These sizes dont fit!
I'm an autist when it comes to naming ship classes and designing roles for my vessels in my fleets. And by this I mean following somewhat realistic and modern hull classification symbols + roles in relation to the hull sizes ingame. And therein lies the problem. In core hulls the tiny hulls are supposedly fighters and small hulls bombers, but then suddenly in medium hulls we get corvettes, frigates and destroyers within the same hull size range. The same repeats with large hulls. We got destoyers, cruisers and battleshits within the same bracket. Huge hulls are somewhat better with only the biggest things there.
I know this is a bit silly nitpicking, but this already bothered me back in GalCiv2. My mentality pretty much follows a kind of first half of the 20th century -ideal when thinking about the roles and classes of the vessels I create. I've pretty much gone with tiny being some sort of gunboats or small attack craft (PG), small being corvettes (FS or FE for fleet escort) and mediums frigates (FF/FFG etc.) based on the core design. Then large hulls are different types of destroyers (DD/DDG/DDL etc.) and huge hulls light, heavy nd such cruisers (CA(CL/CG etc.). But then the autism kicks in and facing battleships, dreadnoughts and titans with destroyers and cruisers on equal footing starts eating away at the immersion. On medium hulls I can live with it by repeating the mantra that the classes are named after their role, not their size or power. This is somewhat believable since in modern naval combat the line between frigates and destroyers has blurred a lot. But it doesnt work for me above and below medium, not to mention that I miss the entire old school awesome spectrum of battleships and battlecruisers. And dont even get me started with the carriers in that equation.
So I'm wondering how others deal with this and what kind of logic do you people follow when designing your fleets?
Since people like pictures, here's what my generic shipyards hull list looks like. Aaand discussion!