Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
wot_chikor

Stalingrad

216 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[TRRC]
[TRRC]
Players
245 posts
6,508 battles

Hello everyone.

Im one of the random guys, finished gathering the steel for stalingrad and bought it.First impressions was that the guns are rly op.....but thats all.just had a game when i built up 3 million potencial dmg, enemy team rly wanted me to kill:) but to use the ship, what I discovered, need to carefull position.need cover.....in open water rly difficult to survive...so I think altogether the ship is not that strong....cant move freely like a zao...8 games done with the ship and I rly enjoy it:) 1 day grinding with snow flake and missions worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RO-RN]
Players
657 posts
8,244 battles

is the obj 907 of wows! and what can the community do? half of them are already biased towards destroyers wanting to nerf everything else! 

and even if there where CC saying to WG that this ship is OP and you need to nerf it why would WG listen to them? 

and one last thing this ship is a revenge from WG towards soviet ships, after they cried about russian bias left and right WG showed them what russian bias looks like!

also its best counters are Henry with IPHE, hindenburg and conqueror, pretty much ships with strong he pen and damage.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RO-RN]
Players
657 posts
8,244 battles

now that we have stalingrad! WG should add H-44 for stell. super accurate guns 4x2 508mm guns, crazy secondarys, 120k HP, massive pen and alpha damage, good DPM, turtleback.

and a bonus for it: damage done to allied ships +30% 

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RO-RN]
Players
657 posts
8,244 battles
15 hours ago, ___V_E_N_O_M___ said:

So join a noob clan and help them get through CBs with your Stalingrad or Sell the Stalingrad at least then its not you doing the OPing.

 

Stalingrad is not really that OP, it plays like the Kronshtadt and has the same weak armour as it the only difference is it has higher sigma big deal.

 

Play your stalingrad Ill kill it just as easy!!

are you SERIOUS? the poor kronstadt is covered in 25mm of armor it dies in lest than 1 minute when it is focused. and the stalingrad guns are way way more accurate 2.65 sigma vs 2.0 is not a big difference? and if you would have played the kronstadt you would have seen how her guns behave: they hit the sky and the sea 9 out of 10 times, when they hit they overpen or they shatter because these guns do not get improved angles. But yeah whats the difference both look almost the same, have the "guns", big hp pool so it doesnt matter it is just a t9 stalingrad right?

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
8,110 battles
2 hours ago, Wilkinson87 said:

First impressions was that the guns are rly op.....but thats all.just had a game when i built up 3 million potencial dmg, enemy team rly wanted me to kill:) but to use the ship, what I discovered, need to carefull position.need cover.....in open water rly difficult to survive...

Which is exactly what every owner of Stalingrad has been trying to explain to you all since she was introduced :cap_old: Great guns, not much else. Dead whenever you decide to leave your island waifu

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
989 posts
8,664 battles
5 hours ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Dead whenever you decide to leave your island waifu

Which is the same as every other radar cruiser. Ever. 

Except Stalin also has insane armour (it is better than a Moskva's by virtue of being spaced armour on the sides and having the 50mm slope under the front turret, it's citadel is also very slightly lower) and it has those stupidly retarded good guns. Des Moines normalization on 1000 m/s 305's is just...why? The very reason that Alaska has been held back so much is because she has that normalization on the same calibre gun...but her velocity is over 200 m/s worse...so why is she being delayed for that, yet Stalin with higher velocity is fine? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UTW]
Weekend Tester, In AlfaTesters
8,888 posts
7,324 battles

Alaska is a tier 9.

Alaska got US balistic. Which is as good as the russian railgun in its own way. Russian railgun can't take advantage of islands and aren't superheavy shells with plunging arcs at long range. 

And Stalingrad doesn't get the same normalization as DM AFAIK. Improved yes, but not to the point of the DM/Alaska.

 

And no, Stalingrad armor isn't better than the Moskva. It may have some better nominal values here and there, but the sheer size of the ship combined with the worst concealment ingame is a huge drawback. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JUNK]
[JUNK]
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,984 battles
9 hours ago, _DeathWing_ said:

lxu2c5zcif621.jpg

One game with 170k and one with 140k dmg .. Is that the undeniable proof something is OP? Haha funny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Beta Tester
1,507 posts
9,952 battles
22 hours ago, ForlornSailor said:

Which we should soon see? I cant wait for the first 50% randoms players to get their hands on Stalin. Im serious. It will actually tell us a lot. We just have to hold our horses a little bit longer.

Well, i just bought it today.

I have never had so much potential dmg received in any of my T10 battleships.

It an amazing ship.

 

shot-18_12.26_18_32.33-0756.thumb.jpg.6685a9eca4a2012c48f8706809fbabe2.jpg

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
989 posts
8,664 battles
1 hour ago, ShinGetsu said:

And no, Stalingrad armor isn't better than the Moskva. It may have some better nominal values here and there, but the sheer size of the ship combined with the worst concealment ingame is a huge drawback. 

So a thicker citadel belt, spaced armour and the only ship in game with a 50mm slope preventing bow pen citadels (90% of the time granted) isn't better armour? Okay. 

As for size, I personally find very little difference shooting at a Stalin and a Moskva in terms of how easy to hit they are. That's just me personally, but I believe the size difference to be pretty negligible, this probably has something to do with the fact both of them are pretty much stationary or moving back and forth at 10-15 knots the majority of the time. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,383 posts
9,314 battles
1 minute ago, kfa said:

Well, i just bought it today.

I have never had so much potential dmg received in any of my T10 battleships.

It an amazing ship.

Wow, over 5,8 mil pot. dmg indeed is impressive. Although I have to tell you - you dont qualify for the group I described. With your 61% WR account you are simply too good. :Smile-_tongue:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
1,304 posts
18,120 battles

They shouldnt remove it now from arsANAL because then only few players have it , and that is not what i want..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
8,110 battles
3 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

Which is the same as every other radar cruiser. Ever. 

Except that Stalingrads citadel alone probably is larger (longer?) than some of those cruisers, not even talking about the whole ship which is nearly the size of a GK (funny how this exact line is also used to describe upcoming VMF t10 BBs size)

 

3 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

Except Stalin also has insane armour

Thickness wise identical to Moskva except for 25mm thicker main belt (155 vs 180 mm)

 

Layout wise... 50mm bow section is far smaller covering only the lower bow not 2/3 of it, 25mm bow and stern are massive, ship itself is way way larger, natural armour angling is far worse as Stalingrads armour is way closer to being vertical than Moskvas armour...

 

On paper it's basically the same, in practice it's effectively far worse

 

3 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

spaced armour on the sides

Where exactly? Afaik there's no spaced armour on Stalingrad. Even her torp-bulges are fully under water, below the main belt

 

3 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

having the 50mm slope under the front turret

Remember how easy it was to oneshoot Moskvas through the bow before they got their 50mm? Without this internal armour layer Stalingrad would be even easier, even with that small 50mm belt on her bow.

 

3 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

it's citadel is also very slightly lower

You mean relative to ships height or the distance above water? Because you have to keep in mind Stalingrad is way larger than Moskva

 

3 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

Des Moines normalization

Yeah, no.

 

1st of all normalization is the angle shell goes closer towards perpendicular after hitting something, and as that's caliber related Stalin gets BBs 6° while DM has it at 7°

 

That aside, while she has improved AP angles (+5°), DM / Mino have 50% better improvement (+7.5°)

 

4 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

Alaska (..) has that normalization on the same calibre gun

Yeah, Alaska in its tests got the 7.5° improvement. Not the 5° like Stalingrad

 

1 hour ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

I believe the size difference to be pretty negligible

rA7KkCI.png

 

And keep in mind that Moskva already was massive for a CA

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
989 posts
8,664 battles
3 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Except that Stalingrads citadel alone probably is larger (longer?) than some of those cruisers, not even talking about the whole ship which is nearly the size of a GK (funny how this exact line is also used to describe upcoming VMF t10 BBs size)

 

Thickness wise identical to Moskva except for 25mm thicker main belt (155 vs 180 mm)

 

Layout wise... 50mm bow section is far smaller covering only the lower bow not 2/3 of it, 25mm bow and stern are massive, ship itself is way way larger, natural armour angling is far worse as Stalingrads armour is way closer to being vertical than Moskvas armour...

 

On paper it's basically the same, in practice it's effectively far worse

 

Where exactly? Afaik there's no spaced armour on Stalingrad. Even her torp-bulges are fully under water, below the main belt

 

Remember how easy it was to oneshoot Moskvas through the bow before they got their 50mm? Without this internal armour layer Stalingrad would be even easier, even with that small 50mm belt on her bow.

 

You mean relative to ships height or the distance above water? Because you have to keep in mind Stalingrad is way larger than Moskva

 

Yeah, no.

 

1st of all normalization is the angle shell goes closer towards perpendicular after hitting something, and as that's caliber related Stalin gets BBs 6° while DM has it at 7°

 

That aside, while she has improved AP angles (+5°), DM / Mino have 50% better improvement (+7.5°)

 

Yeah, Alaska in its tests got the 7.5° improvement. Not the 5° like Stalingrad

 

rA7KkCI.png

 

And keep in mind that Moskva already was massive for a CA

That's maybe a 8/9 metre difference in length. Thickness might mean she takes slightly more plunging fire, but that's all. So negligible. 

 

@Aotearas has screenshots of her armour scheme that point to spaced armour. And I'm not talking about the 50mm bow. I'm talking about the 50mm umbrella plate inside the ship directly under the front turret. That 25mm difference on her main belt is actually significant. It even says on her wiki page that the belt armour was designed to withstand eight inch shells completely at ranges over 13,000 metres. 180mm thickness is just enough that at such ranges lower velocity 203mm shells will non-pen due to lack of kinetic energy. 

 

As for the being immune to bow pens, why should she be? Every other cruiser has to suffer from it from at least Yamato, if she is to be treated as a cruiser in game, she should have cruiser weaknesses to compensate. 

Hmm I thought her normalization was the 7.5, that's my bad I guess. I still think her normalization and other improved AP pen characteristics she got was too much though. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
930 posts
8,664 battles
34 minutes ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

Hmm I thought her normalization was the 7.5, that's my bad I guess. I still think her normalization and other improved AP pen characteristics she got was too much though. 

Remember that AP is effectively all she has. Her HE is terrible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
8,110 battles
2 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

That's maybe a 8/9 metre difference in length.

You kidding, right? Stalingrad is about 10% longer than Moskva. With Stalingrads length listed as 273m Moskva would be about 250, which also fits the blueprints provided in Wiki.

 

That approx 25m difference multiplied by 2.6 ship scaling is 65m length difference in game. That's about 2 Gearings side-by-side added as extra length.

 

Just 8 times more than your guesstimate, "nothing special"

 

2 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

Thickness might mean she takes slightly more plunging fire, but that's all.

That means there's far more deck to hit with HE. Also as I said due to her being fatter her armour has worse natural angles than Moskvas armour

 

 

Also you missed height. Maybe not exactly too obvious from those screenshots, but way higher aswell.

 

And you forgot to tell me where you found that spaced armour on her? Still pretty sure there is none

 

2 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

@Aotearas has screenshots of her armour scheme that point to spaced armour. And I'm not talking about the 50mm bow. I'm talking about the 50mm umbrella plate inside the ship directly under the front turret.

Internal decks and bulkheads are not spaced armour :fish_palm:  They are just internal layers

 

2 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

That 25mm difference on her main belt is actually significant.

Not against a BB

 

2 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

It even says on her wiki page that the belt armour was designed to withstand eight inch shells completely at ranges over 13,000 metres.

