World of Warships – The Stalingrad Problem

19,933 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (695 votes, average: 4.81 out of 5)
Loading...

Showing off newer version of Stalingrad and discussing predicament we will find ourselves in. Hope you have a wonderful day and I’ll catch you next time!

X Stalingrad Replay

https://discord.gg/33xzEjR – Discord Server

Related Ship Rage!

75 Comments:

  1. Just give this ship a battleship icon already… wg please, just dont releases this ship and add more game mods for random battle….

    • +Plato’s Ninja it doesnt have to be historically accurate to a fault. It needs to be balanced. This isnt a sim. If it was, you’d take self-damage to the bow and stern ends if you shot over them, torpedoes would only go 30knts, and any engine or rudder damage would not be magically fixed but require a visit to the repair docks. But that doesnt happen because that’d be broken and not fun. Don’t forget that this is a game.

    • Leo jiang the great

      as if Yamato was historically accurate. The real-life version had a 42km range

    • Regardless of historical accuracy, which shouldn’t be a huge factor in this game anyway, you can’t say this is a battleship. It has some major traits of a battleship, but when compared to the serious battleships like Yamato, Montana, etc., this is not one of them.

    • Sir Raint, Knight of Silverwing

      This is also a game that hitting a target at long range without accurate report from the scout plane is impossible because:
      -Earth’s curvature is not as flat as the game’s counterpart which is totally flat regardless the range between two points.
      -A slight fog/cloud limits the visibility
      -The game’s measurement of length/distance is actually inaccurate (few pixels between almost colliding ships count as 0.1km/100m although the length of the ships mentioned are about 90-270m).

    • I don’t get all the furor over its classifications. Cruiser, battleship…don’t care. It’s NOT as strong as a battleship, and it lacks the torps most cruisers have. Is it really going to just completely outperform a Hindemburg, for example. I doubt it. Doesn’t have the ROF, or the fire starting ability. Probably not as sturdy, either.

  2. Geoff the Ironwolf

    Hey Notser if the stalingrad is the tier 10, for the USA could we see the CA2-D 12 gun 38,000 ton Alaska variant? Be a mini Montana for cruisers?

    • Didn’t the US tree just get a bunch of stupidly annoying HE spamming camping heaps?

    • alaska coming soon, tier 9 premium, work in progress, alaska has around 60k hp, 27mm bow-stern, 36mm deck armor profile, 20 sec reload, hindenburg level detection, AA similar to buffalo+DEFAA, same radar of buffalo…

  3. It is not a cruiser , I repeat not a cruiser ! Wargaming get that in your head

    • Unabatedfire do your research, it’s a real historical design. A new cruiser class too weak in armor or armament to be even classified as a battlecruiser. It’s a special Soviet project of super cruiser designs. Look it up, gun velocity and reload is all accurate to it’s real life testings.

    • Can you stop copying and pasting this? I’m tired of reading it…

  4. SonOfAB_tch2ndClass

    WG if you want tier X to be competitive YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO MAKE ANYTHING INTENTIONALLY OVERPOWERED

    • Plato’s Ninja how about laser accuracy, nothing historical about that

    • You are only right in that it was a real historical “design” that never completed building. Incomplete ships are all perfect, only when they are used do problems show up. So saying that it has to be this strong because the paperwork said it would be is debatable at best. Wargaming muck up historical accuracy all the time to balance ships so why not on this one.

    • SonOfAB_tch2ndClass

      – The broadside punishing dispersion model is not HISTORICALLY ACCURATE.
      – This Bowtanking overmatch world of tanks nonsense that is ever present in this game is not HISTORICALLY ACCURATE.
      – Ships taking forever to turn around is not HISTORICALLY ACCURATE.
      – Radar/Sonar Going through islands is not HISTORICALLY ACCURATE.
      – Having anything 33mm or thicker of armor plating to automatically bounce every shell that falls on top of you from any range is not HISTORICALLY ACCURATE.
      – The automatic CV shut down button (Defensive Fire) is not HISTORICALLY ACCURATE.
      All of these are the only reason this russian wet dream can even be viable against the Montana/Yamato. I can forgive some suspension of disbelief for the sake of game balance and fun, but these 5 points are the reason why World of Warships has become a slog, and why everyone wants to play Tier X all the time.

