Research Misalignment

29 Jan 2019, 01:04

Hey fellow Call of War Commanders,

My name is Debbidosan and I am writing this forum is about the issues or being annoyed with the historical inaccuracy of the Research in the Naval options of the Aircraft Carrier.

For the Aircraft Carrier it stated Level 3 is it the Essex class and Level 4 it is the Independence class but shouldn't this be another way round? Since Independence carrier class standard displacement was 11,000 tons and Essex carrier class standard displacement was 27,500 which is more bigger then the Independence class.

Independence class specifications shown as

188.7m by 21.6m by 7.3m

2 H2 catapults

8 arrestor wires

2 elevators

30 aircraft

10x1 20mm Oerlikon AA guns

5.5" (140mm) machinery belt tapering to 1.5" (38mm) (omitted from first two units)

2" (51mm) forward magazine belt

5" (127mm) bulkheads

2" (51mm) armour deck

4 Babcock & Wilcox boilers

110,000 gallons (416,000 liters) aviation gasoline

SC-2 search radar

Tonnage	11,000 tons standard displacement
Dimensions	619' by 71' by 24'
Maximum speed	31.5 knots
Complement	1461
Aircraft	552' (168.2m) flight deck
Armament	2x4, 8x2 40mmBofors AA guns
Protection	254 tons:
Machinery	4-shaft General Electric geared turbine (100,000 shp)
Bunkerage	2686 tons fuel oil
Range	8325 nautical miles (15,400 km) at 15 knots
Munitions	686.1 tons
Sensors	SKair search radar
Modifications	By 1945 all units had 26-28 40mm in twin and quadruple mounts and SK-2, SP, and SPS-2 radar.

And Essex class shown as

266.4m by 28.3m by 8.5m

1 HIVA hangar catapult

1 HIVC deck catapult

1 60' by 34'6" (18.3m by 10.5m) deck edge and 2 48' by 44'3" (14.63m by 13.48m) centerline elevators

90 aircraft

8x4 40mm Bofors AA guns

46 20mm Oerlikon AA guns

4" (102mm) belt of Class B armor tapering to 2.5" at its lower edge on 0.75" (19mm) STS (Special Treatment Steel) skin.

1.125" (29mm) to 0.75" (19mm) STS skin from belt to hangar deck.

4" (102mm) bulkheads of Class B armor.

0.625" (16mm) STS bulkheads from belt to hangar deck.

2x1.25" (2x32mm) STS hangar deck.

1.25" (32mm) STS elevator pit walls.

1.5" (38mm) STS fourth deck above belt

0.625" (16mm) STS longitudinal bulkheads from fourth to hangar decks.

0.625" (16mm) STS crowns and sides to magazines and aviation gasoline tanks.

1.875" (48mm) STS holding bulkheads.

4.5" (114mm) sides, 4" (102mm) bulkheads of Class B armor and 2x1.25" (2x32mm) crown, 0.75" (19mm) floor of STS for steering compartments.

1" (25mm), 1.5" (38m) and 2x1" (2x25mm) STS funnel uptakes.

1" (25mm) STS bridge.

0.625" (16mm) to 1" (25mm) STS splinter protection for trunks, hoists, and other vital elements.

Hangar deck resistant to 1000lb (454 kg) GP bomb.

8 Babcock & Wilcox boilers

240,000 gallons (908,500 liters) aviation gasoline

1 SC-2 air search radar

2 SG surface search radar

2 FD Mark 4 fire control radar for 5"/38 guns

By 1945, the light AA armament consisted of up to 18x4 40mm guns and 60 20mm guns. The aircraft complement had been increased to 102 and both catapults had been replaced by HIVB deck catapults. The FD fire control radar was upgraded to Mark 12 and supplemented by Mark 22 height finding radar.

