Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
capncrunch21

Please remove 'number in series' from Normandie tech tree listing.

8 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

407
[SIMP]
Members
1,014 posts

As per title.

The current tech tree info box about this French battleship lists 5 ships in the series. These were never finished - in other words never real combat vessels. 

From the wiki: "The ships, named after provinces of France, were never completed due to shifting production requirements after the outbreak of war in 1914. The first four ships were sufficiently advanced in construction to permit their launching to clear the shipyards for other, more important work. Many of the guns built for the ships were instead converted for use by the Army. After the war, the French Navy considered several proposals to complete the ships, either as originally designed or modernized to account for lessons from the war. The weak French post-war economy, however, necessitated that the first four ships be broken up for scrap. The last ship, which was not significantly advanced at the time work halted, was converted into an aircraft carrier in the 1920s. She remained in service in various capacities until the 1960s. The ship was ultimately scrapped in 1967."

This essentially places them out of the running for "ships in a series" which is used to designate true, completed combat ships in the game. It's wrong and misleading information and should be removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
313
[SF-E]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
1,166 posts
13,758 battles

Ships in a class or series doesn't require them having been completed. A lot of ships are scrapped when no longer needed/etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
388
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,423 posts
3,367 battles
51 minutes ago, SkywhaleExpress said:

Ships in a class or series doesn't require them having been completed. A lot of ships are scrapped when no longer needed/etc.

Pretty much, yeah. Look at Yamato and Musashi as perfect examples: Both list ships in series as "4". One was never completed (let alone named), and the other was Shinano which WAS completed... As a carrier. If the requirement was for the ships to be completed as that design, those numbers would be different on many ships.

Edit: Yet Richelieu is listed at 2. Gascogne and "unfinished hull #4" would like to dispute this, devs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
407
[SIMP]
Members
1,014 posts
On ‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 11:41 PM, Landsraad said:

Pretty much, yeah. Look at Yamato and Musashi as perfect examples: Both list ships in series as "4". One was never completed (let alone named), and the other was Shinano which WAS completed... As a carrier. If the requirement was for the ships to be completed as that design, those numbers would be different on many ships.

Edit: Yet Richelieu is listed at 2. Gascogne and "unfinished hull #4" would like to dispute this, devs.

Yes, but at least these 'series' actually had fully completed, combat capable ships of the specific class built and sailed. The Normandie-class had NONE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
405 posts
4,788 battles
On ‎5‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 12:11 PM, capncrunch21 said:

Yes, but at least these 'series' actually had fully completed, combat capable ships of the specific class built and sailed. The Normandie-class had NONE.

No actually, being given a name or being approved for construction qualifies a ship to be counted as "ships in a line".  Also there is considerable discrepancy between nations in how various ships were catalogued and counted.  Coming up with your own criteria doesn't change the situation or it's complexities in the face of governmental red tape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
407
[SIMP]
Members
1,014 posts
18 hours ago, 56Bravo said:

No actually, being given a name or being approved for construction qualifies a ship to be counted as "ships in a line".  Also there is considerable discrepancy between nations in how various ships were catalogued and counted.  Coming up with your own criteria doesn't change the situation or it's complexities in the face of governmental red tape.

In an arcade game, fake ships shouldn't be listed as 'real' ships regardless of some' government' criteria you just made up.

Let's have some uniformity. Fake ships in WoWs should never have a 'number in series' in their listings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
2,708 posts
3,444 battles

Why is this even an issue....

Never understood the hate for paper ships.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
405 posts
4,788 battles
6 hours ago, capncrunch21 said:

In an arcade game, fake ships shouldn't be listed as 'real' ships regardless of some' government' criteria you just made up.

Let's have some uniformity. Fake ships in WoWs should never have a 'number in series' in their listings.

Wait.  Did you just use uniformity and arcade game in the same point?  By citing the sources used in fleshing out the designs used for rendering the ships in game, both real and those existing only on paper and never built, they are being consistent and uniform.  Or if you want to think of it another way, World of Warships is a fiction based very loosely upon fighting ships of the 19th and early 20th century.  As such no real comparison can be made as to either real or imaginary.  Besides, if it bothers you so much, submit an application to WG so you can fix all their mistakes and get paid for it.  Or not get paid because someone who knows little about naval nomenclature [edited] about your work....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×