Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-26091970-20150604000724/@comment-174.7.162.124-20150926034815

The Shinano was ~30m shorter than the Midway, but otherwise equivalent in dimensions as well as having nearly 1.5 times the tonnage. It could arguably warrant the CVB designation, but the Shouaku-class and virtually identical Taiho would absolutely not.

The designation of CVA, on the other hand, was not linked with the size of the vessel. The Essex-class, following post-war modernization, used the CVA designation. The ships of the Essex-class are comparable in dimensions to the Shokaku-class and Taiho. Instead, CVA referred to the carrier using an airgroup primarly for combat, not for anti-submarine (CVS), defense (CVE), nor use of helicopters (CVHA).

Considering that, in-game, Shoukaku and Taihou are not capable of arming for anti-submarine or carrying helicopters, the use of CVA would technically be correct. Though, by that definition, all of the game's standard fleet carriers could arguably use the CVA designation. As a fringe benefit, though CVA is meant to imply CV "Attack", it can be easily misread as CV "Armourerd". It could serve to distinguish Shoukaku and Taihou from the basic CV designation, as the in-game designation is slightly different.

Personally, I don't see a the logic behind "CVR", as it doesn't derive from any previously-used definition. The "-R" suffix in USN usage meant "Radar", used to differentiate DE, FF, and SS which had not usually carried radar like capital ships.