IMPORTANT DISCLAMER
everything below this is our initial post. Thanks to suggestions and criticism from the community, we've modified many things since then. See the guide (link above) for the current version of our suggetions.
EDIT: We have posted a detailed guide with suggestions for the devs to implement on March 22 and amended it with multiple additional suggestions from community since then.
Don't forget to Upvote the suggestion, please!
We want to collect all the inconsistencies in representation of ships in HoI IV for @Caeric 's thread, but as we did we noted two things.
I. This is quite a long list.
II. Why just complain, let's provide precise suggestion on how to improve them.
As the 1.9.1 beta is ongoing until mid-April, we think if we provide the devs a list of things to improve they could implement them in the game.
We, as a group, have examined all ship designs as of 1.9.1 and compared them to their historical prototypes.
EDIT II: @Paul.Ketcham proposed a more extensive Naval Tech Tree Rework, please take a look at it as well!
Here's a breakdown by nations what's ALL things wrong with ships in Hoi IV:
After that we've compiled a list of suggestions for the Devs stating exactly what to change and how:
Missing ships of existing classes in scenario setups. IF possible, we've indicated the Task Force to which they should belong.
We decided to share this preliminary list with the rest of the community to improve it further. We ask everyone who has read it, what's your opinion on these suggestions?
Do you think we got things right, and if not how would YOU improve it?
Is there anything that should be changed further?
After discussing the content here with the rest of the community we will post a refined version (with more suggestions what to change) in the Suggestions forum.
We would like to know if we should report the stuff as a bug as well or if it would be against the rules.
And most importantly, if you are a dev or coder, any chance this will help you?
everything below this is our initial post. Thanks to suggestions and criticism from the community, we've modified many things since then. See the guide (link above) for the current version of our suggetions.
EDIT: We have posted a detailed guide with suggestions for the devs to implement on March 22 and amended it with multiple additional suggestions from community since then.
Don't forget to Upvote the suggestion, please!
We want to collect all the inconsistencies in representation of ships in HoI IV for @Caeric 's thread, but as we did we noted two things.
I. This is quite a long list.
II. Why just complain, let's provide precise suggestion on how to improve them.
As the 1.9.1 beta is ongoing until mid-April, we think if we provide the devs a list of things to improve they could implement them in the game.
We, as a group, have examined all ship designs as of 1.9.1 and compared them to their historical prototypes.
EDIT II: @Paul.Ketcham proposed a more extensive Naval Tech Tree Rework, please take a look at it as well!
Here's a breakdown by nations what's ALL things wrong with ships in Hoi IV:
Hull types:
- The Nelson class BB is represented as an early hull with engines II. This makes them too fast with 27.3 knots (only 23 knots in reality). This class was designed to fit the treaty limits, and was therefore more similar to the King George V class (a heavy hull II in the game) than to the older Battleships. Switching the design to a tier II hull but replacing the engines with tier I one would represent the Nelson class much better.
- The County class CA (including the Australian Canberra class) are represented as early hulls, which makes them very slow (24.5 knots in the game, 30 in reality). Changing the hulls to tier II without changing the modules would give them a speed of 29.4 kn. (much closer to the reality). The same applies to the York class that was a discount-version of the County class design.
- The A/B/C/D class Destroyers (including the Canadian Sanguenay class) are represented as early light hulls, while the E/F/G/H class has 1936 light hulls. The standard interwar classes (from A to I) had very similar hulls. The E/F/G/H class (and later I class as well) should have the same hull type as the A/B/C/D class. (It would be more appropriate to reduce the A/B/C/D class engines instead)
- The Canadian Sanguenay class name is misspelt (should be Saguenay without n), but River class would be better. As they represent all River class destroyers they should have a depth charge module (the C class had it and the A class vessels were outfitted with it in wartime)
modules:
- The Renown class BC has only one main battery I module which makes their hard attack ½ of the value of Revenge or Queen Elisabeth class battleships. But in reality the Renowns had 6 main 15 inch guns while the battleships had 8. Halving their attack value therefore doesn’t feel right. They are also slightly too fast (32kn In the game, 30 in reality). Upgrading the module to main battery II would ameliorate both issues.
- The York class CA has the same problem. In reality, it was a smaller county class design with 6 medium guns instead of 8, but removing one module of two halves the hard attack. Perhaps giving them 2 medium battery I modules would reflect their capabilities better.
- The HMS Vanguard (created by focus) is too heavily armed and too fast. (while the other modules look appropriate) She was armed with 8 15 inch guns, same as the Queen Elisabeth, Revenge and Admiral classes, as mentioned in the flavour text for the focus. (In fact these were old WW1 turrets taken from the Courageous class BCs when they were converted). That means she should have 2 heavy battery I modules. In order to make her slower, the engine should be tier II (also justified as the engine was developed for the unbuilt Lion class) As this makes the ship notably weaker, the naval experience gain from this focus should be increased to 40 (to keep it balanced).
- The Danae class CL have just one light cruiser battery module like the C-class that had only 2 6 inch guns and 8 4 inch guns. Historically, the Danae had 6 6 inch guns. (much closer to the Emerald class with 7 6 inch guns) They should have a second light cruiser battery I module (like the Emerald class. They were also faster than in the game (27.2 kn without a realistic armament in HOI, 29 knots IRL)
- the Leander class includes the Arethusa class ships, that were a weaker and cheaper version with reduced armament. (Same design philosophy as the York class CA: the Arethusa and York both were essentially the Leander and County class respectively with one turret removed). The initial arrangement of AA guns on the Arethusa was also (unintentionally but due to design changes) less efficient compared to the Leander class.
- The Town and Crown colony classes have the same two light cruiser battery II modules like the Leander class while they had 12 6-inch guns and the Leander class only 8. A third light cruiser battery II module instead of the double purpose secondaries (move them to the bottom row slot) would be better.
subs:
- The O/P/R class had 8 torpedo tubes and should have two torpedo tubes modules (like other submarine designs with similar armament)
- The H and L class boats were smaller and had only 4 tubes. Keep the design currently designated O/P/R class for them.
- The river class were a fleet submarine design. They should have Tier II hulls (but otherwise ssame as current O/P/R/ class)
- The S-class had only 6 tubes and was a replacement for the L-class. Removing the second torpedo tubes module but giving them engine II would reflect this better. (this would make them an intermediate stage between the H/L class and the existing U class)
- The Grampus class was based on the R-class submarines fitted as minelayer. They should have Tier I hulls as well.
- The Nelson class BB is represented as an early hull with engines II. This makes them too fast with 27.3 knots (only 23 knots in reality). This class was designed to fit the treaty limits, and was therefore more similar to the King George V class (a heavy hull II in the game) than to the older Battleships. Switching the design to a tier II hull but replacing the engines with tier I one would represent the Nelson class much better.
- The County class CA (including the Australian Canberra class) are represented as early hulls, which makes them very slow (24.5 knots in the game, 30 in reality). Changing the hulls to tier II without changing the modules would give them a speed of 29.4 kn. (much closer to the reality). The same applies to the York class that was a discount-version of the County class design.
- The A/B/C/D class Destroyers (including the Canadian Sanguenay class) are represented as early light hulls, while the E/F/G/H class has 1936 light hulls. The standard interwar classes (from A to I) had very similar hulls. The E/F/G/H class (and later I class as well) should have the same hull type as the A/B/C/D class. (It would be more appropriate to reduce the A/B/C/D class engines instead)
- The Canadian Sanguenay class name is misspelt (should be Saguenay without n), but River class would be better. As they represent all River class destroyers they should have a depth charge module (the C class had it and the A class vessels were outfitted with it in wartime)
modules:
- The Renown class BC has only one main battery I module which makes their hard attack ½ of the value of Revenge or Queen Elisabeth class battleships. But in reality the Renowns had 6 main 15 inch guns while the battleships had 8. Halving their attack value therefore doesn’t feel right. They are also slightly too fast (32kn In the game, 30 in reality). Upgrading the module to main battery II would ameliorate both issues.
- The York class CA has the same problem. In reality, it was a smaller county class design with 6 medium guns instead of 8, but removing one module of two halves the hard attack. Perhaps giving them 2 medium battery I modules would reflect their capabilities better.
- The HMS Vanguard (created by focus) is too heavily armed and too fast. (while the other modules look appropriate) She was armed with 8 15 inch guns, same as the Queen Elisabeth, Revenge and Admiral classes, as mentioned in the flavour text for the focus. (In fact these were old WW1 turrets taken from the Courageous class BCs when they were converted). That means she should have 2 heavy battery I modules. In order to make her slower, the engine should be tier II (also justified as the engine was developed for the unbuilt Lion class) As this makes the ship notably weaker, the naval experience gain from this focus should be increased to 40 (to keep it balanced).
- The Danae class CL have just one light cruiser battery module like the C-class that had only 2 6 inch guns and 8 4 inch guns. Historically, the Danae had 6 6 inch guns. (much closer to the Emerald class with 7 6 inch guns) They should have a second light cruiser battery I module (like the Emerald class. They were also faster than in the game (27.2 kn without a realistic armament in HOI, 29 knots IRL)
- the Leander class includes the Arethusa class ships, that were a weaker and cheaper version with reduced armament. (Same design philosophy as the York class CA: the Arethusa and York both were essentially the Leander and County class respectively with one turret removed). The initial arrangement of AA guns on the Arethusa was also (unintentionally but due to design changes) less efficient compared to the Leander class.
- The Town and Crown colony classes have the same two light cruiser battery II modules like the Leander class while they had 12 6-inch guns and the Leander class only 8. A third light cruiser battery II module instead of the double purpose secondaries (move them to the bottom row slot) would be better.
subs:
- The O/P/R class had 8 torpedo tubes and should have two torpedo tubes modules (like other submarine designs with similar armament)
- The H and L class boats were smaller and had only 4 tubes. Keep the design currently designated O/P/R class for them.
- The river class were a fleet submarine design. They should have Tier II hulls (but otherwise ssame as current O/P/R/ class)
- The S-class had only 6 tubes and was a replacement for the L-class. Removing the second torpedo tubes module but giving them engine II would reflect this better. (this would make them an intermediate stage between the H/L class and the existing U class)
- The Grampus class was based on the R-class submarines fitted as minelayer. They should have Tier I hulls as well.
Hulls:
- The Pensacola class (in the game, the Northampton class is also part of it) are considered early hull while Portland and New Orleans are considered tier II hulls. This makes the Pensacola class much slower than the Portland class. In reality, they were very similar and the main difference was the improved armor of the Portland class (correclty depicted by them having a Tier II module instead of Tier I on the Pensacola class)
- The Farragut class destroyers were built after decade-long break in destroyer construction and increased in size and quality compared to the Clemson class. They should be tier II hulls.
- The Benson & Gleaves class by contrast is considered a Tier III hull. This is too advanced as they were still designed within the Treaty limits (The first Tier III hulls should be the Fletcher class, that was a bigger and more advanced design, unrestricted by the limits)
modules:
- The main battery of the Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Tennessee classes was 12 14 inch guns, the Nevada class had 10 guns. Either way, this is more than the 8 or 9 14 inch OR 10 to 12 12 inch guns typically represented by 2 tier I modules. A third one is necessary, as the lack of it makes the ships too weak and too fast. In order to fit this module, reduce the secondaries: The early standard type battleships (Nevada and Pennsylvania classes) initially had a large secondary battery (21 or 22 5 inch guns), but the latter classes (including the Colorado class) had only 12 to 14 guns. During the early 30s refit the older ships had their secondary battery reduced, similar to the newer classes. This means the two secondaries modules are excessive, and the one in the customisable spot has to be removed (both Pennsylvania and Colorado classes).
- The New Orleans class is too slow due to the improved (Tier II) heavy battery. They should have improved (Tier II) engine as well.
class names:
- The name Pennsylvania class is oddly chosen. In the game, it represents the Nevada, Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Tennessee classes. The Pennsylvania being neither the first nor the last class. It would be useful to rename it Standard-type class.
- The New Orleans class name is anachronistic. The original name was Astoria class. It was only changed after the USS Astoria was sunk in WW2 and the remaining ships were refitted.
Subs:
- The USS Argonaut is depicted as an ordinary Barracuda class boat. She was a designated minelayer.
