaging the enemy. Honor was able to accomplish what she accomplished at Solon with defense plan "Hotel." Hotel stopped firing at the Peeps and went totally to defensive mode IINM. A regular SD(P) needs to share its control links with its missile salvo. And it would not be able to come close to the number of CMs that a CM(P) could shit out if it isn't also dumping huge missiles.

Um, no. RFC has repeatedly said that offensive (MDM) and defensive (CM) control links are totally separate (doubly true now, when CM control links are still lightspeed and Apollo control links are normally FTL grav coms)

The pair of Invictus Honor had weren't repurposing their offensive control links in order to throw 1648 CMs apiece at the income tsunami - that was all from the dedicated CM control links on the hull and their Keyhole IIs.

So they could have still been rolling pods and firing off Apollo salvos while putting out that defense.