Thanks for the explanation.

I'm annoyed that I got hit with a cheesey move, but better of knowing why.
So...why not simply have the display reflect this fact? I went into the combat, not having memorized the behind the scenes combat math (and I've played a lot of tabletop war games, something like this would be lunacy) and expected my fleet of four ships with beam weapons attacking a ship without any beam defenses to win. Instead they got completely annihilated. Apparently by a some game rule in the back of the book in page 219.
My biggest problem is that the combat ran
completely counter to what the statistics that the game presented me with, and I had no real explanation why.
This may have been the first time I'd ever encountered an AI ship with armor that high, actually. An easy way to fix this is instead of showing "0/0/81" for defenses, why not show "(9)/(9)/81". This would say "effective armor of 9".
A fair and balanced combat system is something that this game has over...well...every Civ game...ever. No more defending against a battleship with a phalanx and winning!
But my recent combat experiences were more like that. And quite honestly, that really annoyed me. I quite literally was convinced the computer was cheating and immediately quit the game.
However, the problem with these "rules" is that is seems to skew the combat a bit. These makes a big dent in the supposed penalty for specializing in one area. Instead of being rewarded for building balanced ships, you are rewarded in skewing towards specializing in one area.
I used to put a few points in other two two areas to help protect the ship. But instead of doing that, I'm just going to pile more armor on the ship. It's more efficient.
Oh, and one last thing, a Dread Lord ship taking advantage of this, by placing a single Doom Ray and filling the ship up with armor would make it pretty much invincible, right?