- The Pensacola class (in the game, the Northampton class is also part of it) are considered early hull while Portland and New Orleans are considered tier II hulls. This makes the Pensacola class much slower than the Portland class. In reality, they were very similar and the main difference was the improved armor of the Portland class (correclty depicted by them having a Tier II module instead of Tier I on the Pensacola class)
- The Farragut class destroyers were built after decade-long break in destroyer construction and increased in size and quality compared to the Clemson class. They should be tier II hulls.
- The Benson & Gleaves class by contrast is considered a Tier III hull. This is too advanced as they were still designed within the Treaty limits (The first Tier III hulls should be the Fletcher class, that was a bigger and more advanced design, unrestricted by the limits)
modules:
- The main battery of the Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Tennessee classes was 12 14 inch guns, the Nevada class had 10 guns. Either way, this is more than the 8 or 9 14 inch OR 10 to 12 12 inch guns typically represented by 2 tier I modules. A third one is necessary, as the lack of it makes the ships too weak and too fast. In order to fit this module, reduce the secondaries: The early standard type battleships (Nevada and Pennsylvania classes) initially had a large secondary battery (21 or 22 5 inch guns), but the latter classes (including the Colorado class) had only 12 to 14 guns. During the early 30s refit the older ships had their secondary battery reduced, similar to the newer classes. This means the two secondaries modules are excessive, and the one in the customisable spot has to be removed (both Pennsylvania and Colorado classes).
- The New Orleans class is too slow due to the improved (Tier II) heavy battery. They should have improved (Tier II) engine as well.
class names:
- The name Pennsylvania class is oddly chosen. In the game, it represents the Nevada, Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Tennessee classes. The Pennsylvania being neither the first nor the last class. It would be useful to rename it Standard-type class.
- The New Orleans class name is anachronistic. The original name was Astoria class. It was only changed after the USS Astoria was sunk in WW2 and the remaining ships were refitted.
Subs:
- The USS Argonaut is depicted as an ordinary Barracuda class boat. She was a designated minelayer.
Hulls:
- Historically, the Yubari was a prototype ship with a new hull design. All heavy cruiser classes (from Furutaka to Ibuki) were based on it. Currently Yubari and Aoba (in-game includes the Furutaka class) classes are considered early hull while Myoko and later have hull II. They also have engine I which makes them much too slow (26 knots in game instead of 34 historically). They all should have cruiser hull II. (Especially as the older Aoba and Furutaka classes were actually less top-heavy and more stable compared to the Myoko and Takao classes)
- The Fubuki class was a milestone design, the special type destroyers. The line between tier I and II light hulls must be drawn between the older Mitsuki and Momi class ships (Tier I) and Fubuki and later designs (tier II hulls).
Modules:
- The Fuso/Ise class have only 2 main battery modules, giving them the same firepower as the Kongo. However, they had 12 14 inch guns while the Kongo class had 8. They all have just one secondary I module, which is low compared to the Nagato and foreign battleships with comparative secondary armament.
- The Nagato class battleships is too slow with the tier I engine. (20 knots, slower than the Iuso/Ise class).
- The Aoba class has a single medium I module, which makes their hard attack notably less than half of the newer cruisers. In reality, they had 6 guns while the newer classes had 10.
- The Takao class is treated as part of Myoko class, while it actually has increased torpedo armament. after the mid-30s refit, the Myoko class had the same torpedo armament (2 qudruple launchers) as the older Aoba class.
- The Mogami class in 1936 has the medium battery that were not installed until 1939. Initially they has triple 15,5 cm turrets in order to pass as CL. (should be light cruiser guns II) (But the AI must refit the ships, otherwise it’s better to keep them the same!)
- The Tone class is considered to have the same armament as the Myoko and Mogami classes, while they had only 8 medium guns (instead of 10 on the Myoko to Mogami) and an all-forward arrangement with a reduced arc of fire. Reducing the modules to Tier I seems appropriate to reflect their lower firepower.
- The Tenryu, Kuma/Nagara and Sendai class CL are all too slow. They were designed as fast destroyer squadron leaders. They should have tier II engines instead.
- In reality the Sendai class had the same main armament as the Kuma and Nagara classes (7 guns, represented by 2 modules) that was still weaker than the American Omaha class and Dutch Java class. In the game they have 1 module like the Tenryu class (4 guns). It would be better to give both Kuma/Nagara and Sendai class 1 Tier I light cruiser battery and 1 Tier I secondaries module (their secondaries slots are empty). That would represent an armament stronger than the Tenryu but weaker than Omaha and Java.
Subs:
- The Kaidai III and I-121 classes are too short-ranged. This is especially notable in the Pacific. They should have Tier II hulls to give them longer range.
- The names are inconsistent: it should be either I-52 class instead of Kaidai III OR Kiraisen instead of I-121 and Kaichu IV instead of Ro-26. (a majority in our group prefers the Japanese names)
- The hull numbers were changed (increased by 100) in 1942. In both scenarios, all boats with an I prefix should have two-digit numbers (just remove the first 1 in all three digit-numbers)
- Historically, the Yubari was a prototype ship with a new hull design. All heavy cruiser classes (from Furutaka to Ibuki) were based on it. Currently Yubari and Aoba (in-game includes the Furutaka class) classes are considered early hull while Myoko and later have hull II. They also have engine I which makes them much too slow (26 knots in game instead of 34 historically). They all should have cruiser hull II. (Especially as the older Aoba and Furutaka classes were actually less top-heavy and more stable compared to the Myoko and Takao classes)
- The Fubuki class was a milestone design, the special type destroyers. The line between tier I and II light hulls must be drawn between the older Mitsuki and Momi class ships (Tier I) and Fubuki and later designs (tier II hulls).
Modules:
- The Fuso/Ise class have only 2 main battery modules, giving them the same firepower as the Kongo. However, they had 12 14 inch guns while the Kongo class had 8. They all have just one secondary I module, which is low compared to the Nagato and foreign battleships with comparative secondary armament.
- The Nagato class battleships is too slow with the tier I engine. (20 knots, slower than the Iuso/Ise class).
- The Aoba class has a single medium I module, which makes their hard attack notably less than half of the newer cruisers. In reality, they had 6 guns while the newer classes had 10.
- The Takao class is treated as part of Myoko class, while it actually has increased torpedo armament. after the mid-30s refit, the Myoko class had the same torpedo armament (2 qudruple launchers) as the older Aoba class.
- The Mogami class in 1936 has the medium battery that were not installed until 1939. Initially they has triple 15,5 cm turrets in order to pass as CL. (should be light cruiser guns II) (But the AI must refit the ships, otherwise it’s better to keep them the same!)
- The Tone class is considered to have the same armament as the Myoko and Mogami classes, while they had only 8 medium guns (instead of 10 on the Myoko to Mogami) and an all-forward arrangement with a reduced arc of fire. Reducing the modules to Tier I seems appropriate to reflect their lower firepower.
- The Tenryu, Kuma/Nagara and Sendai class CL are all too slow. They were designed as fast destroyer squadron leaders. They should have tier II engines instead.
- In reality the Sendai class had the same main armament as the Kuma and Nagara classes (7 guns, represented by 2 modules) that was still weaker than the American Omaha class and Dutch Java class. In the game they have 1 module like the Tenryu class (4 guns). It would be better to give both Kuma/Nagara and Sendai class 1 Tier I light cruiser battery and 1 Tier I secondaries module (their secondaries slots are empty). That would represent an armament stronger than the Tenryu but weaker than Omaha and Java.
Subs:
- The Kaidai III and I-121 classes are too short-ranged. This is especially notable in the Pacific. They should have Tier II hulls to give them longer range.
- The names are inconsistent: it should be either I-52 class instead of Kaidai III OR Kiraisen instead of I-121 and Kaichu IV instead of Ro-26. (a majority in our group prefers the Japanese names)
- The hull numbers were changed (increased by 100) in 1942. In both scenarios, all boats with an I prefix should have two-digit numbers (just remove the first 1 in all three digit-numbers)
Hulls:
- France lacks a level II cruiser hull in both scenarios! Starting with Émile Bertin (Émile Bertin, Algérie and La Galissonnière classes), all Cruisers were of a new, improved design that should be represented by a level II hull.
- As the French navy was essentially using two destroyer hull types: a smaller one (Bourrasque and L'Adroit classes, about 1300 tonnes), that is treated one class and quite accurately represented as level I (early hull) in the game. By contrast, the large destroyers (2000 - 3000 tonnes) should all be level II hulls. In the game are split across two hulls: Chacal and Le Fantasque have level I hulls but Mogador has level II hull. This is a bad idea, as they all were much bigger than WW1 destroyers (and the changes from Chacal to Mogador were incremental, there is no reason to consider the Mogador’s hull much more advanced than the previous large designs). The main difference between Chacal and Mogador was the improved engines and armament, NOT the hull.
Modules:
- The Duguay-Trouin class and Suffren class (in the game, including the Duquesne-class) cruisers are too slow. They were fast ships and should have engine II to give them a speed of around 30 knots.
- The Duguay-Trouin class cruisers had a notably stronger torpedo armament than the heavy cruisers (12 tubes on the Duguay-Trouin, 6 on Suffren class). In-game it’s identical.
- The Pluton is depicted as a Duguay-Trouin class light cruisers, but she was a minelayer also used as a training ship. Her design was based on the British HMS Adventure (a proper minelayer in the game). A new class for her is necessary.
- The Jeanne d`Arc is also depicted a ship of the Duguay-Trouin class. In reality, she was a much slower training ship. Curiously, the stats of the in-game Duguay-Trouin class fit the real Jeanne d`Arc much better.
- The game treats the Duquesne and Tourville are part of the Suffren class. But in fact, they were slightly faster because they had no armor belt (only the magazines were armored). This should be depicted by having no armor module (like their smaller prototype, the Duguay-Trouin class and the Italian Giussano class).
- The Algérie and Suffren class had the same torpedo armament. If the Algérie is given the proper level II hull, she can get the torpedo module in the new slot. She should have engine II and armour II representing the improved new design.
- The Émile Bertin and La Galissonnière classe ships should get their engines upgraded to level II along with their hulls to make them fast as in reality. The Émile Bertin has a catapult and the La Galissonnière class had torpedo launchers like the Suffren and Algérie classes. The new module slot (from imroving the hulls) should be used to give them the equipment they currently lack in the game.
- The armament of destoryers is inconsistent. The smaller Bourrasque and L'Adroit classes had four 130mm guns while the bigger destroyers had 5 of them (later classes with slightly bigger 138mm guns) and the Mogador had 8x138guns. However the game depicts both Chacal and Bourrasque as 1 level I light artillery module while Le Fantasque has a tier II guns and Mogador two of them. The Chacal class should have a light battery II module instead.
- Both Mogador class ships were laid down in 1934. They should be in the construction queue in 1936 but are missing.
Submarines:
- The Requin class were long-ranged attack submarines, not coastal submarines like the 600 series. They were a precursor to the Redoutable class and should have the same hull and armament, but weaker engines than the Redoutable.
- The 600 Series and 630 Series classes are depicted as identical. As the 630 Series was a later and improved version, giving the engine II seems better.
- The Aurore class were designed as coastal submarines like the Minerve, 630 and 600 classes. This means they should have level I hulls as well.
- France lacks a level II cruiser hull in both scenarios! Starting with Émile Bertin (Émile Bertin, Algérie and La Galissonnière classes), all Cruisers were of a new, improved design that should be represented by a level II hull.
- As the French navy was essentially using two destroyer hull types: a smaller one (Bourrasque and L'Adroit classes, about 1300 tonnes), that is treated one class and quite accurately represented as level I (early hull) in the game. By contrast, the large destroyers (2000 - 3000 tonnes) should all be level II hulls. In the game are split across two hulls: Chacal and Le Fantasque have level I hulls but Mogador has level II hull. This is a bad idea, as they all were much bigger than WW1 destroyers (and the changes from Chacal to Mogador were incremental, there is no reason to consider the Mogador’s hull much more advanced than the previous large designs). The main difference between Chacal and Mogador was the improved engines and armament, NOT the hull.
Modules:
- The Duguay-Trouin class and Suffren class (in the game, including the Duquesne-class) cruisers are too slow. They were fast ships and should have engine II to give them a speed of around 30 knots.
- The Duguay-Trouin class cruisers had a notably stronger torpedo armament than the heavy cruisers (12 tubes on the Duguay-Trouin, 6 on Suffren class). In-game it’s identical.
