Ship-class reunion? Independent and Bataan were planned as Cleveland-class.
afaik there has to be no more than one ship of a different class (or non-class character, e.g. commander) to be considered for inclusion. although the fact that the Independence-class CVL were borne out of Cleveland-class hulls does present a conundrum.
afaik there has to be no more than one ship of a different class (or non-class character, e.g. commander) to be considered for inclusion. although the fact that the Independence-class CVL were borne out of Cleveland-class hulls does present a conundrum.
I would cite the precedent of how subclasses are handled for the Ship Class Reunion pool. For example, the Akatsuki class are a major presence in the pool. But they're also 1 of the 3 subclasses of the Fubuki class, as seen in post #1922826. But at the same time there are many Fubuki class posts without the Ayanami and Akatsuki subclasses in the pool, such as most recently post #4283864. So it's clearly established that any post with a full up-to-date lineup of the Fubuki subclass will qualify for the pool, with or without the presence of the other two subclasses to produce the full Fubuki class reunion.
I think instances where some ships of a class were converted while others remained in the original configuration should be counted in the same way that subclasses are. All of the Clevelands, all of the Independences or the entirety of both classes combined should each be a valid option within the pool. Likewise for the Admiral Hipper class with Weser (converted Seydlitz) and Mainz (a what-if version of either Lützow or Seydlitz from the original plan where they would've been a CL subclass).
Leave a comment