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

Chapayev Or Tallinn And Why

17 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
584 posts
3,826 battles

Hi guys,

 

Reached that XP moment where I must chose so as title, which one and why? Ones a light cruiser+line and the others a heavy cruiser+line obviously but I don't mind either playstyle tbh so that wouldn't really make much difference to me it's more about which is stronger at doing what it does best. 

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LAFIE]
Beta Tester
5,756 posts
6,312 battles

They're both good ships, but Chappy is definetly the more flexible of the two, so she gets the nod from me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UA-NF]
Players
511 posts
8,203 battles

at current MM Chapayev. You face lot of BB that overmatch both ships and Chapayev is more nimble of two, therefore more "tanky". But I would keep grinding in Shchors till I have both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,360 posts
12,044 battles

"CA" line is massively overspecialized in AP shells and their extreme penetration. In return, their HE damage output leaves a lot to be desired, coupled with bit worse dispersion and very short duration radar, they are almost cripplingly ineffective against destroyers and anyone smart enough to not show you broadside.

 

"CL" line... Chapayev is great CL and comparing Chapa to Tallinn is rather onesided comparison and not in favor of Tallinn. Donskoi I've always found to be a downgrade over Chapa, as "russian bias" 180mm guns combine worst of both CA and CL worlds - slow CA reload and not really hard hitting shells of a CL. 180mm HE also don't have improved penetration over 152mm since IFHE rework. Donskoi/Nevsky AP is nothing to be sneezed at, but HE damage output on both is far from "HE spammers" like Worcester, Smolensk or Des Moines

 

With hightier cruisers of both lines you're kinda incentivised to position yourself in a way to flex your superior AP pen, as HE output might be lacking, which may or may not be easier said than done in your average randoms

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BBMM]
Players
6,775 posts
9,569 battles

Chapayev is my most favourite... but I hate Donskoi.... which I now have to regrind for the Nevsky. 

Man I was sooooooo happy when I finally got Moskva. And noiw... I have to DO IT AGAIN. :etc_swear:

So, if you want the good, then you will at some point be shagged. 

Grab the lube, bend over... :Smile_hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SM0KE]
Players
6,706 posts
15,193 battles

Full disclosure: I suck in all cruisers, even more so than other classes, so this isn't the view of a competent player. However, I am a DD main, so do have a primary target's perspective...

 

I'd go with Chapy:

  • The key thing that both T8 Russian cruisers do is 12 km radar, so the primary consideration - for me - revolves around this; Chapy's simply runs for much longer (coal mod is a nice addition too) - Tallinn's radar is of too short a duration to make spotted ships' lives miserable, even with a coal mod.
  • Chapy is - I believe - a bit sneakier; whilst it's useful on its own, it also means she gets a larger stealth radar window, which allows her to maximise her key strength.

Both have decent guns (others have outlined the pros and cons), and largely hopeless torps; I don't feel this stuff provides much to choose between in terms of game influence. Speaking as - most usually - a DD driver, I don't worry that much about Tallinn (especially if solo) because I'm confident I can usually evade the fire that heads my way during its radar run-time, whereas I view Chapy as a much more serious threat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
660 posts
27,766 battles
Vor 26 Minuten, Latouche_Treville sagte:

You're scaring me about Dimitri Donskoï, I sold Chapayev, I felt uncomfortable whit her i thought she was as nimble as a dead oyster

All Russian Cruisers T7 or Higher are not that nimble.

chapayev has fast firing 152mm Guns

Donskoi Change to slower firing but harder hiting 180mm (same 180mm Guns as the Molotov) and you get 8 Km Torps

Alexander Newski will go from 12 Guns to 8 but now these Guns have very high Firerate

 

As for the Heavy Cruiser Line

You start with Tallin with 12 180mm Guns 

Riga gives you 220mm Guns but no Torps

Petropavlovsk has the same Guns but they Hit harder and reload quicker

 

The only nimble high Tier russian cruiser i can think of is the Smolensk and you can not get her anymore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,708 posts
19,926 battles
15 hours ago, Sir_Sinksalot said:

Hi guys,

 

Reached that XP moment where I must chose so as title, which one and why? Ones a light cruiser+line and the others a heavy cruiser+line obviously but I don't mind either playstyle tbh so that wouldn't really make much difference to me it's more about which is stronger at doing what it does best. 