- The Pluton is depicted as a Duguay-Trouin class light cruisers, but she was a minelayer also used as a training ship. Her design was based on the British HMS Adventure (a proper minelayer in the game). A new class for her is necessary.
- The Jeanne d`Arc is also depicted a ship of the Duguay-Trouin class. In reality, she was a much slower training ship. Curiously, the stats of the in-game Duguay-Trouin class fit the real Jeanne d`Arc much better.
- The game treats the Duquesne and Tourville are part of the Suffren class. But in fact, they were slightly faster because they had no armor belt (only the magazines were armored). This should be depicted by having no armor module (like their smaller prototype, the Duguay-Trouin class and the Italian Giussano class).
- The Algérie and Suffren class had the same torpedo armament. If the Algérie is given the proper level II hull, she can get the torpedo module in the new slot. She should have engine II and armour II representing the improved new design.
- The Émile Bertin and La Galissonnière classe ships should get their engines upgraded to level II along with their hulls to make them fast as in reality. The Émile Bertin has a catapult and the La Galissonnière class had torpedo launchers like the Suffren and Algérie classes. The new module slot (from imroving the hulls) should be used to give them the equipment they currently lack in the game.
- The armament of destoryers is inconsistent. The smaller Bourrasque and L'Adroit classes had four 130mm guns while the bigger destroyers had 5 of them (later classes with slightly bigger 138mm guns) and the Mogador had 8x138guns. However the game depicts both Chacal and Bourrasque as 1 level I light artillery module while Le Fantasque has a tier II guns and Mogador two of them. The Chacal class should have a light battery II module instead.
- Both Mogador class ships were laid down in 1934. They should be in the construction queue in 1936 but are missing.
Submarines:
- The Requin class were long-ranged attack submarines, not coastal submarines like the 600 series. They were a precursor to the Redoutable class and should have the same hull and armament, but weaker engines than the Redoutable.
- The 600 Series and 630 Series classes are depicted as identical. As the 630 Series was a later and improved version, giving the engine II seems better.
- The Aurore class were designed as coastal submarines like the Minerve, 630 and 600 classes. This means they should have level I hulls as well.
Hulls:
- All Italian interwar cruisers (heavy and light) had fundamentally the same hull design: a long, narrow hull build for high speed. Currently, the CAs (Trento, Zara and Bolzano class) and the Giussano class CLs are represented as early cruiser hulls, while the Montecuccoli and Duca degli Abruzzi class CLs have (more appropriate) level II hulls. They should all have Tier II hulls and Tier II engines to represent this design properly.
- All ships represented as Navigatori class (actual Navigatori class and Mirabello and Leone classes) were designed as small scout cruisers with significantly larger hulls than the ordinary destroyers. They should still be light ships hulls, but a level II hull should reflect this better (and allow a more realistic arrangement of modules).
- The Maestrale class had a new designed hull that was as direct precursor to the Soldati class. Two older classes (Freccia and Folgore) and smaller and weaker torpedo boats (Spica class) for some reason appear as Maestrale class ships in the game, this is plainly wrong (but the Freccia, Folgore and Spica class ships actually should be represented by level I hulls).
Modules:
- The Trento and Bolzano class CAs had torpedo armament but lack it in the game (because the tier I hull doesn’t have enough slots?) Also the Bolzano carried 3 planes while the Trento class had only 2.
- As mentioned above, the Condottieri class cruisers had increasingly better armour at the cost of speed with each subclass, with the Montecuccoli subclass being the first armored one (in the game they are still unarmored). The Duca degli Abruzzi class had improved armor further, based on the Zara`s protection scheme (represented as Tier II on the Zara class).
- Generally, almost all Italian destroyers were equipped with minelaying rails. In the game, only the Navigatori class has them. All other classes still have an empty slot for them.
- The Curatone class (it is spelled Curtatone!) ships represent a mix of several old classes. Some had Depth charges (Generali, Sella, Sauro and Turbine classes) while others did not (Palestro, Curtatone, Pilo, Audace, Sirtori and La Masa classes). The ASW-capable ships were also newer and bigger than the old WW1 destroyers (re-rated as torpedo boats since 1929).
- The actual Navigatori class was faster than in the game (38 knots) had more powerful armament (6x120mm) than most other Italian destroyer (4 such guns). This should be fixed by upgrading their light battery and engine module.
- The Leone and Mirabello classes (part of Navigatori class in the game) had an even more powerful armament with 8 120 mm guns. They had no ASW equipment (they were used for colonial patrols).
- In The Maestrale class in the game lacks the minelaying gear they had IRL. (The Freccia and Folgore classes should have the exactly same modules but on a tier I hull)
- While the game depicts them as Maestrale-class units, the Spica class were much smaller torpedo boats. They should form a separate class (similar to the current Curatone class but with improved AA)
- In the game, the Soldati class DD have level II guns but level I AA. Compared to the Maestrale and Oriani class they had the same main armament (2×twin 120 mm) but improved AA (8 AA guns on Soldati, only 4 on Maestrale and Oriani).
- The Pegaso class Destroyer escorts are in-game part of the Soldati class. However, they were a design based on Spica class hull repurposed for escort duty.
Submarines:
- The Mamelli and Bandiera classes were ocean-going submarines, lie the Calvi Class that should have level II hulls. (note that the Brazilian Humaytá class and Portuguese Delfim class already have tier II hulls. These were the same design with minor changes!) As this would make the Bandiera same as the current Calvi class, replace the two level I torpedo tubes with a single level II module on the Bandiera class. (that would make them between the Mamelli and the Calvi classes, properly reflecting the incremental development)
- The old WW1-era H class boats should be still represented by the design currently called Mamelli class.
- The Sirena class were coastal submarines and should have Level I Hulls.
- the Perla, Adua and Argo classes were medium submarines, essentially a slightly improved Sirena class. In the game they are depicted as part of the bigger Calvi class. (And the 10 Perla class boats should be under construction in 36). All of them should be Sirena class instead
- The minelaying submarines are missing! There should be two classes: One for the old X-class (level I hull, 2 boats) and another (a level II hull) representing the Bragandin, Micca and Foca classes.
- All Italian interwar cruisers (heavy and light) had fundamentally the same hull design: a long, narrow hull build for high speed. Currently, the CAs (Trento, Zara and Bolzano class) and the Giussano class CLs are represented as early cruiser hulls, while the Montecuccoli and Duca degli Abruzzi class CLs have (more appropriate) level II hulls. They should all have Tier II hulls and Tier II engines to represent this design properly.
- All ships represented as Navigatori class (actual Navigatori class and Mirabello and Leone classes) were designed as small scout cruisers with significantly larger hulls than the ordinary destroyers. They should still be light ships hulls, but a level II hull should reflect this better (and allow a more realistic arrangement of modules).
- The Maestrale class had a new designed hull that was as direct precursor to the Soldati class. Two older classes (Freccia and Folgore) and smaller and weaker torpedo boats (Spica class) for some reason appear as Maestrale class ships in the game, this is plainly wrong (but the Freccia, Folgore and Spica class ships actually should be represented by level I hulls).
Modules:
- The Trento and Bolzano class CAs had torpedo armament but lack it in the game (because the tier I hull doesn’t have enough slots?) Also the Bolzano carried 3 planes while the Trento class had only 2.
- As mentioned above, the Condottieri class cruisers had increasingly better armour at the cost of speed with each subclass, with the Montecuccoli subclass being the first armored one (in the game they are still unarmored). The Duca degli Abruzzi class had improved armor further, based on the Zara`s protection scheme (represented as Tier II on the Zara class).
- Generally, almost all Italian destroyers were equipped with minelaying rails. In the game, only the Navigatori class has them. All other classes still have an empty slot for them.
- The Curatone class (it is spelled Curtatone!) ships represent a mix of several old classes. Some had Depth charges (Generali, Sella, Sauro and Turbine classes) while others did not (Palestro, Curtatone, Pilo, Audace, Sirtori and La Masa classes). The ASW-capable ships were also newer and bigger than the old WW1 destroyers (re-rated as torpedo boats since 1929).
- The actual Navigatori class was faster than in the game (38 knots) had more powerful armament (6x120mm) than most other Italian destroyer (4 such guns). This should be fixed by upgrading their light battery and engine module.
- The Leone and Mirabello classes (part of Navigatori class in the game) had an even more powerful armament with 8 120 mm guns. They had no ASW equipment (they were used for colonial patrols).
- In The Maestrale class in the game lacks the minelaying gear they had IRL. (The Freccia and Folgore classes should have the exactly same modules but on a tier I hull)
- While the game depicts them as Maestrale-class units, the Spica class were much smaller torpedo boats. They should form a separate class (similar to the current Curatone class but with improved AA)
- In the game, the Soldati class DD have level II guns but level I AA. Compared to the Maestrale and Oriani class they had the same main armament (2×twin 120 mm) but improved AA (8 AA guns on Soldati, only 4 on Maestrale and Oriani).
- The Pegaso class Destroyer escorts are in-game part of the Soldati class. However, they were a design based on Spica class hull repurposed for escort duty.
Submarines:
- The Mamelli and Bandiera classes were ocean-going submarines, lie the Calvi Class that should have level II hulls. (note that the Brazilian Humaytá class and Portuguese Delfim class already have tier II hulls. These were the same design with minor changes!) As this would make the Bandiera same as the current Calvi class, replace the two level I torpedo tubes with a single level II module on the Bandiera class. (that would make them between the Mamelli and the Calvi classes, properly reflecting the incremental development)
- The old WW1-era H class boats should be still represented by the design currently called Mamelli class.
- The Sirena class were coastal submarines and should have Level I Hulls.
- the Perla, Adua and Argo classes were medium submarines, essentially a slightly improved Sirena class. In the game they are depicted as part of the bigger Calvi class. (And the 10 Perla class boats should be under construction in 36). All of them should be Sirena class instead
- The minelaying submarines are missing! There should be two classes: One for the old X-class (level I hull, 2 boats) and another (a level II hull) representing the Bragandin, Micca and Foca classes.
Hull Tiers:
The Königsberg-class cruisers are depicted as Tier I early hulls, same as the Emden and Bremse-class. But they were a more advanced design, that was overall very similar to the subsequent Leipzig-class. They should have Tier II hull instead.
modules:
Leipzig-class had the same minelaying equipment as the Königsberg-class, but lacks minelaying rails in the game. As replacing a Tier I AA module with Minelaying Rails will reduce the AA (but it was improved compared to the Königsberg-class), the remaining AA module should be upgraded from Tier I to Tier II.
U-boats:
- The two Type I submarines are (U-25 and U-26) were designed as ocean-going boats. They are currently depicted as part of the short-ranged Type II class. (Tier I Torpedos would still make them inferior to Type VII)
- The Type IX was a significant improvement over Type VII. They should have a better engine. (The Turkish Saldiray class, their export-sister ships, depicts these boats accurately). (U-37 to U-44, U-64 under construction, U-65 should also be queued but is missing)
The Königsberg-class cruisers are depicted as Tier I early hulls, same as the Emden and Bremse-class. But they were a more advanced design, that was overall very similar to the subsequent Leipzig-class. They should have Tier II hull instead.
modules:
Leipzig-class had the same minelaying equipment as the Königsberg-class, but lacks minelaying rails in the game. As replacing a Tier I AA module with Minelaying Rails will reduce the AA (but it was improved compared to the Königsberg-class), the remaining AA module should be upgraded from Tier I to Tier II.
U-boats:
- The two Type I submarines are (U-25 and U-26) were designed as ocean-going boats. They are currently depicted as part of the short-ranged Type II class. (Tier I Torpedos would still make them inferior to Type VII)
- The Type IX was a significant improvement over Type VII. They should have a better engine. (The Turkish Saldiray class, their export-sister ships, depicts these boats accurately). (U-37 to U-44, U-64 under construction, U-65 should also be queued but is missing)
Hull Tiers:
The Kirov class is a hull I with only 29,6 knots speed in the game. Historically, they were fast (36 knots) modern ships (developed from the Italian Montcuccoli and Duca d'Aosta classes that are already Tier II hulls in the current setup). The design should definitely be changed to Tier II hull (all modules should stay as they are).
