Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
CaptainTeddybear

Stalingrad vs Kronshtadt

47 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
1,863 posts
8,842 battles

Stalingrad has much thicker armor and can only be penetrated from the front by Yamato.

Stalingrad has a much smaller citadel.

Stalingrad gets the US auto-bounce angles for it's AP shells.

Stalingrad has triple the long range AA DPS.
 

Many criticisms of the Kronshtadt became moot when WG gave it the citadel the size of Mt Everest but it is looking like they plan to make up the difference with Stalingrad and then some.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,417
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
5,064 posts
6,754 battles

well the Kronshtadt was the design that lead to the Stalingrad iirc, so it makes sense it would have advantages to its predecessor 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
361
[5D]
Members
1,245 posts
7,213 battles

Kron has HE, Stalingrad does not.

 

That is a significant deal. Not necessarily a dealbreaker... but it is significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
75
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers
385 posts
5,528 battles

Your also making a t9 vs t10 comparison. Do the same with a ship like Izumo and it'll fair just as poorly compared up against a Yamato.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
273
[HCH]
[HCH]
Beta Testers
877 posts
7,240 battles

Anyone going to complain that these cruisers should be battleships? No?

*sits in corner thinking about Alaska and B-65*

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,863 posts
8,842 battles
4 minutes ago, Raigir said:

Your also making a t9 vs t10 comparison. Do the same with a ship like Izumo and it'll fair just as poorly compared up against a Yamato.

 

The only one that would be even semi-true is armor but even that one isn't true to the degree it is with Stalingrad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,510
[NSF]
Beta Testers
4,994 posts
5,931 battles

Honestly at this point I don't even care anymore. WG is so confused about what its trying to accomplish balance wise that its not even worth speculating.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
726
[HYDRO]
Members
1,571 posts
3,751 battles

Too early to judge however methinks, there are bound to be a few rounds of supertesting left to see if the ship is too strong. I don't think at this point WG's interests lie in making this ship too strong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
393
Members
2,388 posts
7,693 battles

Stalingrad seems a meh ship right now, seems a very limited ship.

 

Good armor but meh citadel. Guns hit hard, but the low calliber and lack of HE might harm them. Limited consumables (for a cruiser). HUGE size.

 

Stalingrad really lacks versatility. If you get into a situaion where you can angle against the enemy (out of a Yamato) and the enemy dont angle agaisnt you, big game. But if the enemy angle, you will have hard time getting damage. Or if the enemy flank or croos fire you are done. Seems a hit or miss ship. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,863 posts
8,842 battles
3 minutes ago, Xlap said:

Stalingrad seems a meh ship right now, seems a very limited ship.

 

Good armor but meh citadel. Guns hit hard, but the low calliber and lack of HE might harm them. Limited consumables (for a cruiser). HUGE size.

 

Stalingrad really lacks versatility. If you get into a situaion where you can angle against the enemy (out of a Yamato) and the enemy dont angle agaisnt you, big game. But if the enemy angle, you will have hard time getting damage. Or if the enemy flank or croos fire you are done. Seems a hit or miss ship. 

 

 

It's pretty rare that every ship is angled. Especially if you have 20km range, US auto-bounce angles and rail gun arcs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
393
Members
2,388 posts
7,693 battles
4 minutes ago, CaptainTeddybear said:

 

It's pretty rare that every ship is angled. Especially if you have 20km range, US auto-bounce angles and rail gun arcs.

True. But you always wont have all ships availeble to shoot at. Range, islands, turrets might be facing other direction. If the targets you have availeble at the time are angled you might be a hard time doing damage, at least good damage. 

 

Not saying that Stalingrad guns are bad. But the gun calliber and lack of HE limits their potential. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,262
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,797 posts
15,222 battles
1 hour ago, tcbaker777 said:

well the Kronshtadt was the design that lead to the Stalingrad iirc, so it makes sense it would have advantages to its predecessor 

Do you mean like "This stack of papers leads to that stack of papers" as neither of these ships has anywhere near their correct IRL stats.

1 hour ago, sulghunter331 said:

Anyone going to complain that these cruisers should be battleships?

Are you referring to iChase's video, and the title displayed so boldly?

1 hour ago, Big_Spud said:

Honestly at this point I don't even care anymore. WG is so confused about what its trying to accomplish balance wise that its not even worth speculating.

There is no balance when it comes to either of these two blatantly overpowered paper ships, just an ongoing joke in which the punchline is the ever popular phrase "Russian Bias".

1 hour ago, warheart1992 said:

I don't think at this point WG's interests lie in making this ship too strong.

And yet it seems to happen so very, very often.

24 minutes ago, why_u_heff_to_be_mad said:

Stalingrad is 'reward not premium', so won't make credits like one. 

Oh, well, that makes everything OK then; it won't print credits.

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[POP]
Members
1,164 posts
15,055 battles

Who cares about them its all Russian bias anyway you look at it. 

Edited by tm63au
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,863 posts
8,842 battles
27 minutes ago, Xlap said:

Not saying that Stalingrad guns are bad. But the gun calliber and lack of HE limits their potential. 

I'm not sure that true.

Here is Stalingrad penetration:

- 5 km 698 mm (2.11 deg, 1.95 s)
- 10 km 578 mm (5.31 deg, 4.23 s)
- 15 km 480 mm (9.95 deg, 6.89 s)
- 20 km 402 mm (16.47 deg, 10.04 s)

 

This is Montana penetration:

- 5 km 733 mm (3.19 deg, 2.41 s)
- 10 km 617 mm (7.77 deg, 5.18 s)
- 15 km 520 mm (14.30 deg, 8.43 s)
- 20 km 443 mm (22.78 deg, 12.22 s)

 

Stalingrad gets US Cruiser auto-bounce angles, Montana gets the standard 60 degrees.

