Did Wargaming made the Montana's model wrong?

[RicardoHellman5]

So when i first saw the Montana in World of warships, i thought that the ship was pretty, however due to her large size and her low superstructure, it look kinda odd, so i started looking for blueprints of Montana, and i found a website called "shipbucket" where people save old ships designs and redraw them, and there i found a Montana final design which was in her way to be built, and when i compared it with the wows design i found some differences

 

1-The whole superstructure was planned to be bigger than it appears in wows

2-The AA mount that is right between the smokestacks weren't meant to exist

3-Both turret 2 and 3 had AA guns on top of them

4-There was a single AA mount on the bow of the ship

And all of you will see the lack of detail that wows model has (oh, and also Montana was meant to have radar)

 

[RicardoHellman5]

[Dictonary]

Well. The model in-game is based off a 1944 design model shown here. It looks familiar to you?

[CLUCH_CARGO]

WoWs is not a Historical Game. It has been adapted to fit the game play up to and including Ship Spec's. Paper ships { Drawing of intended ships by a nation but never built } Have become a norm in WoWs. The Ships you see rendered in WoWs are designed to fit the game as intended. Not the Historically accurate Ships they represent.

[Macabe]

Battleships should never receive radar. It's bad enough the KMS BBs got Sonar. Shipbucket imo isnt very reliable unless it has designs cited for comparision. Even if its minorly inaccurate it doesn't matter.

[Dictonary]

It is the closest thing to the real ship as it was a builder's model made before the project was cancelled. As such, the model was commisioned by the US Navy.

[RicardoHellman5]

well, im new in this warships thing, and i didnt knew that

 

[Unabletony]

Paper ships are, well based off of their plans. Very rarely (as such, Montana with her model) will plans have models for exhibition. WoWs based in game Montana with her model version. Often times, paper ships get redesigned over and over, and maybe that picture you linked was Montana later in the war.

Yeah, as you can note, in your pic at the upper right hand corner, it says 1945, whilst Dictionary's post has her in 1944.

[Edselman]

Probably for balance, a large superstructure can be very annoying when you're getting peppered with HE. And the Montana's AA suit is already the heaviest in the game, don't really see the need for additional mounts.

[Dictonary]

Here is an earlier model of the Montana. Details weren't concrete. 

[dseehafer]

It's a paper ship. WG is allowed to take some liberties with paper ships. Besides, many ships look very different from their original designs when actually completed (See Bismarck). In short, we don't know for sure what Montana would have looked like if completed or what kind of modifications she would have received over her career.

 

Instead of worrying about inaccuracies in a paper design how about you focus your energy on some of the horribly inaccurate in-game models of ships that were actually built such as Tirpitz and Furutaka. 

[YamatoA150]

Overall; it's for balance considerations.  As others have said, the Montana we have was based off the model, rather than delving deep into records and coming up with something a bit more "accurate" the way shipbucket does (as far as accuracy and paper ships go).  And as a paper ship, they can have certain liberties taken with them to make them work.