Board Thread:Game Updates/@comment-25730832-20151013050733/@comment-26574811-20151106102312

Qunow wrote: I'd say her kai lines are mainly referencing to her in-game changes like parking planes on flight deck. Yes, the remodel based on elements taken from design concept of Kai Taihou class, but that does not mean he change into kai taihou class. Like even if you give kiyoshimo a kaini to turn it into a battleship it would still be of Yuugumo Class. By "Kais into Kai-Taiho-class", I was referring to her design, I don't care about and don't agree with whatever the library defines her ship class. KC categorizes ships in a very poor manner, and I am not interested in following it. Or at least, not every one of it.

What follows is a very lengthy explaination, you can choose to skip it.

What you point out is a great blindspot of KC. The library categorizes ships in its own way, Zuiho was Shoho-class' second ship, Hayasui was Kai-Kazahaya class, Taiho was Taiho-class even if a Taiho class can never be remodel into what is known as Taiho-Kai in KC.

But this is not how ship classes work.

Let me use the Super-Yamato-class as an example:

Super-Yamato-class was a name used in early stages of development. Historically, it was suggested that the class is to be named officially as the Kii-class. Since all the names are given, there will be no problem when the devs introduce them: Yamato class consisting of Yamasushi, while Kii-class (aka Super-Yamato) includes Kii and Owari. (situation A)

But what if no names were given? Easy. The devs then introduces Yamasushi K2 instead of Kii-class, and continue to call them "Yamato-class" in the library, while they are actually using Super-Yamato designs. (situation B)

This is exactly what happened with Taiho. She IS the Kai-Taiho-class, it's just that since Kai-Taiho never had a official name, so the devs had to upgrade Taiho into her.

Now, Kii and Owari in situation A is practically the same as Yamasushi K2 in situation B. If we assume an official name for Kai-Taiho, let's use WOWS's Hakuryu (although that one more likely based on G14), then Hakuryu becomes just like Kii in situation A, while Taiho Kai is just like Yamasushi K2 in situation B.

So why can we call them Super-Yamato-class/Kai-Taiho-class in situation A, but not in B? Because of the library? Clearly it's the library that's making a mistake here, not the rest of the world.

And Hayasui, too, actually, in the other way around. In reality she was officially Kazahaya-class, "Kai-Kazahaya-class" is a name the devs gave her, supposedly referring to her CAM form, but KC refers to pre-Kai Hayasui as Kai-Kazahaya as well.

(google "Kai-Kazahaya-class Fleet Oiler" in Japanese gives merely 78 hits, this term doesn't even exist outside KC)

Ro-500 is another example of how poorly KC's ship classes were categorized. She was never part of any Japanese submarine classes, just listed under Ro-series due to her size. She belongs to Type IXC to the very end, while KC chose to classify her as "Ro-series submarine", which is not even a ship class. -

Now, I have throughly explained why KC library-style ship class catagorization should not be followed, in order not to let my post getting deleted by the devs, let's get back to Matsu-class.

From what I have said above, and from the fact that it is flatly pointless to introduce a slow (22kt), poorly armed (one duel 5-incher), barely useful "transport ship" (remember, a number of expeditions require destroyers), one highly possible way to deal with this is to introduce Matsu-class only, design their Kai according to the No.1-class transport, while still stubbernly call them Matsu-class destroyers. Exacly the same way as Taiho. This solves all problems.