Modules
- Historically, all Soviet destroyer classes had minelaying capabilities. (The Tashkent is an exception, perhaps because the Italians built her? Probably no, the Italians used mines on their DD as well) In the game they lack the Minelaying Rails module, even when they have a free slot for it!
- The Gnevnyy class lacks torpedo armament. (Seems like an oversight, historically these ships had 2x3 tubes)
- The Soobrazitelnyi class is a tier III hull in the game. Historically they were an incrementally improved upgrade of the Gnevnyy class. If the Gnevnyy is Tier II and Tashkent Tier III, this class definitely has to be Tier II as well. (Note that both Wikipedia and Navypedia called it Storozhevoy class) and the Storozhevoy is the first ship in the build queue. A rename seems reasonable.)
Submarines:
The Series II Leninets and Series XIII Leninets were based on the HMS L55 (A WW1 boat) and the Series I Dekabrist class (all of them Tier I hulls). These two classes should have Tier I hulls as well.
The Kirov class is a hull I with only 29,6 knots speed in the game. Historically, they were fast (36 knots) modern ships (developed from the Italian Montcuccoli and Duca d'Aosta classes that are already Tier II hulls in the current setup). The design should definitely be changed to Tier II hull (all modules should stay as they are).
Modules
- Historically, all Soviet destroyer classes had minelaying capabilities. (The Tashkent is an exception, perhaps because the Italians built her? Probably no, the Italians used mines on their DD as well) In the game they lack the Minelaying Rails module, even when they have a free slot for it!
- The Gnevnyy class lacks torpedo armament. (Seems like an oversight, historically these ships had 2x3 tubes)
- The Soobrazitelnyi class is a tier III hull in the game. Historically they were an incrementally improved upgrade of the Gnevnyy class. If the Gnevnyy is Tier II and Tashkent Tier III, this class definitely has to be Tier II as well. (Note that both Wikipedia and Navypedia called it Storozhevoy class) and the Storozhevoy is the first ship in the build queue. A rename seems reasonable.)
Submarines:
The Series II Leninets and Series XIII Leninets were based on the HMS L55 (A WW1 boat) and the Series I Dekabrist class (all of them Tier I hulls). These two classes should have Tier I hulls as well.
Modules:
The HNLMS De Ruyter has low Light attack stats compared to the Tromp class cruisers. In reality, she had a slightly more powerful broadside (7 guns, only 6 on the Tromp class). Her Light cruiser battery I module should be upgraded to Tier II (same as Tromp-class).
The HNLMS De Ruyter has low Light attack stats compared to the Tromp class cruisers. In reality, she had a slightly more powerful broadside (7 guns, only 6 on the Tromp class). Her Light cruiser battery I module should be upgraded to Tier II (same as Tromp-class).
Hulls:
- The Principe Alfonso class was an only slightly improved from the British Emerald class that was a WW1 era design and has a Tier I hull in the game. The Principe Alfonso class should therefore have a Tier I hull as well.
- The Churruca class destroyers were based on the previous Alsedo class and the Brtish Scott class (of WW1 vintage). It should therefore have a Tier I hull instead of the Tier II hull it currently has. (the Argentine Servantes class should be adjusted the same way! It consisted of Churruca class DDs sold to Argentina)
Modules:
- The Canarias class in the game is for some reason unarmoured and has no torpedo armament. She actually had four triple torpedo mounts (12 tubes total) that are usually represented by two Torpedo Launcher modules in the game.
Submarines:
- The C class had improved hulls (compared to the B class), but had the same machinery. They should have engine I like the B class.
- The Principe Alfonso class was an only slightly improved from the British Emerald class that was a WW1 era design and has a Tier I hull in the game. The Principe Alfonso class should therefore have a Tier I hull as well.
- The Churruca class destroyers were based on the previous Alsedo class and the Brtish Scott class (of WW1 vintage). It should therefore have a Tier I hull instead of the Tier II hull it currently has. (the Argentine Servantes class should be adjusted the same way! It consisted of Churruca class DDs sold to Argentina)
Modules:
- The Canarias class in the game is for some reason unarmoured and has no torpedo armament. She actually had four triple torpedo mounts (12 tubes total) that are usually represented by two Torpedo Launcher modules in the game.
Submarines:
- The C class had improved hulls (compared to the B class), but had the same machinery. They should have engine I like the B class.
Hulls:
- The Venticinco de Mayo class was developed as a cheaper version of the Italian Trento class cruisers. As explained in the entry on Italy above, they should be tier II hulls. Their Argentine counterpart should also be a tier II hulls.
- The ARA La Argentina was a British-build design based on the Arethusa class. The British prototype already has a tier II hull (as part of Leander class) in the game!
- The Cervantes and Mendoza class DDs all have tier II hulls. However, they all were based on less advanced designs and should have tier I hulls instead.
Modules:
- The Mendoza class in the game lacks torpedos, this seems like an oversight as they had usual torpedo armament IRL.
- As the Buenos Aires class was a version of the British G-class, with the same torpedo launchers but no depth charges. It should therefore the same torpedo armament as the G-class, that is currently represented by 2 Torpedo launcher I modules instead of 1.
- The Venticinco de Mayo class was developed as a cheaper version of the Italian Trento class cruisers. As explained in the entry on Italy above, they should be tier II hulls. Their Argentine counterpart should also be a tier II hulls.
- The ARA La Argentina was a British-build design based on the Arethusa class. The British prototype already has a tier II hull (as part of Leander class) in the game!
- The Cervantes and Mendoza class DDs all have tier II hulls. However, they all were based on less advanced designs and should have tier I hulls instead.
Modules:
- The Mendoza class in the game lacks torpedos, this seems like an oversight as they had usual torpedo armament IRL.
- As the Buenos Aires class was a version of the British G-class, with the same torpedo launchers but no depth charges. It should therefore the same torpedo armament as the G-class, that is currently represented by 2 Torpedo launcher I modules instead of 1.
- The 3 Tupi class submarines were short-ranged, and should hav a level I hull to represent this. (see the proposal for their Italian sister ships above)
- The Hydra class destroyers had minelaying equipment IRL but lacks it in the game.
- The Glafkos class submarines were better armed than the Katsonis class, but still short-ranged. They should have an early hull to reflect this, not Tier II.
- The Glafkos class submarines were better armed than the Katsonis class, but still short-ranged. They should have an early hull to reflect this, not Tier II.
The Wilk class submarines were based on a French prototype from WW1 (the Pierre Chailley that was scrapped in 1936 as outdated). They had a much shorter range than the Orzel class. That means they should have a Tier I hull.
- The Delfinul was short-ranged and a rather poor design. She definitely should be represented as a Tier I hull.
- The more advanced Requinul (a downscaled German Type boat) and Marsuinul boats (similar to Requinul but with minelaying tubes) are missing in the 39 construction queue (they were both laid down in 1938)
- The more advanced Requinul (a downscaled German Type boat) and Marsuinul boats (similar to Requinul but with minelaying tubes) are missing in the 39 construction queue (they were both laid down in 1938)
The Göteborg-class destroyers are depicted as Tier II hulls. They were a follow-up design with incremental improvement from the Ehrensköld-class. The engine module being better should be enough to represent the improvements.
Hulls:
- The Beograd class has a Tier II hull but was based on the French L'Adroit (part of the Bourrasque classe in the game) class that has a Tier I hull. The ships were also notably smaller than the Dubrovnik.
Modules:
- The Dubrovnik-class destroyer has Tier I light battery while the Beograd class has Tier II. The Dubrovnik had 4 140mm guns while the Beograd-class had smaller 120mm guns! The armament of these two classes should be reversed. The Dubrovnik also had more AA guns than the Beograd-class, this should be represented by having a tier II module.
Submarines:
- The Hrabri class were a slightly modified British L-class from WW1. (the Yugoslav boats were build from leftover parts). They definitely should have Tier I hulls.
- The Beograd class has a Tier II hull but was based on the French L'Adroit (part of the Bourrasque classe in the game) class that has a Tier I hull. The ships were also notably smaller than the Dubrovnik.
Modules:
- The Dubrovnik-class destroyer has Tier I light battery while the Beograd class has Tier II. The Dubrovnik had 4 140mm guns while the Beograd-class had smaller 120mm guns! The armament of these two classes should be reversed. The Dubrovnik also had more AA guns than the Beograd-class, this should be represented by having a tier II module.
Submarines:
- The Hrabri class were a slightly modified British L-class from WW1. (the Yugoslav boats were build from leftover parts). They definitely should have Tier I hulls.
After that we've compiled a list of suggestions for the Devs stating exactly what to change and how:
Royal Navy:
- Nelson class BB: upgrade hull to Heavy Hull II. Downgrade engine II to engine I.
- Renown class BC: upgrade main battery I to Main Battery II.
- Vanguard class BB (as created by the focus): replace one main battery III with AA III. Downgrade the other two main battery III modules to main battery I. Downgrade engine IV to engine II.
- County class CA: upgrade hull to Cruiser Hull II.
- York class CA: upgrade hull to Cruiser Hull II. Add a secondary I module. Possibly: replace the single medium battery II module with two medium battery I modules (the hull change unlocks a slot for this)
- Danae class CL: upgrade engine I to engine II. Add a light cruiser battery I module.
- Arethusa class CL: split off from Leander class. Downgrade both light cruiser battery II modules to light cruiser battery I and AA II to AA I (rest as current Leander class)
- Town class CL: move the secondaries II module to the currently empty secondaries slot. Add a third light cruiser battery II module in the slot currently occupied by the secondaries.
- Crown Colony class CL: move the dual-purpose secondaries module to the currently empty secondaries slot. Add a third light cruiser battery II module in the slot currently occupied by the secondaries.
- A/B/C/D class DD: upgrade hull to light hull I. Downgrade engine II to engine I
- E/F/G/H class DD: Rename class as E/F/G/H/I class
- O/P/R class SS: Add a second torpedo tubes I module.
- Keep the current O/P/R class design as H/L class.
- Split off River class from O/P/R class SS: upgrade hull to Submarine Hull II.
- S class SS: upgrade engine I to engine II. Remove the second torpedo tubes I module.
- Grampus class SS: downgrade Hull to Submarine Hull I.
Royal Ausralian Navy:
- Canberra class CA: upgrade hull to cruiser Hull II.
Royal Canadian Navy:
- Sanguenay class DD: upgrade hull to light hull I. Downgrade engine II to engine I. Add a depth charge module. Rename class as River class.
US Navy:
- Pennsylvania class BB: Replace 1 AA I with main battery I. Replace secondaries I module with AA I (because the heavy battery can’t fit in the slot currently occupied by the excessive secondaries) Change name to Standard-type class.
- Colorado class BB: remove 1 secondaries I module.
- Pensacola class CA: upgrade hull to cruiser hull II. Change name to Pensacola/Northampton class.
- New Orleans class CA: upgrade Engine I to II. Change name to Astoria class.
- Farragut class DD: upgrade hull to light hull II.
- Benson & Gleaves class DD: downgrade hull to light hull II. Change name to Benson/Gleaves class.
- Split off Argonaut class form Baracuda class: add minelaying tubes module.
IJN:
- Kongo class BC: add Add 1 secondary I module.
- Fuso/Ise class BB: Add 1 heavy battery I module into an empty custom slot. Add 1 secondary I module.
- Nagato class BB: upgrade Engine I to Engine II.
- Aoba class CA: upgrade hull to cruiser hull II. Upgrade medium battery I to II. Change name to Furutaka/Aoba class.
- Myoko class CA: replace the 2 torpedo I modules with 1 torpedo II module.
- Split off Takao class form Myoko class (same design as the current Myoko class).
- (Possible change): Mogami class CA, (36 scenario only): replace both medium battery modules with cruiser light guns II modules. Keep the current layout as a refitted version (Mogami Kai) and use it in the 39 scenario.
- Tone class CA: decrease both medium battery II module to I.
- Tenryu class CL upgrade Engine I to II.
- Kuma/Nagara class CL: upgrade Engine I to II. Replace the custom light cruiser battery I with secondaries I.
- Sendai class CL: upgrade Engine I to II. Add secondaries I module.
- Yubari class CL: upgrade hull to cruiser hull II.
- Fubuki class DD: upgrade hull to light hull II.
- Kaidai III class: upgrade hull to submarine hull II.
