Board Thread:Event Community Discussion/@comment-28069733-20170521154728/@comment-460323-20170525055027

Vcharng wrote: IRL DE is a variant of DD, and just read this sentence:

"Destroyer escort is not a kind of destroyer".

It's correct at least in the game, but very anti-intuitive. As opposed to the fact that SSV is a kind of SS, BBV is a kind of slow BB (in most cases), and CVB is a kind of carrier (most carrier-requiring branching or expedition accepts CVL, CV, CVB alike, the only exception is 2-2). But for someone without the slightest knowledge of navy, what difference would that make?

In reality, by the time someone got their hand on a DE/PF, they would've known the in-game difference between a DE and DD (like, if you choose to sortie a DE when you could run a torp CI DD, you're doing it all wrong). All the other classification uses extensions (CV -> CVL / CVB, BB -> FBB / BBV) but never changes the word, so I really doubt confusion over the two is a thing.

Plus, if we're talking about confusing classifications, having a ship class called Coastal Defense Ship using either PF or DE rather than CDS is just bonkers. The other derivations (e.g. Destroyers -> DD, Aviation Battleship -> BBV) is at least somewhat logical given that they uses the ship class' initials or sticking with Aviation == V. But Coastal Defesnse Ship -> PF/DE? And THEN complaining about mistranslation?

I mean, really now. Suggesting that DE / PF will improve understanding or causes confusion is just bonkers. Both are confusing and pointless from a non-navy standpoint.

Arguing that it's historically accurate, sure. Arguing that one of it impedes gameplay? C'mon now.