Petropavlovsk vs Stalingrad vs Moskva

[fat gaben]

Any1 with sufficient experience can list a brief comparison here between those 3 ships in a sort of pros/cons

[Sir InstallAlot]

Guns vs armor vs all round

[noralovro504]

Following this post with interest, although there are many comparisons online between st-ppvl, msk-ppvl, st-msk, msk-st.
Looks like question is not about sufficient experience, but sufficient steel.😂
Looks like not so much Stalingrad owners here.

I can not comment, as I also do not own Stalingrad, but between Moskva and Ppavlovsk, I choose Ppvlovsk, no particular reason, I play them with similar style, only use HE more on Moskva, but Ppvlovsk just feels better to me.

[Jackson]

I got Stalin. I like it. I don't really care for Moskva. Stalin is mostly a straight upgrade from it and I got it right after Moskva, so don't have much xp in it. Don't have Petro yet.

Both Stalin and Moskva get citadeled very easily from side but have good bow armor
Stalin is slower and a bit more of a slug.
Stalin has much more powerful guns but they fire slower.
Moskva has hydro, Stalin doesn't.

[noralovro504]

Publicado originalmente por Jack:

I got Stalin. I like it. I don't really care for Moskva. Stalin is mostly a straight upgrade from it and I got it right after Moskva, so don't have much xp in it. Don't have Petro yet.

Both Stalin and Moskva get citadeled very easily from side but have good bow armor
Stalin is slower and a bit more of a slug.
Stalin has much more powerful guns but they fire slower.
Moskva has hydro, Stalin doesn't.

There you go!
We are getting there...😄🤞👍
So one "pro" for Stalingrad and one "pro" for Ppvlovsk, and one "pro" for Moskva if I understood correctly Sir installAlot post.
We are getting nowhere.🤔
Help!😬

[fat gaben]

Publicado originalmente por Jack:

I got Stalin. I like it. I don't really care for Moskva. Stalin is mostly a straight upgrade from it and I got it right after Moskva, so don't have much xp in it. Don't have Petro yet.

Both Stalin and Moskva get citadeled very easily from side but have good bow armor
Stalin is slower and a bit more of a slug.
Stalin has much more powerful guns but they fire slower.
Moskva has hydro, Stalin doesn't.

am still confused about the ice breaking frontal armor, does all russian cruisers have or only heavy cruisers tier IX-X ?

edit: i did check the armor layout and i found both CA and CL have 25mm frontal armor

[Jackson]

Publicado originalmente por fat gaben:

Publicado originalmente por Jack:

I got Stalin. I like it. I don't really care for Moskva. Stalin is mostly a straight upgrade from it and I got it right after Moskva, so don't have much xp in it. Don't have Petro yet.

Both Stalin and Moskva get citadeled very easily from side but have good bow armor
Stalin is slower and a bit more of a slug.
Stalin has much more powerful guns but they fire slower.
Moskva has hydro, Stalin doesn't.

am still confused about the ice breaking frontal armor, does all russian cruisers have or only heavy cruisers tier IX-X ?

edit: i did check the armor layout and i found both CA and CL have 25mm frontal armor

Only the high tier ones.

[York]

starlin is my vote

[noralovro504]

I was playing today with Ppavlovsk and Moskva, and I know why I like Ppavlovsk more than Moskva.
Despite they both have high velocity shells and flat trajectory, Ppavlovsk shells are little bit faster, and ( maybe I am imagining) seems to me it is easier to hit (evasive) DD at 10 km range with Ppavlovsk than Moskva.
Also, Ppavlovsk has much better concealment than Moscow.
They both are tanky, Moskva with much larger HP, but both suffer from same illnes.
Positioning.
Few games with both, started well, position myself near Cap, cover my broadside near an Island, bow in and punish enemy and protect DD, in all games we managed to push enemy away from Cap. (A,B,C games)
And then, when enemy flees, problems started.
Re-positioning.
Once I needed to leave my first position, as no enemy left to shoot at, or far away, and get out in the Open, I was doomed.
Did a quite good damage in open, I sunked Kurfurst with Ppavlovsk, (7km range and he foolishly show broadside to catch me with more Guns, ccccc, little did he know) practically by myself and Edinburgh assistance. Venezia was also not a match. But when Halland appeared on my flank, it was death by torps or by Thunderer citadell. It was Thunderer, as I turned bow to torps. Btw, Halland died in 26 sec.
Same or similar scenario with Moskva, in majority of games.
Once these ships are out of their comfort zone, adios. Their poor manouverability greatly assist your doom. Maybe more skilled player than me can do wonders in direct fight without cover, but I cannot.
With Ppavlovsk, if you silent your Guns and kite away, maybe you can live to fight again, due to concealment, but Moskva sucks as you are visible Like Mount Everest. (Somewhere, once I read Moskva is visible as Yamato, correct me if I am wrong)
Anyway, long story short, Petropavlovsk is (again IMAO!) better cruiser than Moskva.
When I get enough steel (AD 2025) I Will tell you about Stalingrad.😃