Yay, super long range cruiser AP will be less effective, not like they will HE spam you at those ranges anyway

 

Also btw DM goes down to 180mm vertical plate pen at 17.2km. Hindy at 14.5km. Zao at 20.1km.

Why would any of those still fire AP at you from those distances in the 1st place?

 

2 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

As for the being immune to bow pens

It's not, in fact you eat quite a lot of those.

 

The sort-of turtleback armour on the front (the one you referred to as spaced armour) only protects the citadel. And even then it doesn't make it impossible, jsut kind-of unlikely in most cases.

 

2 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

Every other cruiser has to suffer from it from at least Yamato

Not Moskva, that 50mm goes up so high it's a bounce or an overpen on the top of the bow

 

2 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

if she is to be treated as a cruiser in game

She's a battlecruiser, not a cruiser. Since they're not separated out they sometimes are put in BB lines, sometimes in CA lines.

General difference for placement seems to be armour, and I'm pretty sure Stalingrad doesn't have 32mm plating. Unless, of course, you want her to be a t7?

 

2 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

she should have cruiser weaknesses to compensate. 

And she does. Go back to any older Stalingrad thread and re-read what's written there, I'm not going to repeat it all again

 

2 hours ago, Reaper_JackGBR said:

Hmm I thought her normalization was the 7.5, that's my bad I guess. I still think her normalization and other improved AP pen characteristics she got was too much though. 

And yet that's the only amo she can reasonably use, her HE is practically useless. Angle and you're safe, unless you are a Mino. But then that goes for Mino vs a Henri aswell.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
989 posts
8,664 battles
2 hours ago, wilkatis_LV said:

You kidding, right? Stalingrad is about 10% longer than Moskva. With Stalingrads length listed as 273m Moskva would be about 250, which also fits the blueprints provided in Wiki.

 

That approx 25m difference multiplied by 2.6 ship scaling is 65m length difference in game. That's about 2 Gearings side-by-side added as extra length.

 

Just 8 times more than your guesstimate, "nothing special"

 

That means there's far more deck to hit with HE. Also as I said due to her being fatter her armour has worse natural angles than Moskvas armour

 

 

Also you missed height. Maybe not exactly too obvious from those screenshots, but way higher aswell.

 

And you forgot to tell me where you found that spaced armour on her? Still pretty sure there is none

 

Internal decks and bulkheads are not spaced armour :fish_palm:  They are just internal layers

 

Not against a BB

 

Yay, super long range cruiser AP will be less effective, not like they will HE spam you at those ranges anyway

 

Also btw DM goes down to 180mm vertical plate pen at 17.2km. Hindy at 14.5km. Zao at 20.1km.

Why would any of those still fire AP at you from those distances in the 1st place?

 

It's not, in fact you eat quite a lot of those.

 

The sort-of turtleback armour on the front (the one you referred to as spaced armour) only protects the citadel. And even then it doesn't make it impossible, jsut kind-of unlikely in most cases.

 

Not Moskva, that 50mm goes up so high it's a bounce or an overpen on the top of the bow

 

She's a battlecruiser, not a cruiser. Since they're not separated out they sometimes are put in BB lines, sometimes in CA lines.

General difference for placement seems to be armour, and I'm pretty sure Stalingrad doesn't have 32mm plating. Unless, of course, you want her to be a t7?

 

And she does. Go back to any older Stalingrad thread and re-read what's written there, I'm not going to repeat it all again

 

And yet that's the only amo she can reasonably use, her HE is practically useless. Angle and you're safe, unless you are a Mino. But then that goes for Mino vs a Henri aswell.

 

You're misreading quite a lot of what I said. I did not say the frontal armour is spaced armour. I made a period/full stopand started a new sentence talking about the 50mm umbrella seperately. (I don't expect everyone's first language to be English though so no worries.) 

Moskva can easily be bow cit penned (again I was not suggesting Stalingrad cannot be penned there, just not cit penned) because she does not have the 50mm umbrella, I've had GK's do literally 30-40k dmg through my Moskva's bow at 16km with lucky shots, you can't do that to a Stalin. 