- I-121 class: upgrade hull to submarine hull II. Change name to Kiraisen class
- Ro-26 class: Change name to Kaichu IV class
Marine Nationale:
- Suffren class CA: improve engine I to engine II.
- Split off Duquesne class from Suffren class: improve engine I to engine II. remove armor I module.
- Algérie class CA: improve hull I to hull II. add torpedo I module. improve engine I to engine II. improve armor I to armor II.
- Duguay-Trouin class CL: improve engine I to engine II. improve torpedo I to torpedo II.
- keep the design currently named Duguay-Trouin class as the Jeanne d’Arc-class.
- Split off Pluton class CM (from Duguay-Trouin class): same design as the existing British Adventure Class CM. (just copy paste hull and modules)
- Émile Bertin class CL: improve hull I to hull II. improve engine I to engine II. add catapult
- La Galissonnière class CL: improve hull I to hull II. improve engine I to engine II. add torpedo I module
- Chacal class DD: improve hull I to hull II. improve light battery I to light battery II.
- Le Fantasque class DD: improve hull I to hull II.
- Split off La Melpomène class: (keep hull I). decrease engine II to engine I. decrease light battery II to light battery I. decrease torpedo II to torpedo I. remove torpedo I module. (The remaining torpedo I module should be in the fixed torpedo slot). Add the 12 ships to construction queue in 1936 scenario.
- Split off Requin class from 600 Series SS: improve hull I to hull II. add torpedo I module.
- 630 Series SS: improve engine I to engine II.
- Aurore class SS: decrase hull II to hull I.
Regia Marina:
- Trento class CA: improve hull I to hull II. improve engine I to engine II. add a torpedo module in the new available slot.
- Zara class CA: improve hull I to hull II.
- Bolzano class CA: improve hull I to hull II. improve catapult I to catapult II. add a torpedo module in the new available slot.
- Giussano class CL: improve hull I to hull II.
- Montecuccoli class CL: add armor I module.
- Duca degli Abruzzi class CL: improve armor I to armor II.
- Curatone class DD: add minelaying rails module. Correct the name to Curtatone class
- Split off Sella class: add minelaying rails module. add depth charges module.
- Navigatori class DD: improve hull I to hull II. improve engine I to engine II. improve light battery I to light battery II.
- Split off Mirabello/Leone class: improve hull I to hull II. replace depth charges module with second light battery I.
- Maestrale class DD: improve hull I to hull II. add minelaying rail. Rename it Maestrale/Oriani class
- Split off Freccia/Folgore class: add minelaying rail.
- Split off Spica class (from Maestrale class): decrease engine II to engine I. increase AA I to AA II
- Soldati class DD: decrease light battery II to light battery I. increase AA I to AA II. add minelaying rail.
- split off Pegaso class: decrease hull II to hull I. decrease engine II to engine I. decrease light battery II to light battery I. increase AA I to AA II. add a second depth charge module.
- Mamelli class SS: improve hull I to hull II.
- keep the design currently named Mamelli class as the H class.
- Bandiera class SS: improve hull I to hull II. improve fixed torpedo tubes I module to torpedo tubes II. remove the second torpedo tubes I module
- Sirena class SS: decrease hull I to hull II.
Kriegmarine:
- Königsberg class CL: upgrade hull from Tier I to Tier II.
- Leipzig class CL: Upgrade the (fixed) Tier I AA module to Tier II AA. Replace the custom-slot AA module with a Minelaying Rails module.
- Split off Type II class from Type II: upgrade hull from Tier I to Tier II.
- Split off Type IX class from Type VII: upgrade engine from Tier I to Tier II. (U-37 to
Soviet Red Navy:
- Kirov class CA: upgrade hull from Tier I to Tier II.
- Orfey class DD: add Minelaying Rails module.
- Leningrad & Minsk class DD: add Minelaying Rails module.
- Gnevnyy class DD: add Minelaying Rails module.
- Soobrazitelnyi class DD: downgrade hull from Tier III to Tier II. Add Minelaying Rails module. Rename class Storozhevoy class
- Series II Leninets class SS: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
- Series XIII Leninets class SS: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
Koninklijke Marine:
- De Ruyter-class: upgrade Light cruiser battery from Tier I to Tier II.
Spanish Navy:
- Canarias class CA: add cruiser armor I module. Add 2x Torpedo Launcher modules. (move the second medium battery II module to the leftmost slot to allow installation of a second torpedo module)
- Principe Alfonso class CL: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I
- Churruca class DD: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I
- C-class SS: downgrade engine from Tier II to Tier I.
Argentine Navy:
- Venticinco de Mayo class CA: upgrade hull to cruiser hull II.
- La Argentina class CL: upgrade hull to cruiser hull II.
- Cervantes class DD: downgrade hull to light hull I.
- Mendoza class DD: downgrade hull to light hull I. Add torpedo launcher I module.
- Buenos Aires class DD: Add a second torpedo launcher I module
Royal Hellenic Navy:
- Hydra class DD: add minelaying rail module.
- Glafkos class SS: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
Polish Navy:
- Wilk class SS: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
Romanian Navy:
- Delfinul class SS: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
- New class: Requinul class: (same as German Type VII class, copy-paste design)
- New class: Marsuinul class: (like Requinul class but add minelaying tubes in the empty slot)
Swedish Royal Navy:
- Göteborg class DD: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
Royal Yugoslav Navy:
- Dubrovnik class DD: upgrade light battery I to light battery II. upgrade AA I to AA II.
- Beograd class DD: downgrade hull II to hull I. downgrade light battery II to light battery I.
- Hrabri class SS: downgrade hull II to hull I.
Techs than need to be added for some countries in the scenario setup (in order to unlock the required modules):
Argentina: 1936 cruiser hull (both scenarios)
France: 1936 cruiser hull, Basic Cruiser Armor Scheme (both scenarios)
Soviet Union: 1936 cruiser hull (36 scenario)
UK: 1936 heavy ship hull, 1936 submarine hull (36 scenario).
Yugoslavia: Basic Light Battery (36 scenario).
- Nelson class BB: upgrade hull to Heavy Hull II. Downgrade engine II to engine I.
- Renown class BC: upgrade main battery I to Main Battery II.
- Vanguard class BB (as created by the focus): replace one main battery III with AA III. Downgrade the other two main battery III modules to main battery I. Downgrade engine IV to engine II.
- County class CA: upgrade hull to Cruiser Hull II.
- York class CA: upgrade hull to Cruiser Hull II. Add a secondary I module. Possibly: replace the single medium battery II module with two medium battery I modules (the hull change unlocks a slot for this)
- Danae class CL: upgrade engine I to engine II. Add a light cruiser battery I module.
- Arethusa class CL: split off from Leander class. Downgrade both light cruiser battery II modules to light cruiser battery I and AA II to AA I (rest as current Leander class)
- Town class CL: move the secondaries II module to the currently empty secondaries slot. Add a third light cruiser battery II module in the slot currently occupied by the secondaries.
- Crown Colony class CL: move the dual-purpose secondaries module to the currently empty secondaries slot. Add a third light cruiser battery II module in the slot currently occupied by the secondaries.
- A/B/C/D class DD: upgrade hull to light hull I. Downgrade engine II to engine I
- E/F/G/H class DD: Rename class as E/F/G/H/I class
- O/P/R class SS: Add a second torpedo tubes I module.
- Keep the current O/P/R class design as H/L class.
- Split off River class from O/P/R class SS: upgrade hull to Submarine Hull II.
- S class SS: upgrade engine I to engine II. Remove the second torpedo tubes I module.
- Grampus class SS: downgrade Hull to Submarine Hull I.
Royal Ausralian Navy:
- Canberra class CA: upgrade hull to cruiser Hull II.
Royal Canadian Navy:
- Sanguenay class DD: upgrade hull to light hull I. Downgrade engine II to engine I. Add a depth charge module. Rename class as River class.
US Navy:
- Pennsylvania class BB: Replace 1 AA I with main battery I. Replace secondaries I module with AA I (because the heavy battery can’t fit in the slot currently occupied by the excessive secondaries) Change name to Standard-type class.
- Colorado class BB: remove 1 secondaries I module.
- Pensacola class CA: upgrade hull to cruiser hull II. Change name to Pensacola/Northampton class.
- New Orleans class CA: upgrade Engine I to II. Change name to Astoria class.
- Farragut class DD: upgrade hull to light hull II.
- Benson & Gleaves class DD: downgrade hull to light hull II. Change name to Benson/Gleaves class.
- Split off Argonaut class form Baracuda class: add minelaying tubes module.
IJN:
- Kongo class BC: add Add 1 secondary I module.
- Fuso/Ise class BB: Add 1 heavy battery I module into an empty custom slot. Add 1 secondary I module.
- Nagato class BB: upgrade Engine I to Engine II.
- Aoba class CA: upgrade hull to cruiser hull II. Upgrade medium battery I to II. Change name to Furutaka/Aoba class.
- Myoko class CA: replace the 2 torpedo I modules with 1 torpedo II module.
- Split off Takao class form Myoko class (same design as the current Myoko class).
- (Possible change): Mogami class CA, (36 scenario only): replace both medium battery modules with cruiser light guns II modules. Keep the current layout as a refitted version (Mogami Kai) and use it in the 39 scenario.
- Tone class CA: decrease both medium battery II module to I.
- Tenryu class CL upgrade Engine I to II.
- Kuma/Nagara class CL: upgrade Engine I to II. Replace the custom light cruiser battery I with secondaries I.
- Sendai class CL: upgrade Engine I to II. Add secondaries I module.
- Yubari class CL: upgrade hull to cruiser hull II.
- Fubuki class DD: upgrade hull to light hull II.
- Kaidai III class: upgrade hull to submarine hull II.
- I-121 class: upgrade hull to submarine hull II. Change name to Kiraisen class
- Ro-26 class: Change name to Kaichu IV class
Marine Nationale:
- Suffren class CA: improve engine I to engine II.
- Split off Duquesne class from Suffren class: improve engine I to engine II. remove armor I module.
- Algérie class CA: improve hull I to hull II. add torpedo I module. improve engine I to engine II. improve armor I to armor II.
- Duguay-Trouin class CL: improve engine I to engine II. improve torpedo I to torpedo II.
- keep the design currently named Duguay-Trouin class as the Jeanne d’Arc-class.
- Split off Pluton class CM (from Duguay-Trouin class): same design as the existing British Adventure Class CM. (just copy paste hull and modules)
- Émile Bertin class CL: improve hull I to hull II. improve engine I to engine II. add catapult
- La Galissonnière class CL: improve hull I to hull II. improve engine I to engine II. add torpedo I module
- Chacal class DD: improve hull I to hull II. improve light battery I to light battery II.
- Le Fantasque class DD: improve hull I to hull II.
- Split off La Melpomène class: (keep hull I). decrease engine II to engine I. decrease light battery II to light battery I. decrease torpedo II to torpedo I. remove torpedo I module. (The remaining torpedo I module should be in the fixed torpedo slot). Add the 12 ships to construction queue in 1936 scenario.
- Split off Requin class from 600 Series SS: improve hull I to hull II. add torpedo I module.
- 630 Series SS: improve engine I to engine II.
- Aurore class SS: decrase hull II to hull I.
Regia Marina:
- Trento class CA: improve hull I to hull II. improve engine I to engine II. add a torpedo module in the new available slot.
- Zara class CA: improve hull I to hull II.
- Bolzano class CA: improve hull I to hull II. improve catapult I to catapult II. add a torpedo module in the new available slot.
- Giussano class CL: improve hull I to hull II.
- Montecuccoli class CL: add armor I module.
- Duca degli Abruzzi class CL: improve armor I to armor II.
- Curatone class DD: add minelaying rails module. Correct the name to Curtatone class
- Split off Sella class: add minelaying rails module. add depth charges module.
- Navigatori class DD: improve hull I to hull II. improve engine I to engine II. improve light battery I to light battery II.
- Split off Mirabello/Leone class: improve hull I to hull II. replace depth charges module with second light battery I.
- Maestrale class DD: improve hull I to hull II. add minelaying rail. Rename it Maestrale/Oriani class
- Split off Freccia/Folgore class: add minelaying rail.
- Split off Spica class (from Maestrale class): decrease engine II to engine I. increase AA I to AA II
- Soldati class DD: decrease light battery II to light battery I. increase AA I to AA II. add minelaying rail.