    • @Plato’sNinja You argument this ship to be historically accurate, in the game which isn’t all the other ships or the gameplay mechanic are also historically accurate. Dumb.

    • SonOfAB_tch2ndClass

      I guess WG has that same mind set when they implemented the Khabarovsk, a ship with armor so thick and so small it would have no where to put the fuel

  5. imo they should just drop the radar and give it dfaa, hydro and cruiser planes. nerf the alpha, and make it play like a cruiser version of yamato – relying on overmatch rather than raw damage. it will still be a cruiser fulfilling a bb role. unless the model doesn’t allow for a plane.

  6. It’s Russian. What did you expect?

    • it to be classified correctly?

      4 BBs per team, and one team gets an extra BB in cruiser slot is totally absurd – far more absurd than non radar cruisers vs radar cruisers as the noobs may allude to.

  7. can asashio hit this can of ship ? :0)

  8. It’s not a battleship, it’s a special new class of super cruiser. Too weak in armor or armament to be classified as even a battlecruiser. Look it up, these are historically accurate ships, the Soviet battleship designs were enormous, as large as Hitlers H-series. Completely different then these new cruisers.

    • What was WG saying they are willing sacrifice “historic accuracy” for gameplay………this a perfect chance to hold WG to their word.

    • If you think anything other than the ships’ models are accurate in this game then I respectfully suggest you need to do more reading about naval combat and technologies of the very wide period covered.

    • Plato’s Ninja Russian ships are mostly to powerful. Khaba is plain stupid. Its impossable for a dd to have great armor great guns and move at 50 knots that about 60 mph.
      When the bb come oit I might have to quite the game because they will all be OP.
      Stalingrade was never made and it could have preformed they way it does in game..
      This is a Bb stop pretending its anything else.

    • Risheen Mukherjee don’t generalise this as a video game and it can’t have historical accuracy! This is a Wg game (very arcadish)…

      Look at wt…thats some historical accuracy in a VIDEO GAME

    • +Plato’s Ninja since when WG cares about Historical accuracy?

  9. All of you guys haven’t done your research, it’s a real historical design, the guns were tested in real life and velocity and reload are accurate. It’s better than the Scharnhorst cause it was designed in the 50s…not the 30s. Another thing is it’s in the tier 10 bracket. Every battleship over powers it, significantly, and every cruiser can bounce its shells if angled. What are you complaining about? These are real designs, appreciate them cause no other game brings us the opportunity to play these ships. It’s a new class of super cruiser, do your research. It needs battleship armor OR battleship armament to be classified a battlecruiser. It has neither. It’s a cruiser.

    • well, i m curious which one is the more giant, Amagi or Moskva….

    • Fact is the Soviet navy was, especially in surface ships, a paper tiger. They simply didn’t have the heavy industry and the very high technology demands required to make surface ships of these sorts of sizes and complexities. They encountered the same issues with submarines in the nuclear age where their practical technologies lagged well behind their theoretical designs and specs with the effect they were nowhere near as good as they might have been, or weren’t able to be built at all.
      They largely depended on foreign nations for ships (UK and Italy to name a few) and had a problem of crap crews and appalling maintenance etc.
      Soviet army and airforce were rightly viewed as potent by the end of the war, the navy was largely a non-event as it wasn’t necessary nor was it a priority.
      Large surface ship design and delivery are hugely complicated exercises; the main nations had decades of experience. Soviets were neophytes in comparison. Thinking a gun tested on land a few times = powerful surface ship is simplistic in the extreme.

    • Plato’s Ninja because wargaming its a game… A game, very stupid and unreal

    • Solution… Lets all play This ruskie lie…. And thats it. Iowa the most power full ship in wwii, but for wargaming the russskiiiesss

    • i really cant hear the phrase “historically accurate” anymore. nothing, i repeat NOTHING is either historically or physically accurate in this game!

      -> ships are moving WAY too fast… even most cars dont run a distance of 40, 50 or 60 kilometers in 20 minutes, which is the usual distance you travel in one match!

      -> shell velocity is just the same… pause the video at 13:20 –> it says shell travel time of 7 seconds for 15km! thats over 2000 meters per second!

      and theres tons of other examples. where the hell would this ever be “historically accurate”?!

