Ship Names - Anachronistic?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Ship Names - Anachronistic?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> Ship Names - Anachronistic?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Ship Names - Anachronistic? - 10/3/2021 9:36:51 AM

LGKMAS

Posts: 267
Joined: 4/25/2010
Status: offline

Just as an aside and with no intent to criticise the developers.
I have been looking at Ships that are due to arrive. I know that some names are changeable, such as the Yorktown II , which of course assumes that in our gameplay we lost the original Yorktown. Hence we can change the name before it arrives if the original still is afloat
I am interested in those ships that bear names that may or may not have relevance to the battles we have fought and where we cannot change the name before arrival.
For an example, the CVE USS Midway, later changed to St Lo as the Midway was decided to be a full fleet carrier rather than a CVE of the Casablanca class.
In my game. there has been no Midway battle so the name basically just means an island of no great importance. In fact, the St Lo arrives as the St Lo despite the battle of St Lo not having been fought yet and thus again having no great significance. in fact, it is downright wrong as the class were basically named after bays and St Lo is well inland.
There are other names that again make no sense in the Casablanca Class CVE as many of the battles have not yet been fought and may never be, due to the different approaches we have taken. For example, I have not had a battle of the Solomon Islands, yet one of the CVEs is named after that battle. I have a list of those CVEs that had their name changed and what their original planned name was. It makes interesting reading.
However, as i said it is just an aside that intrigues me.

Post #: 1

RE: Ship Names - Anachronistic? - 10/3/2021 6:02:16 PM

sstevens06

Posts: 276
Joined: 10/9/2005
From: USA
Status: offline

Because I am OCD about such matters I have been keeping track & renaming accordingly. Playing as Allies against AI (am up to April 28, 1944) & have made changes to ship reinforcements with editable names, for example:

Historically lost ships I didn't lose:
CV Hornet II became CV Valley Forge
CV Wasp II became CV Oriskany

I lost CVs Lexington & Yorktown so didn't change reinforcement CVs Lexington II & Yorktown II.

Did more or less the same with cruisers, destroyers, subs, TKs, & a few other ships. Just doesn't make sense to have the original ship & Version II in the same game.

Btw used Conway's All the Worlds Fighting Ships, 1922-1946 as a reference.

(in reply to LGKMAS)

Post #: 2