Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Gr1zzly

Confused about a ship on the Wiki.

8 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
142 posts
484 battles

Greetings,


I've been filling in the Wiki, since there was some mention of a possible beta invite for helping do so. I enjoyed reading about the ships and the history of them, so I did the history of all the destroyers both IJN and USA.

 

However, when I was doing the IJN, I came across something...confusing. The Katori is listed under both Cruisers and Destroyers. Now, is it a cruiser or a destroyer? The sources I've been able to come across mention it as a cruiser or a battleship. Nothing about destroyers. I was hoping someone here could point me in the right direction, as the information I've provided in the Historical section of this particular ship represents it as a cruiser. As such, it shows up in the destroyer section as a cruiser. Was thinking I might have to adjust the wording if The Katori was both a destroyer and a cruiser at some point.

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,874 battles

The one we have in-game is technically a cruiser, albeit a training cruiser that was later pressed into combat. It ought to be classified in the cruiser section, as she was armed pretty much like an early-WWII IJN light cruiser, which were basically enlarged destroyer designs. 

 

(Katori is listed as being 129m long. For comparison, a Fubuki-class destroyer is 112m)

 

The sources mentioning it as a battleship refers to the Katori-class pre-dreadnought battleships that were decommissioned before WWII

Edited by Syanda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
142 posts
484 battles

Thanks Syanda.

 

Can you tell me if the Katori is a tier 1 starting point for the Tech Tree, and perhaps that is why it is listed under both? It's the only thing I can consider, which will make it a bit confusing, considering the wiki has it under destroyers and cruisers, but mine is not to reason why...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
142 posts
484 battles

Well, that makes some sense, considering the Katori class were originally ordered by the IJN to serve as 'training ships' in the 1937 and 1939 supplemental navy budgets. It was interesting to note due to a mix steam turbine / diesel propulsion system, which was intended for instructional value rather than speed, they were considered too slow for conventional cruiser duties.

 

However, I would have thought the use of a destroyer instead of a cruiser would have been more logical, especially since the IJN did have destroyers which would have easily fit the bill. The use of a 'training' ship in place of a proper destroyer on WG's part is....curious.

 

Thanks for all your help Syanda. There isn't much I can do about the description other than put a notation in, at least until WG finalizes plans / tech tree's / etc and the dust settles. Hopefully, by that time, I'll be able to have a play with some of them and give some player observations on different classes.

Edited by Gr1zzly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,177 posts
4,099 battles

Do you need an in-game screenshot of the two tech trees? Seeing the current lines might be able to help you out a bit.

 

One thing to keep in mind if you're writing history blurbs for each wiki entry is that you need to be careful of multiple ships of the same name. Throughout history, there were numerous ships named St. Louis (something like 5 of them), Isokaze (a 1939 Kagero-class destroyer, and a 1916 Isokaze-class destroyer), Umikaze, and Amagi.

Edited by benlisquare

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
142 posts
484 battles

Thanks benlisquare. A screenie of the tech tree would be helpful.

 

And yes, I am aware that there were ships which carried the names as well as the classes. Separating them out was part of the fun lol.

 

I was extremely careful to ensure it was the class of ship and not an individual ship I included in the historical section. :)

 

(Note: I'm a fairly hopeless phone user and thus the quote above and no text, since my phone decided it didn't want to type anywhere but in the quote area.)

 

Edited by Gr1zzly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×