  10. Yukishiro Windbloom

    Move Stalingrad and Kronstadt to BB line can solve all problem like KMS Scharnhorst.

    • The reason why Kronstadt and Stalingrad are so annoyingly powerful in the game is because they have the benefit to be the only ships of their type in the game.
      Let Wargaming introduce the USS Alaska at Tier 9 and her bigger cousin design CA2-D with 12 x 305mm guns at Tier 10
      The Japanese B-64 Ashikari at Tier 9 and her bigger cousin B-65 armed with 9 x 360mm guns at Tier 10
      The German design O with 6 x 380 mm guns at Tier 9 and design KW45 with 8 x 380 mm guns with a top speed of 36 knots at Tier 10
      And let’s see that with the above cruisers if Krondstad and Stalingrad will still be top dog in the game.

    • Do you even have Kronstadt ???? it’s such a garbage, i just hate myself to spend 750.000xp for that BS crap of ship that I will never play again – any T10 cruiser is far better than him and you have BB with 430mm guns that have 19.6 reload with legendary module and absurd 2nd and AA ( all of what Kron have none ), Kron have radar 20 sec and you can shoot one time and that time BB ugly dispersion will f. you every single time on close range …
      So just don’t talk about things that you see on YT – one good fight from 10 and even in this one he score what 130k – who know how many fight he score 20k and can do shit vs angled cruiser like you can not do anything in Kron..
      In one battle i saw Stalingrad from WG-ST guy in first shoot in my Republique i hit him for 66000 with 4 citadels after that he was behind island for 5 min while I was fighting 4 other ships from his team and after he saw that I was focused he get out in ok angle and I hit him agaon with my back turret and score double cit and delete him, also did killed GK that thought that he have better 2nd and 1 hipper others run away ..
      So don’t give me a BS that 305mm BB dispersion Battlecrusier is OP, it’s like in Republique one time shell will all go in 1 spot and other 5 time every shell will have her post code bcs of dispersion

  11. wg just dont know how to balance ship… and thats also reason why not to buy any old premiums, because they are powercrept by “new ships” same with old lines… i just dont get it… it cant be that hard

  12. Complaining about the performance of a pocket battleship lol. Alaska, kronshtadt and stalingrad are all cruisers with the firepower to deal with battleships. Armor is meant to deal with battleships, but the calibre of those guns is nearly the calibre of a tier 5,6,7 305mm, not even 356. Stalingrad is t10 as well

    • MotorsportsMania21

      SteelxWolf Not really. By this time 12 inch guns had performance similar to inter-war 14 inch guns. Problem is that by this time most battleships were armored against 15 or 16 inch guns. These ships were designed as cruiser killers first and foremost. This is evident by Alaska only having sufficient armor to resist 8 inch shells used by heavy cruisers.

  13. No matter what WG do they’re going to annoy a lot of people, they keep painting themselves into stupid corners, the Soviet bias is just one of those corners, they never even completed one of this class of ship and the Stalingrad was only partially completed before being used to test test anti-ship missiles. So when you read that these ships were historically accurate you can call bullsh£$, no one knows how accurate they would have been because non were finished and non fired a single shot.

    • Sir Raint, Knight of Silverwing

      The same goes to Montana, Lion, Conqueror, Friedrich der Grosse, Grosser Kurfurst, Alsace, and many more as neither of those were built, either. Players that cry out loud on Russian Bias are those who forget the Russian gun characteristics are close to how it should be (no rainbow arc, and can punch holes into even the thickest armor).

      Mind you that historically US destroyers were able to shred the hull of the Japanese battleships with their guns only. On the other hand, Bismarck was unsinkable by gunfire as she was sunk by torpedo hits from HMS Dorsetshire (or according to German intel she was scuttled from within by her own crew).

      If the game was as realistic as that, it would be totally bland & boring. And of course there wouldn’t be as many ships as they have now. Also British cruisers should have HE shells (Belfast should have torpedo too because she was HMS Edinburgh’s sister ship.

    • Not really true. There are designs, similar comparables, etc. The Montana was never built…are its specs bogus?

    • Sir Raint, Knight of Silverwing

      Apart from its displacement, the characteristic of its armaments, and its physical design on blueprints; yes because the specs written on the blueprint were never tested. That applies on all other paper ships.