Edited by CaptainTeddybear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,306 posts
9,373 battles
12 minutes ago, CaptainTeddybear said:

I'm not sure that true.

Here is Stalingrad penetration:

- 5 km 698 mm (2.11 deg, 1.95 s)
- 10 km 578 mm (5.31 deg, 4.23 s)
- 15 km 480 mm (9.95 deg, 6.89 s)
- 20 km 402 mm (16.47 deg, 10.04 s)

 

This is Montana penetration:

- 5 km 733 mm (3.19 deg, 2.41 s)
- 10 km 617 mm (7.77 deg, 5.18 s)
- 15 km 520 mm (14.30 deg, 8.43 s)
- 20 km 443 mm (22.78 deg, 12.22 s)

 

Stalingrad gets US Cruiser auto-bounce angles, Montana gets the standard 60 degrees.

"Auto bounce angles" is not a thing. It's called shell normalisation and means that shells with a high norm have a higher chance of penning at weird angles. 

 

So many people mad over not being able to get Stalingrad. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,863 posts
8,842 battles
25 minutes ago, Fog_Heavy_Cruiser_Takao said:

"Auto bounce angles" is not a thing. It's called shell normalisation and means that shells with a high norm have a higher chance of penning at weird angles. 

 

So many people mad over not being able to get Stalingrad. 

Whatever you want to call it these are the actual stats.     Ricochet 67.5 + 6.0 deg

 

I don't think that is the main problem. It's the huge health pool, Battleship armor with Conqueror style citadel, and Cruiser Heal, Cruiser Damage Control and Defensive Fire.

 

WG should just admit it's a Battleship.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by CaptainTeddybear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
393
Members
2,388 posts
7,693 battles
23 minutes ago, CaptainTeddybear said:

I'm not sure that true.

Here is Stalingrad penetration:

- 5 km 698 mm (2.11 deg, 1.95 s)
- 10 km 578 mm (5.31 deg, 4.23 s)
- 15 km 480 mm (9.95 deg, 6.89 s)
- 20 km 402 mm (16.47 deg, 10.04 s)

 

This is Montana penetration:

- 5 km 733 mm (3.19 deg, 2.41 s)
- 10 km 617 mm (7.77 deg, 5.18 s)
- 15 km 520 mm (14.30 deg, 8.43 s)
- 20 km 443 mm (22.78 deg, 12.22 s)

 

Stalingrad gets US Cruiser auto-bounce angles, Montana gets the standard 60 degrees.

Those US auto bounce angles are nice but they dont solve all issues. Still strugle with low calliber, low DPM and no HE. 

 

Once again, not saying that the guns are bad, just that they have some limitations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,327 posts
3,591 battles
2 hours ago, sulghunter331 said:

Anyone going to complain that these cruisers should be battleships? No?

*sits in corner thinking about Alaska and B-65*

B-65 I really like the design of a mini Yamato and yes I am still waiting on Alaska myself. Hopefully Wargaming sees the want and acts on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,301 posts
21,065 battles
2 hours ago, Raigir said:

Do the same with a ship like Izumo and it'll fair just as poorly compared up against a Yamato.

Well....Izumooo is in a class all by itself really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,337
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
5,832 posts
9,582 battles

Holly Effin ****. Just got out of a game with one of these things against my Z-52. Stalingrad seems to have a 40 second radar with a 60 second cooldown. Absolutely impossible to do anything stealth based with that thing around. It will light you, butcher you, and withstand any return fire your team throws at it.
 

2 hours ago, Xlap said:

Not saying that Stalingrad guns are bad. But the gun calliber and lack of HE limits their potential. 

Effortlessly wrecked my Z-52 from 11k away while stern-on because I dared try to do anything other than run away from the radar ship. The guns are absolute monsters. Long range, brawling, we could not kill that thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
426
[STP]
[STP]
Beta Testers
2,036 posts
11,210 battles

Stalingrad is a Tx, stalingrad is reward ship from clan wars [3 times], stalingrad of course need be is way better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,064
[OPG]
Members
3,971 posts
5,673 battles
5 minutes ago, HazardDrake said:

Holly Effin ****. Just got out of a game with one of these things against my Z-52. Stalingrad seems to have a 40 second radar with a 60 second cooldown. Absolutely impossible to do anything stealth based with that thing around. It will light you, butcher you, and withstand any return fire your team throws at it.

It has the exact same radar as the Moskva. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
393
Members
2,388 posts
7,693 battles
4 minutes ago, HazardDrake said:

Effortlessly wrecked my Z-52 from 11k away while stern-on because I dared try to do anything other than run away from the radar ship. The guns are absolute monsters. Long range, brawling, we could not kill that thing.

1- avoid going straight stern/bow on vs AP, you are actually increassing the chances of big hits. 

 

2- Any radar ship would f**k you the same way if caught you out of cover. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,863 posts
8,842 battles
19 minutes ago, HazardDrake said:

Holly Effin ****. Just got out of a game with one of these things against my Z-52. Stalingrad seems to have a 40 second radar with a 60 second cooldown. Absolutely impossible to do anything stealth based with that thing around. It will light you, butcher you, and withstand any return fire your team throws at it.
 

Effortlessly wrecked my Z-52 from 11k away while stern-on because I dared try to do anything other than run away from the radar ship. The guns are absolute monsters. Long range, brawling, we could not kill that thing.

 

The difference is other Radar ships, even Moskva, can be focused down. Stalingrad can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×