- split off Pegaso class: decrease hull II to hull I. decrease engine II to engine I. decrease light battery II to light battery I. increase AA I to AA II. add a second depth charge module.
- Mamelli class SS: improve hull I to hull II.
- keep the design currently named Mamelli class as the H class.
- Bandiera class SS: improve hull I to hull II. improve fixed torpedo tubes I module to torpedo tubes II. remove the second torpedo tubes I module
- Sirena class SS: decrease hull I to hull II.
Kriegmarine:
- Königsberg class CL: upgrade hull from Tier I to Tier II.
- Leipzig class CL: Upgrade the (fixed) Tier I AA module to Tier II AA. Replace the custom-slot AA module with a Minelaying Rails module.
- Split off Type II class from Type II: upgrade hull from Tier I to Tier II.
- Split off Type IX class from Type VII: upgrade engine from Tier I to Tier II. (U-37 to
Soviet Red Navy:
- Kirov class CA: upgrade hull from Tier I to Tier II.
- Orfey class DD: add Minelaying Rails module.
- Leningrad & Minsk class DD: add Minelaying Rails module.
- Gnevnyy class DD: add Minelaying Rails module.
- Soobrazitelnyi class DD: downgrade hull from Tier III to Tier II. Add Minelaying Rails module. Rename class Storozhevoy class
- Series II Leninets class SS: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
- Series XIII Leninets class SS: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
Koninklijke Marine:
- De Ruyter-class: upgrade Light cruiser battery from Tier I to Tier II.
Spanish Navy:
- Canarias class CA: add cruiser armor I module. Add 2x Torpedo Launcher modules. (move the second medium battery II module to the leftmost slot to allow installation of a second torpedo module)
- Principe Alfonso class CL: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I
- Churruca class DD: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I
- C-class SS: downgrade engine from Tier II to Tier I.
Argentine Navy:
- Venticinco de Mayo class CA: upgrade hull to cruiser hull II.
- La Argentina class CL: upgrade hull to cruiser hull II.
- Cervantes class DD: downgrade hull to light hull I.
- Mendoza class DD: downgrade hull to light hull I. Add torpedo launcher I module.
- Buenos Aires class DD: Add a second torpedo launcher I module
Royal Hellenic Navy:
- Hydra class DD: add minelaying rail module.
- Glafkos class SS: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
Polish Navy:
- Wilk class SS: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
Romanian Navy:
- Delfinul class SS: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
- New class: Requinul class: (same as German Type VII class, copy-paste design)
- New class: Marsuinul class: (like Requinul class but add minelaying tubes in the empty slot)
Swedish Royal Navy:
- Göteborg class DD: downgrade hull from Tier II to Tier I.
Royal Yugoslav Navy:
- Dubrovnik class DD: upgrade light battery I to light battery II. upgrade AA I to AA II.
- Beograd class DD: downgrade hull II to hull I. downgrade light battery II to light battery I.
- Hrabri class SS: downgrade hull II to hull I.
Techs than need to be added for some countries in the scenario setup (in order to unlock the required modules):
Argentina: 1936 cruiser hull (both scenarios)
France: 1936 cruiser hull, Basic Cruiser Armor Scheme (both scenarios)
Soviet Union: 1936 cruiser hull (36 scenario)
UK: 1936 heavy ship hull, 1936 submarine hull (36 scenario).
Yugoslavia: Basic Light Battery (36 scenario).
Missing ships of existing classes in scenario setups. IF possible, we've indicated the Task Force to which they should belong.
UK:
- HMS Rowena (S-class DD) was scrapped 1937. In 1936 she was part of the Nore Fleet.
- HMS Torrid (S-class DD) was scrapped 1937. In 1936 she was part of the Nore Fleet.
- HMS Thruster (S-class DD) was scrapped 1937. In 1936 she was part of the Nore Fleet.
- HMS Searcher (S-class DD) was scrapped in 1938. In 1936 she was part of the Reserve fleet at Portsmouth.
- HMS Tyrant (S-class DD) was scrapped in 1938. In 1936 she was part of the Reserve fleet at Portsmouth.
- HMS Walrus (V/W class DD) was damaged beyond repair by a storm in 1938. In 1936 she was part of the Rosyth Escort Force.
- 8 L class-submarines (O/P/R class in the game but should be new H/L class, see our proposal above) were scrapped at various points between 1936 and 1939 (L18, L19, L21, L53, L54, L56, L69, L71,). They should be part of one of the submarine task forces.
- There are 2 S-class submarines in the construction queue. The HMS Seawolf is correct, but the other one is named HMS Narwhal (actually a HMS Grampus class boat). There should be 3 S-class under construction, (HMS Spearfish and HMS Sunfish were also laid down in 1935 finished in 36)
- As mentioned above, the HMS Narwhal should be HMS Grampus class. 2 more (HMS Grampus and HMS Rorqual) should be under construction as well.
- 9 more E/F/G/H-class destroyers should be in the construction queue at a lower stage of completion than the G-class vessels. (They were laid down in early 1935 and finished by the end of 1936)
Canada:
- 2 old S-class Destroyers (HCMS Vancouver and HCMS Champlain) were in commission until November 36 and scrapped in 1937.
USA:
Ships that were scrapped or sunk before 1939 but still active or in reserve as of 1936 (the ships struck for scrapping in early 1936 not included) (ALL destroyers are Clemson-class, ALL subs S-class):
- USS Gwin: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was scrapped in 1939.
- USS Kimberly: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was scrapped in April 1939.
- USS Gridley: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was scrapped in 1939.
- USS Taylor: active, part of the Atlantic fleet in 36, later served in the Caribbean in 1937) decommissioned in december 1938 and used for spare parts for her sisterships during the war.
- USS Bell: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was scrapped in 1939.
- USS Champlin: In reserve at San Diego (Pacific Reserve Destroyers TF). was sunk in weapon test on 12 August 1936
- USS Seth Thompson: active, part of the Asiatic Fleet TF in the Philippines. Was irreparably damaged in collison on 14 April 1936.
- USS James K. Paulding: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was scrapped in 1939.
- USS O-1: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was sold for scrap on May 18 1938.
- USS R-8: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was sunk by accident on 26 February 1936.
- USS S-19: In reserve at Pearl Harbor (perhaps the 4th Submarine Squadron TF?). Was struck on 12.12.1936 and disposed in 1938
- USS S-3: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was scrapped in 1937.
- USS S-6: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was scrapped in 1937.
- USS S-7: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was scrapped in 1937.
- USS S-8: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was scrapped in 1937.
- USS S-9: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was scrapped in 1937.
- USS S-10: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was sold for scrap on November 13 1938.
Missing in 36 scenario but present in 39 (looks like an oversight):
- USS Lea (Clemson class DD) should be in the Pacific Reserve Destroyers TF. (Curiously, she’s present in the 39 scenario.) Has to be corrected, she served through the war.
- 6 R class subs (S class in the game): USS R-12, USS R-14, USS R-15, USS R-16, USS R-17 and USS R-18: All 6 In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF).
Ships converted into other classes between 1936 and 39:
- USS Manley (DD-74): active, part of the Special Service Squadron TF in the Caribbean. Was converted into a high-speed transport in 1938-39 and back into a destroyer (training ship) in 1945. (arguably could be still included as a destroyer in 1939 scenario as well)
- USS Walker (DD-163): In reserve at San Diego (Pacific Reserve Destroyers TF). was converted to auxiliary (water barge, later damage control hulk) in April 1938 ad scuttled on December 28 1941.
- USS Semmes (DD-189): was used as experimental ship for equipment tests off Key West, but returned to service as escort and AS-patrol in WW2. scrapped in 1946-47.
- USS George E. Badger (DD-196): In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was converted into a Seaplane Tender in October 1939 and served as escort in WW2, (8 battle stars & Presidential Unit Citation) served in WW2 (scrapped in 1946.
- USS Tracy (DD-214): active In the Pacific fleet (Battle Fleet, unknown TF). Was converted into a Destroyer Minelayer in 1937. (7 battle stars). Scrapped in 1946.
- USS Childs (DD-241): active In the Pacific fleet (Scouting Force TF). Was converted into a Seaplane Tender in 1938-39 and served as patrol in WW2 (1 battle star). Was scrapped in 1946.
- USS Williamson (DD-244): active In the Pacific fleet (Scouting Force TF). Was converted into a Seaplane Tender in 1938-39 but served with destroyer squadrons in WW2 (4 battle stars). Was scrapped in 1946/
- USS Turner (DD-259): In reserve at San Diego (Pacific Reserve Destroyers TF). Was converted into a water barge in September 1936 and scrapped in 1947.
- USS Preble (DD-345): active In the Pacific fleet (Battle Fleet, unknown TF). Was converted into a Destroyer Minelayer in 1937. (8 battle stars). Scrapped in 1946.
- USS Sicard (DD-346): active In the Pacific fleet (Battle Fleet, unknown TF). Was converted into a Destroyer Minelayer in 1937. (2 battle stars). Scrapped in 1946.
- USS Pruitt (DD-347): active In the Pacific fleet (Unknown TF). Was converted into a Destroyer Minelayer in 1937. (3 battle stars). Scrapped in 1946.
Missing in the production queue:
- only 4 of the 8 Porter class and 9 of the 18 Mahan class DD are under construction. Please add the remaining ones. They were all laid down in 1934-35.
- 6 Perch class SS (In-game Porpoise class).
Japan:
Ships that were scrapped in 1940 (or transferred to Manchukuo in 1937) should be part of IJN in both scenarios:
- 4 Momo-class destroyers, should appear as Momi-class in the game) (possibly, give one of them, Kashi (Hai Wen) already to Manchuria)
- 3 coastal submarines (Ro-53, Ro-54 and Ro-55) (should be Ro-26 class. (curiously, the Ro-51 and Ro-56 that were scrapped with them in 1940 ARE in the game)
France:
The construction queue lacks the following ships:
- Strassbourg (second Dunkerque class ship), under construction since 1934.
- Georges Leygues (sixth La Galissonnière class ship), under construction since 1933.
- Ouessant and Sidi-Ferruch (two Redoutable class submarines), under construction since 1931.
Italy:
- ships delivered to the Nationalists in SCW are missing. Add them: 4 Aquila/Poerio class DD: exactly the same design as the existing Spanish Melilla class and Romanian Marasti Class. (just copy paste modules). 4 Archimede class SS: same design as the existing Spanish General Mola class. Sending aid to Nationalist Spain should transfer these ships (similar to the transfer of cruisers from UK to NZ via focus)
- The old destroyer Premuda was not scrapped until January 39. Should be represented as a Mirabello/Leone class and be in the same TF as Carlo Mirabello and Augusto Riboty.
- 4 (formerly AH navy) destroyers were scrapped between 1937 and 39: Zenson, Grado, Cortelazzo and Monfalcone. (represented as Curtatone class vessels).
- The submarine H3 was retired in April 37. She should be still in the I Gruppo Sommergibili with the other H-class boats.
- The WW1 era submarines Lazzaro Mocenigo and Luigi Galvani were scrapped in April 1937 and January 1938 respectively. They should still be there as Balilla class submarines.
- 10 Perla class submarines in the construction queue (should be Sirene class in-game)
- HMS Rowena (S-class DD) was scrapped 1937. In 1936 she was part of the Nore Fleet.
- HMS Torrid (S-class DD) was scrapped 1937. In 1936 she was part of the Nore Fleet.
- HMS Thruster (S-class DD) was scrapped 1937. In 1936 she was part of the Nore Fleet.
- HMS Searcher (S-class DD) was scrapped in 1938. In 1936 she was part of the Reserve fleet at Portsmouth.
- HMS Tyrant (S-class DD) was scrapped in 1938. In 1936 she was part of the Reserve fleet at Portsmouth.
- HMS Walrus (V/W class DD) was damaged beyond repair by a storm in 1938. In 1936 she was part of the Rosyth Escort Force.
- 8 L class-submarines (O/P/R class in the game but should be new H/L class, see our proposal above) were scrapped at various points between 1936 and 1939 (L18, L19, L21, L53, L54, L56, L69, L71,). They should be part of one of the submarine task forces.
- There are 2 S-class submarines in the construction queue. The HMS Seawolf is correct, but the other one is named HMS Narwhal (actually a HMS Grampus class boat). There should be 3 S-class under construction, (HMS Spearfish and HMS Sunfish were also laid down in 1935 finished in 36)
- As mentioned above, the HMS Narwhal should be HMS Grampus class. 2 more (HMS Grampus and HMS Rorqual) should be under construction as well.
- 9 more E/F/G/H-class destroyers should be in the construction queue at a lower stage of completion than the G-class vessels. (They were laid down in early 1935 and finished by the end of 1936)
Canada:
- 2 old S-class Destroyers (HCMS Vancouver and HCMS Champlain) were in commission until November 36 and scrapped in 1937.
USA:
Ships that were scrapped or sunk before 1939 but still active or in reserve as of 1936 (the ships struck for scrapping in early 1936 not included) (ALL destroyers are Clemson-class, ALL subs S-class):
- USS Gwin: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was scrapped in 1939.
- USS Kimberly: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was scrapped in April 1939.
- USS Gridley: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was scrapped in 1939.
- USS Taylor: active, part of the Atlantic fleet in 36, later served in the Caribbean in 1937) decommissioned in december 1938 and used for spare parts for her sisterships during the war.
- USS Bell: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was scrapped in 1939.
- USS Champlin: In reserve at San Diego (Pacific Reserve Destroyers TF). was sunk in weapon test on 12 August 1936
- USS Seth Thompson: active, part of the Asiatic Fleet TF in the Philippines. Was irreparably damaged in collison on 14 April 1936.
- USS James K. Paulding: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was scrapped in 1939.
- USS O-1: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was sold for scrap on May 18 1938.
- USS R-8: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was sunk by accident on 26 February 1936.
- USS S-19: In reserve at Pearl Harbor (perhaps the 4th Submarine Squadron TF?). Was struck on 12.12.1936 and disposed in 1938
- USS S-3: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was scrapped in 1937.
- USS S-6: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was scrapped in 1937.
- USS S-7: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was scrapped in 1937.
- USS S-8: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was scrapped in 1937.
- USS S-9: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was scrapped in 1937.
- USS S-10: In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF). Was sold for scrap on November 13 1938.
Missing in 36 scenario but present in 39 (looks like an oversight):
- USS Lea (Clemson class DD) should be in the Pacific Reserve Destroyers TF. (Curiously, she’s present in the 39 scenario.) Has to be corrected, she served through the war.
- 6 R class subs (S class in the game): USS R-12, USS R-14, USS R-15, USS R-16, USS R-17 and USS R-18: All 6 In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Submarines TF).
Ships converted into other classes between 1936 and 39:
- USS Manley (DD-74): active, part of the Special Service Squadron TF in the Caribbean. Was converted into a high-speed transport in 1938-39 and back into a destroyer (training ship) in 1945. (arguably could be still included as a destroyer in 1939 scenario as well)
- USS Walker (DD-163): In reserve at San Diego (Pacific Reserve Destroyers TF). was converted to auxiliary (water barge, later damage control hulk) in April 1938 ad scuttled on December 28 1941.
- USS Semmes (DD-189): was used as experimental ship for equipment tests off Key West, but returned to service as escort and AS-patrol in WW2. scrapped in 1946-47.
- USS George E. Badger (DD-196): In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was converted into a Seaplane Tender in October 1939 and served as escort in WW2, (8 battle stars & Presidential Unit Citation) served in WW2 (scrapped in 1946.
- USS Tracy (DD-214): active In the Pacific fleet (Battle Fleet, unknown TF). Was converted into a Destroyer Minelayer in 1937. (7 battle stars). Scrapped in 1946.
- USS Childs (DD-241): active In the Pacific fleet (Scouting Force TF). Was converted into a Seaplane Tender in 1938-39 and served as patrol in WW2 (1 battle star). Was scrapped in 1946.
- USS Williamson (DD-244): active In the Pacific fleet (Scouting Force TF). Was converted into a Seaplane Tender in 1938-39 but served with destroyer squadrons in WW2 (4 battle stars). Was scrapped in 1946/
- USS Turner (DD-259): In reserve at San Diego (Pacific Reserve Destroyers TF). Was converted into a water barge in September 1936 and scrapped in 1947.
- USS Preble (DD-345): active In the Pacific fleet (Battle Fleet, unknown TF). Was converted into a Destroyer Minelayer in 1937. (8 battle stars). Scrapped in 1946.
- USS Sicard (DD-346): active In the Pacific fleet (Battle Fleet, unknown TF). Was converted into a Destroyer Minelayer in 1937. (2 battle stars). Scrapped in 1946.
- USS Pruitt (DD-347): active In the Pacific fleet (Unknown TF). Was converted into a Destroyer Minelayer in 1937. (3 battle stars). Scrapped in 1946.
Missing in the production queue:
- only 4 of the 8 Porter class and 9 of the 18 Mahan class DD are under construction. Please add the remaining ones. They were all laid down in 1934-35.
- 6 Perch class SS (In-game Porpoise class).
Japan:
Ships that were scrapped in 1940 (or transferred to Manchukuo in 1937) should be part of IJN in both scenarios:
- 4 Momo-class destroyers, should appear as Momi-class in the game) (possibly, give one of them, Kashi (Hai Wen) already to Manchuria)
- 3 coastal submarines (Ro-53, Ro-54 and Ro-55) (should be Ro-26 class. (curiously, the Ro-51 and Ro-56 that were scrapped with them in 1940 ARE in the game)
France:
The construction queue lacks the following ships:
- Strassbourg (second Dunkerque class ship), under construction since 1934.
- Georges Leygues (sixth La Galissonnière class ship), under construction since 1933.
- Ouessant and Sidi-Ferruch (two Redoutable class submarines), under construction since 1931.
Italy:
- ships delivered to the Nationalists in SCW are missing. Add them: 4 Aquila/Poerio class DD: exactly the same design as the existing Spanish Melilla class and Romanian Marasti Class. (just copy paste modules). 4 Archimede class SS: same design as the existing Spanish General Mola class. Sending aid to Nationalist Spain should transfer these ships (similar to the transfer of cruisers from UK to NZ via focus)
- The old destroyer Premuda was not scrapped until January 39. Should be represented as a Mirabello/Leone class and be in the same TF as Carlo Mirabello and Augusto Riboty.
- 4 (formerly AH navy) destroyers were scrapped between 1937 and 39: Zenson, Grado, Cortelazzo and Monfalcone. (represented as Curtatone class vessels).
- The submarine H3 was retired in April 37. She should be still in the I Gruppo Sommergibili with the other H-class boats.
- The WW1 era submarines Lazzaro Mocenigo and Luigi Galvani were scrapped in April 1937 and January 1938 respectively. They should still be there as Balilla class submarines.
- 10 Perla class submarines in the construction queue (should be Sirene class in-game)
USA:
- USS George E. Badger (DD-196): In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was converted into a seaplane Tender in October 1939 and served as escort in WW2, (8 battle stars & Presidential Unit Citation) scrapped in 1946.
- USS Childs (DD-241): In the Atlantic fleet (TF unknown, was operating between Florida and Puerto Rico). Was already a Seaplane Tender but served as patrol in WW2 (4 battle stars). Was scrapped in 1946.
- USS Williamson (DD-244): In the Pacific fleet (TF unknown, was operating in California). Was already a Seaplane Tender but served as patrol in WW2 (1 battle star). Was scrapped in 1946/
Japan:
- The two Ioshima class cruisers (captured Ninghai class ships, commissioned by the IJN) (same design as the Chinese Ninghai class in 36 scenario, obviously).
- As in the 36 scenario, the Momo class destroyers (now only 3) are missing. (and a fourth one that should be in the Manchukuo navy)
- DD Yugao (Wakatake class, Momi class in the giame) is missing. She was in service until sunk on 10/11/1944 (she’s present in the 36 scenario but as a Mitsuki class ship, that is wrong)
- As in the 36 scenario, 3 coastal submarines (Ro-53, Ro-54 and Ro-55) are missing.
Manchukuo:
- should have a Hai Wei class DD (same as Japanese Momi class): Hai Wei (former IJN Kashi)
France:
The construction queue lacks the following ships:
- Le Flibustier and Le Corsair (both Le Hardi class destroyers), under construction since 1938.
- (possibly the remaining six Le Hardi class destroyers as well)
- 14 Aurore class submarines (at least those 8 of them under construction since 1937 or 1938).
Italy:
- The ships sold to Sweden in 1940 (Destroyers Bettino Ricasoli, Giovanni Nicotera, Astore and Spica) are already missing. (They are not in the Swedish navy, neither as existing nor on the queue.) Should be still in the Italian navy (and the Spica and Astore should be Spica-class as suggested, definitely not Maestrale class).
German Reich:
- The Zerstörerflotte TF includes 5 Type 24 ships. (And Some of the names are wrong). There should be 6 of them (The Tiger was lost in collision on 27 August, but the Scenario starts on the 14. Besides the Tiger is still there.) Instead of the Gepard and Panther there should be 3 ships named Jaguar, Leopard and Luchs (the 36 scenario has them right. Just copypaste)
- 12 Type 35 Torpedo boats (for the game, treat them as more Type 24 units) should be in the construction queue at almost complete progress.
- The Admiral Hipper-class CA Seydlitz and Lützow should be in the construction queue.
- USS George E. Badger (DD-196): In reserve at Philadelphia (Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF). Was converted into a seaplane Tender in October 1939 and served as escort in WW2, (8 battle stars & Presidential Unit Citation) scrapped in 1946.
- USS Childs (DD-241): In the Atlantic fleet (TF unknown, was operating between Florida and Puerto Rico). Was already a Seaplane Tender but served as patrol in WW2 (4 battle stars). Was scrapped in 1946.
- USS Williamson (DD-244): In the Pacific fleet (TF unknown, was operating in California). Was already a Seaplane Tender but served as patrol in WW2 (1 battle star). Was scrapped in 1946/
Japan:
- The two Ioshima class cruisers (captured Ninghai class ships, commissioned by the IJN) (same design as the Chinese Ninghai class in 36 scenario, obviously).
- As in the 36 scenario, the Momo class destroyers (now only 3) are missing. (and a fourth one that should be in the Manchukuo navy)
- DD Yugao (Wakatake class, Momi class in the giame) is missing. She was in service until sunk on 10/11/1944 (she’s present in the 36 scenario but as a Mitsuki class ship, that is wrong)
- As in the 36 scenario, 3 coastal submarines (Ro-53, Ro-54 and Ro-55) are missing.
Manchukuo:
- should have a Hai Wei class DD (same as Japanese Momi class): Hai Wei (former IJN Kashi)
France:
The construction queue lacks the following ships:
- Le Flibustier and Le Corsair (both Le Hardi class destroyers), under construction since 1938.
- (possibly the remaining six Le Hardi class destroyers as well)
- 14 Aurore class submarines (at least those 8 of them under construction since 1937 or 1938).
Italy:
- The ships sold to Sweden in 1940 (Destroyers Bettino Ricasoli, Giovanni Nicotera, Astore and Spica) are already missing. (They are not in the Swedish navy, neither as existing nor on the queue.) Should be still in the Italian navy (and the Spica and Astore should be Spica-class as suggested, definitely not Maestrale class).
German Reich:
- The Zerstörerflotte TF includes 5 Type 24 ships. (And Some of the names are wrong). There should be 6 of them (The Tiger was lost in collision on 27 August, but the Scenario starts on the 14. Besides the Tiger is still there.) Instead of the Gepard and Panther there should be 3 ships named Jaguar, Leopard and Luchs (the 36 scenario has them right. Just copypaste)
- 12 Type 35 Torpedo boats (for the game, treat them as more Type 24 units) should be in the construction queue at almost complete progress.
- The Admiral Hipper-class CA Seydlitz and Lützow should be in the construction queue.
Wickes and Clemson class destroyers (in-game Clemson class) converted to minelayers. Should have this Hull and module layout:
- Flush Decker class (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, fire control, 2x minelaying rails.)
In 1936 scenario: 10 ships total (6 old ones in reserve):
- 4 in the Pacific Reserve Fleet TF (USS Stribling, USS Ingraham, USS Anthony and USS Sproston)
- 2 in Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF (USS Israel and USS Lansdale)
- 4 newest (USS Gamble, USS Ramsay, USS Montgomery and USS Breese) form a New TF: Mine Squadron 1 (part of the Battle Force fleet) The Oglala class should be in this TF as well.