Tonnage	27,500 tons standard displacement
Dimensions	874' by 93' by 28'
Maximum speed	33 knots
Complement	2631
Aircraft	862' (262.7m) flight deck
Armament	4x2, 4x1 5"/38 dual-purpose guns
Protection	996.7 tons:
Immune zone	11,250 to 18,700 yards (10,300 to 17,100 meters) versus 6" (152mm) shells.
Machinery	4-shaft Westinghouse geared turbine (150,000 shp)
Bunkerage	6330 tons fuel oil
Range	15,440 nautical miles (28,600km) at 15 knots
Munitions	1601 tons
Sensors	1 SK-2 air search radar
Modifications	By late 1943 SM fighter-direction radar was installed on most units.

Well I feel like although the year of Independence class was completed in 1943 and Essex class was between 1942-1945 but I think Independence class should be Level 3 and Essex class should be level 4 as Since Midway is Level 5 for it. Well what do you all think about it? Leave your suggestions or any conclusion on it.

Reference.

https://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/I/n/Independence_class.htm

http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/E/s/Essex_class.htm

Regards,

Debbidosan

7 Replies

29 Jan 2019, 08:55

The mentioned unit classes are merely flavoring of the unit info pages, and they contain many questionable choices. For example, the Soviet air craft carriers contain several types who were never built because, well, the Soviets didn't actually build any aircraft carriers in this period, so daydream drawing table models were used instead.

As another example, the L2-L4 levels of Soviet "Medium tank" types are BT7-KV1-T34. The first is actually a light tank, the second a heavy tank, and the third a medium tank. Other tanks which are usually classified as "medium" are in the light tank series... the SU-76 is BOTH used in the tank destroyer AND self-propelled artillery series (becoming available on ddifferent dates), and so on, and so on... so frankly, it is a bit of a mess all over.

No actual unit type stats are used in the game, an "L1" carrier is the same for all nations regardless of the skin (German/Soviet/American/Japanese) used for your nation.

29 Jan 2019, 14:49

So in the end could I say this game is not 100% entirely accurate on the historical itself then?

29 Jan 2019, 15:39

lol... that is a mild way of putting it)))

29 Jan 2019, 15:44

Like Roko said, the unit statistics will be the same for each "skin"

And yes, the fact that the skin names and images don't match and aren't always the best fit is something that is planned to be fixed at some point in the future.

I am sure that if a comprehensive list of suggested unity types and images were collected here in the forum that would make the task of changing things a little easier when the time comes. This will need to be collected and organized, rather than a random thread here and there.

War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill
VorlonFCW
Retired from Bytro staff as of November 30, 2020.
>>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<

29 Jan 2019, 18:33

K.Rokossovski wrote:
lol... that is a mild way of putting it)))

Oo well then okay..

VorlonFCW wrote:
Like Roko said, the unit statistics will be the same for each "skin"
And yes, the fact that the skin names and images don't match and aren't always the best fit is something that is planned to be fixed at some point in the future.
I am sure that if a comprehensive list of suggested unity types and images were collected here in the forum that would make the task of changing things a little easier when the time comes. This will need to be collected and organized, rather than a random thread here and there.

Then why isn't there a post that let fellow us CoW Commanders able to post such suggestions especially for individuals units specifications and images on it? This could also be a good varifying of data collections on it. Which it will let all of us submit a images on respective units and also this will let the Game Designer and Game Operators to take a reference on it. Isn't it?

30 Jan 2019, 01:03

Debbidosan wrote:
Then why isn't there a post

Because such a thing needs someone who will follow it through, AND someone who has the time, drive, and historical knowledge to do so.

That person is not me

However I would outline a thread this way:

Title: comprehensive suggestions for armored unit skins

then make a post for each unit just as a "placeholder" to be filled in later:

Armored car

light tank

Medium tank

and so on.

Then below that you start your discussion and everyone offers suggestions. The original poster / organizer of the thread will fill in the first posts, keeping in mind that you need all of the skins for each unit level and whatnot.

Then, even when it is completed we have no idea when such an update will be budgeted for and made of course.

30 Jan 2019, 01:37

Well hey at least that a good start and I pretty sure they will be some CoW Commanders will spend time to find infos on it.

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

Back to Bug Reports and Issues