English language pet peeves

Sounds good to me.

Oh, and for the record, no knowledgeable person refers to a naval capital ship whose primary function is to provide a platform for naval aviation combat operations as an "airplane carrier," in either British or American English. The vessel type is universally called an "AIRCRAFT CARRIER"; please replace the awkward term "airplane carrier" with the correct term "aircraft carrier" in all instances throughout the unit production menus and elsewhere.

Thanks.

Try posting your peeves here: Spelling and Grammar checks: Ongoing thread

Thanks, QD. It is obvious to a lover of the English language that many of these suspect phrases were written by someone whose first language is not the mother tongue of Shakespeare -- and there are a lot of them. I may keep adding here to encourage other English-language users to compile a list and then add brief summary of each issue at the thread you linked.

Cheers.

MontanaBB wrote:

It is obvious to a lover of the English language that many of these suspect phrases were written by someone whose first language is not the mother tongue of Shakespeare

MontanaBB wrote:

I may keep adding here to encourage other English-language users to compile a list and then add brief summary of each issue at the thread you linked.

Quasi-duck wrote:

The devs are German

And sometimes it shows in very odd ways. These small language issues are minor. I laughed out loud at the selection of a Bismarck/Tirpitz class battleship as the representative BB for all navies, including the Allies, as well as the Sea Fury as the representative Allied fighter -- one of the greatest propeller-driven planes ever made, but it never saw action in World War II. There is a lot that could be done to improve the game and make it more realistic on multiple levels, but some folks seem to take the attitude that "it's a game," and it does not need to be reflective of any greater military or historical reality. That's unfortunate.

MontanaBB wrote:

And sometimes it shows in very odd ways. These small language issues are minor. I laughed out loud at the selection of a Bismarck/Tirpitz class battleship as the representative BB for all navies, including the Allies, as well as the Sea Fury as the representative Allied fighter -- one of the greatest propeller-driven planes ever made, but it never saw action in World War II. There is a lot that could be done to improve the game and make it more realistic on multiple levels, but some folks seem to take the attitude that "it's a game," and it does not need to be reflective of any greater military or historical reality. That's unfortunate.

Supermarine Spitfire, North American P-51 Mustang, Vought F4U Corsair were all among the best propeller-driven aircraft ever made and all flew with both American and British pilots -- and they pick a plane that didn't even fly in combat during the war in question. That said, the Sea Fury was one of the best planes most people have never heard of because it didn't get a chance to make a name for itself during WW2.

MontanaBB wrote:

That said, the Sea Fury was one of the best planes most people have never heard of because it didn't get a chance to make a name for itself during WW2.

Quasi-duck wrote:

I think it shot down jets in Korea.

MontanaBB wrote:

So did the Mustang and Corsair, but that was only because the allied pilots were better trained and had better tactics at the start of the war. The speed differential was only about 100 mph in level flight, but the best propeller fighters could exceed 500 mph in steep dives, so if they could catch the MiGs below them, they had a shot an upset victory against those first generation jets. Same thing happened with P-51 bomber escorts vs. Me 262s at the end of WW2. All things being equal, I would have rather had the jet, but the Sea Fury was an impressive piece of piston engine technology.

Quasi-duck wrote:

Didn't know that was how they did it.

Bottom line: by the time the 262 appeared in operational numbers, it was too late for the Luftwaffe.