In 1939 scenario: 8 ships total (the ones that were in reserve have been scrapped, 4 new have been converted, see missing ships entry above)
All 8 and USS Oglala should form the Mine Squadron 1 TF in the Battle Force fleet:
Mine Squadron 1
USS Oglala (CM 4), flag
Mine Division 13
USS Tracy (DM 19), flag
USS Preble (DM 20)
USS Sicard (DM 21)
USS Pruitt (DM 22)
Destroyer Division 14
USS Gamble (DM 15), flag
USS Ramsay (DM 16)
USS Montgomery (DM 17)
USS Breese (DM 18)
- Flush Decker class (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, fire control, 2x minelaying rails.)
In 1936 scenario: 10 ships total (6 old ones in reserve):
- 4 in the Pacific Reserve Fleet TF (USS Stribling, USS Ingraham, USS Anthony and USS Sproston)
- 2 in Atlantic Reserve Destroyers TF (USS Israel and USS Lansdale)
- 4 newest (USS Gamble, USS Ramsay, USS Montgomery and USS Breese) form a New TF: Mine Squadron 1 (part of the Battle Force fleet) The Oglala class should be in this TF as well.
In 1939 scenario: 8 ships total (the ones that were in reserve have been scrapped, 4 new have been converted, see missing ships entry above)
All 8 and USS Oglala should form the Mine Squadron 1 TF in the Battle Force fleet:
Mine Squadron 1
USS Oglala (CM 4), flag
Mine Division 13
USS Tracy (DM 19), flag
USS Preble (DM 20)
USS Sicard (DM 21)
USS Pruitt (DM 22)
Destroyer Division 14
USS Gamble (DM 15), flag
USS Ramsay (DM 16)
USS Montgomery (DM 17)
USS Breese (DM 18)
As many countries have mid-sized armed minelayers represented by light ship hulls with minelaying rails and no torpedo launcher modules (Katsuriki class in Japan, Jupiter class in Spain). By 1939 the Royal Navy had such a ship as well (HMS Plover). The Koninklijke Marine was completing the HMNLS Willem van der Zaan, that was considered the best dedicated minelayer of WW2 (older Dutch minelayers had much weaker armament). Romania was building one as well (and tw sister ships were planned but cancelled).
UK:
- HMS Plover (present in the 1939 scenario): (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, AA I, 2x minelaying rails)
Netherlands:
- HMNLS Willem van der Zaan (almost finished construction in the 39 scenario). (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, AA I, 2x minelaying rails)
Romania:
- Amiral Murgescu class: (under construction in 1939 scenario) light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, AA II, minelaying rails, Depth charges)
UK:
- HMS Plover (present in the 1939 scenario): (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, AA I, 2x minelaying rails)
Netherlands:
- HMNLS Willem van der Zaan (almost finished construction in the 39 scenario). (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, AA I, 2x minelaying rails)
Romania:
- Amiral Murgescu class: (under construction in 1939 scenario) light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, AA II, minelaying rails, Depth charges)
As explained in the entry on Italy above, th Italian navy lacks their historical minelaying submarines in both scenarios.
- X class (Level I hull with torpedo I and minelaying tubes.): 2 ships in both scenarios (X2 and X3)
- Bragandin class (Level II hull with torpedo I and minelaying tubes.): 3 ships in 36 scenario (Marcantonio Bragandin, Filippo Corridoni and Pietro Micca). 6 ships (3 more Foca class) in 1939.
- X class (Level I hull with torpedo I and minelaying tubes.): 2 ships in both scenarios (X2 and X3)
- Bragandin class (Level II hull with torpedo I and minelaying tubes.): 3 ships in 36 scenario (Marcantonio Bragandin, Filippo Corridoni and Pietro Micca). 6 ships (3 more Foca class) in 1939.
They are represented differently across various navies. The German Type 24 (including the very similar Type 25 vessels) are present in the game with a module layout representing them very accurately (But the twelve Type 35 TBs should be in 1939 construction queue (and the first few almost ready). They had very similar specs to the Type 24 and Type 25 Torpedo boats, and should be represented as more units of this class.
Similar ships in the French and Italian navy are depicted as larger destroyers (this is wrong, we have explained how they should be rewritten above.)
However, the Japanese and Soviet navies had commissioned similar ships, but they absent in the game (the names for the French ones are in the Historical Light Destroyers list). The French Le Fier class and the Italian Albatros (unique ship) are also missing. In order to treat the navies equally, the following ships classes should be implemented:
Japan:
- Chidori/Otori class: (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, fire control, torpedo I, depth charges.)
- In 1936: 4 ships present, 8 more under construction.
- In 1939: all 12 completed.
France:
- Le Fier class: (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, AA II, fire control, torpedo II, depth charges.)
- 14 ships under construction in 39 scenario.
Italy:
- Albatros class sub-chaser: (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, fire control, 2x depth charges.)
- 1 ship present in both scenarios.
Soviet Union:
- Uragan class: (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, fire control, torpedo I, depth charges, minelying rail.)
- 12 ships completed and 6 under construction in 36 scenario,
- all 18 completed in 39 scenario.
Similar ships in the French and Italian navy are depicted as larger destroyers (this is wrong, we have explained how they should be rewritten above.)
However, the Japanese and Soviet navies had commissioned similar ships, but they absent in the game (the names for the French ones are in the Historical Light Destroyers list). The French Le Fier class and the Italian Albatros (unique ship) are also missing. In order to treat the navies equally, the following ships classes should be implemented:
Japan:
- Chidori/Otori class: (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, fire control, torpedo I, depth charges.)
- In 1936: 4 ships present, 8 more under construction.
- In 1939: all 12 completed.
France:
- Le Fier class: (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, AA II, fire control, torpedo II, depth charges.)
- 14 ships under construction in 39 scenario.
Italy:
- Albatros class sub-chaser: (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, fire control, 2x depth charges.)
- 1 ship present in both scenarios.
Soviet Union:
- Uragan class: (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, fire control, torpedo I, depth charges, minelying rail.)
- 12 ships completed and 6 under construction in 36 scenario,
- all 18 completed in 39 scenario.
These ships can be represented well as cruiser hulls with weak armament and Tier I engines but many catapult modules. We think these ships can be recreated well with these hull and module setups:
(Note that while the conversion of the USS Langley sytarted only in October 1936, it was scheduled since 1934. As it seems impossible to convert from a carrier into a cruiser hull, it’s best to have the Langley in the production queue as a seaplane tender)
Australia (later UK):
- Albatross class (1 ship, 36 scenario: in Australia, 39 scenario in UK): (early cruiser hull. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, 2xAA I, 2x catapult I)
USA:
- Wright class: 1 ship (USS Wright) present in both scenarios (early cruiser hull. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, AA I, 3x catapult I), tagged as obsolete.
- Langley class: (under construction in 36 scenario, complete in 39) (early cruiser hull. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, 3x catapult II)
- Curtiss class: (USS Curitss and USS Albemarle under construction in 1939 scenario) (early cruiser hull. Modules: engine I, fire control, double-purpose light battery I, AA II, 3x catapult II)
Japan:
- Chitose/Mizuho class: (Chitose and Chiyoda under construction in 36 scenario, present in 39 scenario. Mizuho under construction in 39 scenario) (cruiser hull II. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, AA I, 3x catapult I)
- Nisshin class: (1 ship under construction 1939) (cruiser hull II. Modules: engine I, fire control, light cruiser battery I, AA I, 2x catapult I, minelaying rails.)
France:
- Commandant Teste class: (1 ship present in both scenarios) (cruiser hull I. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery II, AA II, secondaries I, armor I, 3x catapult I.)
Italy:
- Giuseppe Miraglia class: (1 ship present in both scenarios) (cruiser hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, AA I, fire control, 2x catapult I.)
Spain:
- Dédalo class: (1 ship present in both scenarios) (cruiser hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, AA I, fire control, 2x catapult I.)
(Note that while the conversion of the USS Langley sytarted only in October 1936, it was scheduled since 1934. As it seems impossible to convert from a carrier into a cruiser hull, it’s best to have the Langley in the production queue as a seaplane tender)
Australia (later UK):
- Albatross class (1 ship, 36 scenario: in Australia, 39 scenario in UK): (early cruiser hull. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, 2xAA I, 2x catapult I)
USA:
- Wright class: 1 ship (USS Wright) present in both scenarios (early cruiser hull. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, AA I, 3x catapult I), tagged as obsolete.
- Langley class: (under construction in 36 scenario, complete in 39) (early cruiser hull. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, 3x catapult II)
- Curtiss class: (USS Curitss and USS Albemarle under construction in 1939 scenario) (early cruiser hull. Modules: engine I, fire control, double-purpose light battery I, AA II, 3x catapult II)
Japan:
- Chitose/Mizuho class: (Chitose and Chiyoda under construction in 36 scenario, present in 39 scenario. Mizuho under construction in 39 scenario) (cruiser hull II. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery I, AA I, 3x catapult I)
- Nisshin class: (1 ship under construction 1939) (cruiser hull II. Modules: engine I, fire control, light cruiser battery I, AA I, 2x catapult I, minelaying rails.)
France:
- Commandant Teste class: (1 ship present in both scenarios) (cruiser hull I. Modules: engine I, fire control, light battery II, AA II, secondaries I, armor I, 3x catapult I.)
Italy:
- Giuseppe Miraglia class: (1 ship present in both scenarios) (cruiser hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, AA I, fire control, 2x catapult I.)
Spain:
- Dédalo class: (1 ship present in both scenarios) (cruiser hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, AA I, fire control, 2x catapult I.)
Can be represented well by using coastal defence cruiser hulls with minimal armament.
Italy:
- Eritrea class: 1 ship in 1939 scenario, part of the squadra di Mar Rosso: (coastal defense ship hull. Modules: engine I, fire control, light cruiser battery I, AA I)
Netherlands:
The HNLMS Van Kingsbergen was a unique ship to replace the HNLMS Soerabaja (rated a frigate after the war).
- Van Kingsbergen class (coastal defense ship hull. Modules: engine II, fire control, light cruiser battery I, AA I, armour I). present in 1939 scenario
Italy:
- Eritrea class: 1 ship in 1939 scenario, part of the squadra di Mar Rosso: (coastal defense ship hull. Modules: engine I, fire control, light cruiser battery I, AA I)
Netherlands:
The HNLMS Van Kingsbergen was a unique ship to replace the HNLMS Soerabaja (rated a frigate after the war).
- Van Kingsbergen class (coastal defense ship hull. Modules: engine II, fire control, light cruiser battery I, AA I, armour I). present in 1939 scenario
UK:
- HMS Sturdy is represented a V/W class destroyer. She should be S class instead. (Error in both scenarios)
Japan:
- Yugao should be a Momi class destroyer instead of Mitsuki class. (like the rest of the Wakatake class) (shes’s absent in 1939 scenario)
Italy:
- Perla, Adua, and Argo class submarines (essentially most of the ships named Calvi class in the game except the three actual Calvi class boats) should be Sirene class instead.
German Reich:
- The U-56 to U-63 (first 6 in the VI. U-bootsflotille TF, last 2 in construction queue) were Type II boats not Type VII.
- HMS Sturdy is represented a V/W class destroyer. She should be S class instead. (Error in both scenarios)
Japan:
- Yugao should be a Momi class destroyer instead of Mitsuki class. (like the rest of the Wakatake class) (shes’s absent in 1939 scenario)
Italy:
- Perla, Adua, and Argo class submarines (essentially most of the ships named Calvi class in the game except the three actual Calvi class boats) should be Sirene class instead.
German Reich:
- The U-56 to U-63 (first 6 in the VI. U-bootsflotille TF, last 2 in construction queue) were Type II boats not Type VII.
- The German pride of the Fleet [/B]in the 1936 scenario should be the panzerschiff Deutschland, not her sisterhsip Admiral Scheer. Reason: was named after the country.
Do you think we got things right, and if not how would YOU improve it?
Is there anything that should be changed further?
After discussing the content here with the rest of the community we will post a refined version (with more suggestions what to change) in the Suggestions forum.
We would like to know if we should report the stuff as a bug as well or if it would be against the rules.
And most importantly, if you are a dev or coder, any chance this will help you?
Last edited:
- 23
- 3
- 2
- 1
