I think you are under estimating how threatening Capital Missiles are even when they cannot ensure a kill. Each hit would be three critical checks even for a Barracuda for less than 201 armor.
Where do you get 3? I see one for the threshold (8+) and one from it being a Barracuda (11+). What's the third source of a critical hit?
Add in the consideration that carrying even 1 ASM will slow the unit in question by two thrust that alone raises some interesting variables that gives Warships a bit more of a chance as it is no longer a certainty that ASFs will be able to afford to Evade, let alone close.
Ok, let's do this.
A 7/11 65 ton ASF could mount 25 tons of armor for 120/100/100/80 on the facings as well as 5 tons of fuel and a weapons load. It would be degraded to 5/8 after mounting an ASM which is adequate to evade and close against a 3/5 warship that's fleeing. The fuel here is adequate for 36 rounds at max thrust. The criticals which matter are Nose/FCS (5/36) and Nose/Sensors (2/36) and the expected criticals are Threshold(15/36) and Barracuda (3/36), so the chance of a critical that matters is 10%/hit. It's probably 10 Barracudas to kill a fighter through damage so we can simplify here by assuming that a fighter with 5 hits does half damage.
A 3/5 600K ton warship designed for killing fighters and fleeing under these rules might mount 83 Barracudas in Aft and Aft-sides with 10 shots each. Let's assume two Barracuda Missileers for a total cost of ~12B.
A similarly optimized same-size carrier might mount 6 regiments of ASF bays (648 ASF) for a fully loaded cost of ~8B.
At extreme range, the to-hit is: 12=4(base)+6(extreme)+3(Evasion)+1(Nose)-2(Barracuda), generating 9.2 hits/round, mission killing ~1 ASF/round.
At long range, the to-hit is 10, generating 83*2*2*6/36 = 55 hits/round, mission killing 5.5 ASF/round.
At Medium range, the to-hit is 8, generating 83*2*2*15/36 = 138 hits/round, missile killing 13.8 ASF/round.
At Short range the ASF fire their ASMs, with a to-hit of 7=4(base)+3(ECM)+0(Aft).
Starting at range 51 with zero relative velocity, the fighters will add 1 to their closing velocity each round while evading. The end of round ranges are then 50, 48, 45, 41, 36, 30, 23, 15, 6 so the missileers get 4 shots at extreme range, 2 at long range, and 2 at medium range which mission kills ~43 ASF. The remaining ASF hit with ~353 ASMs which do 1059 capital damage, likely gutting both warships for plausible armor distributions. You also generate ~30 capital missile critical hits (+potential threshold and structure hits) which likely render the warships combat inoperative, even if the warships put almost all their armor in the aft and aft-sides.
Also SCL-1s and LSCCs make NL-35s and NAC-10s pointless.
I have no doubt these are good weapons, but I don't see them tipping the balance.
The rules for attacking Capital Missiles slightly modified. ASMs and Capital Missiles can be engaged with a +3 to hit offensive attack that also doubles angle of attack modifiers. Capital Missiles and ASMs outershells for purposes of damage done to them are Standard Scale and thus follow the existing 10:1 conversion taking the damage they deliver to be destroyed.
The +5 to hit here means only 27% of shots fired hit. This means you need about twice as many defensive ASF as incoming ASMs at 50 damage/ASF (plausible for the Age of War/3025 tech I'm working with here). This also means that no plausible amount of on-board standard scale weapons will dent an ASM wave and that the Barracuda warships inflict less damage against 6 regiments of ASF-with-ASM since it's better to shoot down missiles instead of evading.
Well, as it was explained in one of those topics:Sub-Caps are, on average, more accurate, and they offer a concentrated punch - that means crits.
They also offer this crit potential against larger ships, but we probably all agree that their damage potential often outstrips that of actual capital weapons.
Let's consider an SCL1 armed ship. Bays of 13 will mission kill the notional fighter here. You can mount 10 bays of 13 in the Aft and Aft-side arcs, so using 2 SCL1 warships you can bring 40 bays to bear on pursuing ASF in a round.
At long range, the to-hit is: 4(base)+1(Nose)+4(Long)+1(subcap AAA)+3(Evasion)=13, so no hits.
At medium range the to-hit is: 11, mission killing 3.33ASF.
So, using the same attack profile, the ASM armed ASF lose ~7 before they release missiles. Switching to SCL3s and placing them in bays of 5, you can take out ~13ASF before they release missiles.
Overall, I think we are left with the conclusion that carriers significantly dominate both on offense and defense under monbvols proposal, even against a pretty good anti-fighter designed warship.
Edit: added monbvols proposal as Attempt 5 to the OP.