 

Thanks.

I would pick chappy just because of her dpm. But both t10s are really strong. And ofc russian t10 light cruisers is not really a light cruiser. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
584 posts
3,826 battles

Thanks guys. Glad I asked now since I was under the impression the new Russian CA line had been deemed bordering on the OP. Besides, I prefer light cruisers anyway since they're much more forgiving and consistent for a noob like me but if the heavy cruisers were deemed much stronger obviously I would have gone that path.

 

Anyway I don't even understand what the purpose of a heavy cruiser is anyway. I just fail hard whenever I try them. Armor is better than light cruisers but it ain't no BB, gun range is generally lower than light cruisers and BB's, they over pen DD's and they don't hurt a BB enough, often failing to pen it anyway so all you have is a slow reloading and less agile cruiser that only really bothers other cruisers. It doesn't rip a DD apart in seconds like a light cruiser, it doesn't perma-torch other ships like a light cruiser can with a hail of fast reloading shells and ya... I don't understand the point of heavy cruisers. To me they just seem weak and frustrating to play. It's either play a light cruiser or one of the faster BB options, no need for a heavy cruiser dorking about not doing a whole lot of anything lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
9 hours ago, doerhoff_damian said:

The only nimble high Tier russian cruiser i can think of is the Smolensk and you can not get her anymore

Ochakov is still available, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,360 posts
12,044 battles
13 minutes ago, Sir_Sinksalot said:

Thanks guys. Glad I asked now since I was under the impression the new Russian CA line had been deemed bordering on the OP. Besides, I prefer light cruisers anyway since they're much more forgiving and consistent for a noob like me but if the heavy cruisers were deemed much stronger obviously I would have gone that path.

 

Anyway I don't even understand what the purpose of a heavy cruiser is anyway. I just fail hard whenever I try them. Armor is better than light cruisers but it ain't no BB, gun range is generally lower than light cruisers and BB's, they over pen DD's and they don't hurt a BB enough, often failing to pen it anyway so all you have is a slow reloading and less agile cruiser that only really bothers other cruisers. It doesn't rip a DD apart in seconds like a light cruiser, it doesn't perma-torch other ships like a light cruiser can with a hail of fast reloading shells and ya... I don't understand the point of heavy cruisers. To me they just seem weak and frustrating to play. It's either play a light cruiser or one of the faster BB options, no need for a heavy cruiser dorking about not doing a whole lot of anything lol. 

RU heavies have traits that seem OP, but once you assemble them all into the ship, you get ship that can be called "overspecialized" at best and frustrating to play at worst. Tbh, the same story was with first branch of cruisers and destroyers ("ermagad OP railguns") but attached to rather flawed hulls.

 

That said, RU CA gets penetration to threaten even BB grade armor, as I've experienced that the fun way, when I started scoring main belt penetrations on Pommern (300mm main belt) with Tallinn at +-9km. And with next ships onward, I can expect that to be even better.

 

With normal heavy cruisers (and hightier RU CLs) you kinda need to abuse AP whenever possible for citadel hits/regular pens. Only Des Moines have HE damage output to match light cruisers thanks to CL grade reload, though Hindenburg can be very consistent due to increased penetration and you compensate for low-ish damage with sheer weight of broadside. And still decent reload.

 

2 minutes ago, Sir_Sinksalot said:

Btw, now that I've picked up that ship, what goes in the 5th slot?

 

f8ebKVg.jpg

Concealment. You pick Concealment on 99% of the ships, with that 1% being Khabarovsk (assuming you play one in 2020) or French/Italian CA built for agility and overall open water shenanigans.

 

With Chapa and next ships on the line, main issue is not lack of rudder shift, but terrible turn radius and you can't fix that.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
78 posts
2,024 battles
5 hours ago, Sir_Sinksalot said:

Armor is better than light cruisers but it ain't no BB

Armor is similar from light cruisers to heavy cruisers and it doesn't matter against 30mm overmatch...

Share this post


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

×