    • I don’t see anything that would indicate a Russian Bias, except maybe how WG keeps pumping out mid to low Tier Russian Cruisers as Premiums.

      I mean, it’s not like all of the USN fast Battleships have an artificially lowered citadel, while several Russian Cruisers practically got armor plates removed in this game…

    • Nailed it.

  14. I like how they Make Salem a Island Dependant ship, and then make Stalingrad a Cruiser that can fight like a Battleship..

    World of Warships.. it says “Made in Russia” all over it..

    • Well, if you like that games5yle you play Moskva, or choose Zao, not Salem, thats it. This U.S. design was also present in WOT called “hull down”

    • Jozsef Toth
      But the US Cruiser Design in real life was totally different, The USN Cruisers, Heavy and Light, were badass in open water. They were NOT island dependant.

  15. It’s Russian. WG always makes their Russian ships and tanks the best in the game in every class. The trick is to yell RUSSIA when you fire to ensure all your shots hit and do max damage.

    • no need to advertise that you are inexperienced player. Do YOU THINK moskva is OP? or Khaba is OP?

    • Five years of dealing with WG has led me to believe that they will either change mechanics or buff some hidden stat to make the Russian line better. It makes sense because most of their player base is Russian. They may not buff it today or tomorrow, but it will happen.

    • lol Khaba IS OP… that is not even a question…

    • Khaba is OP but “for the wrong reasons” 🙂 It’s basically cruiser classified as destroyer. It’s OP yes, but it’s not going to cap a single point…. It can be OP as much as it wants but there is very good chance it’s gonna loose you game. I wonder if Khaba is used in serious competition much.

  16. Still waiting for the german and british battlecruiser lines..

  17. Drossel Von Flugel

    let us wait patiently for the next version so WG can give it a Reload Booster consumable or something like that, maybe an Armor Booster, Anti Burning consumable or an Double Shell in one Barrel consumable.

  18. 😒And the already ridiculously strong, got it all, elite few…once AGAIN!, get even stronger!
    …cos f..k new players and the casuals lol

    Clear message from WG as always Notser – Clan up, DIv up and grind , grind, grind!! your life away in game…or you ARE just there to make up the numbers!
    (its sadly becoming a game of “Have” or “Have Nots”…instead of skill & wit)

    O7 – your southern Pirate Fleet, Lord Commander Notser Sir

    PS – The eagles have been struck from the southern sky’s my Lord Commander…new orders for the fleet?

    • Ducks fly together!

    • Na, you have just forgotten that you don’t need to have the latest ‘apparently OP’ ship to stay competitive even though the normal T10 cruisers are all very strong as they are.

      P.S. You really are talking out of your ass if you think this game has to do with anything but wit and skill.

    • To be honest you are just salty that its for “the elite few”. This will make it rare to find in battles so the effect on the community is low.
      Also, in random battles, where most ppl play, 1 ship can’t beat the team. Stalingrad’s impact is not much higher than a moskva being in the game. The overblowing notser is making it is laughable, as always.

      I think its fine for WG to give rewards for clan performance.

    • The thing is, I’m the ‘elite few’ and even then I think all the CC’s are a bunch of spanners for blowing a strong ship completely out of proportion while forgetting there are ordinary tech tree ships which are even stronger than the Stalingrad. I honestly look forward to meeting it is battle (as I already have) since it provides me with a unique target to test my skills against and effectively counter.

      I myself am just getting frustrated by people thinking they need the latest and greatest piece of equipment to keep up with the curve while forgetting they could most likely improve themselves as a player instead to level out the supposed power difference mentality they have in their head.
      Besides, when people seriously talk about Russian Bias (most of the comments in this video) they are talking out of their ass’s and it just go to show how moronic the playerbase is nowadays.

  19. The problem with the Stalingrad is that it’s an OP ship that’s only going to be given to the best players. That is a veritably insane idea.

    • Well yes but the same thing was said about Black and look what happened noone really likes it

    • Yep same thought …. when they released Flint everyone was like “OMG it’s Atlanta with smoke, end of the world is comming!!!!”. I saw about 5 Flints in game in last year?

  20. another make-believe russian ship that’s OP. nope, no russian bias here, none at all. the Mexican coast guard had more ships then the russian navy WW2.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *