Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-26091970-20150604000724/@comment-115.77.219.254-20150927120446

Vcharng wrote: 115.77.219.254 wrote:

If size or displacement don't matter, so we don't need seperate Light Cruiser, Heavy Cruiser or Battlercruiser either, just Cruiser for all of them, because their role are "cruisers". Cruisers are NOT seperated by displacements but by gun calibers, I mentioned Ooyodo being heavier than Furutaka. They are also VERY different in roles. BC is used as just a faster, weaker BB, CA put more efforts on torpedoes (unless if your torpedo technology sucks like the USN), CL are used more on leading DD fleets (all),  ASW (Japan), as a long-range patrol (UK) or genarally as fleet escorts.

Light carriers' definition also shifts from nation to nation, to the Japanese they are slower, fleet-defence carriers (and yes, there's little to no differnce between CVL and CVE to the Japanese); to the Americans they are cheaper fleet carriers that can still go with the big carriers; to the British they are just cheaper CVAs.

Light Cruiser and Heavy Cruiser only seperated by gun caliber, yes, but only because London Treaty. When the war broke out, Heavy Cruisers were built with heavier displacement with around 15.000 tons, while Light Cruisers countinue keep at 10.000 tons and below. About their role, I don't think only CA put more effert on torpedoes, there are many CL that focus on torperdos like Kuma and Kitakami class. And their role are not very different, their majority role are still same or similiar protect carrier or commerce ships, support fleet in term of firepower, recon. JPN's light cruiser may use in other role like lead destroyer, torpero cruiser, but still also be used in common cruiser roles.