The spaced armour is on the sides, or at least appears to be, like I said I don't have the screenshots at hand. I'll go find them. 

Spaced Armour (Hard to see I know.) 

1.thumb.jpg.d16906aeb37a09c8cbec5fb5998d336d.jpg

 

The view of the citadel, which is lower than moskva's just a tad, and no, not relatively, it is lower overall. 

2.jpg.9019b2fe2f042a42e7d9fa3eb3c01a9e.jpg 

 

And the 50mm sloped umbrella I've been talking about. 

 

3.jpg.ebc2e1c1da72b1dd48401513e17e617e.jpg 

 

You should be firing AP at those ranges in anything that's not a Hindy, as a Moskva broadside can be citadeled at those ranges by those ships. Seeing as Stalingrad and Mosva are what we're comparing, that's why. And yes, she is a Battlecruiser, hence why in CW's she should take the BB slot and then we would not have any of this mess to begin with, and yes, I would give her the 32mm upper plate then as well if she wanted to stay at tier 10;  because 25mm vs 32mm means basically sod all in the meta anyway. Every other single Battlecruiser ever built that is currently in game is in the Battleship slot. Alaska will ruin this, but she is a tier lower, with 13k less HP and significantly worse armour. 

 

Finally, her HE is not useless, no ship's HE is ever 'useless' and her fire chance is actually pretty competent even if her alpha is not. Her HE hurts just as much as say a Hindy's over the grand scheme of things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JUNK]
[JUNK]
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,984 battles

Whats even the point of the armor discussion? The best way to "tank" or survive is not being hit to begin with. Two of the biggest factors for avoiding being hit is mobility and size. Moskva is better in both despite having overall the same armor layout and weak broadside. 

 

Add in the longer fire duration and concealment and you have one clear winner in survivability.

 

As for the nose citadel thing. Ive never experienced more than a 10k AP volley on my Moskva bow after the buff. Seems super situational or requires the Moskva to be perfectly bow in for the AP shell to reach that far. Either way it seems it can be avoided by keeping a slight angle (just like old moskva) and you get the back turret on target that way anyhow. Due to the sheer size of Stalingrads bow I feel normal AP (and HE for that matter) pens hit regularly for much more there in the end.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LAZY]
Beta Tester
128 posts
9,952 battles
On 12/25/2018 at 4:36 PM, ShinGetsu said:

Now, here's an example of a super-unicum stats with his tier 10 cruisers :
 

snip:  < some fancy stats in a nice purple color (*) >

 

To me it doesn't seems like Stalingrad is that much of an outlier. An we're talking a guy that use all  its ship  his two unicum division teammates to its full potential.

Corrected that bit for you. :Smile_teethhappy:

 

You played Wargaming right into their hands with that free (shipstats) advertisement (*)...

(actually, wot-chikor did with this thread, to be fair)

 

Wargaming want the perception of this ship to be overpowered as hell, so every average joe player will want to buy it.

Nothing special to see there. They are using that sales/marketing trick over-and-over in WoT for years already (Foch 155, Obj 409, Defender, Waffentrager etcetera).

Sell it - nerf it - sell new model - nerf it, rinse and repeat ad nauseum.

It works. Sales are up again !

:Smile_popcorn:

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,012 posts
14,599 battles
Am 25.12.2018 um 19:31, hierrark sagte:

...This thread is interesting, you are welcome to discuss and share opinion about Stalingrad...

Thank you your highness for allowing us commons to mingle around this topic as it pleases you.

 

You might wanna try to chose your words more carefully as a moderator because your above sentence might be perceived as arrogant and not neutrally moderating.

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles

I got Balanzgrad yesterday just because I could.

 

Handles like a Moskva yes but will need more testing on potato victims. :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[O-S-W]
Players
604 posts
18,078 battles
On 12/25/2018 at 4:02 PM, LemonadeWarrior said:

Played a few games on my Stalingrad. Must say that I still prefer the Moskva.

why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×