Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
sfcgx3

Please buff Moskva

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

149
[AN-DO]
Member
392 posts
9,199 battles

Haven't got much success in Moskva which feels not as comfortable as the other CBs I have, Alaska, Agir, Yoshino. Comparing to these ships, here are my thoughts on Moskva:

- Very very bad surface detection at 14+km vs ~12km for the others. Air detection is somewhat better which is very strange

- only CB with CA guns

- no improved AP angle

- bad HE damage

- No Torps

Remember she is Tier X so should be better than Alaska or Agir but I certainly don't feel that way.

Don't say it's not a CB. It's 65k HP, its a special ship and it's large.

Moskva needs a buff and shall not be forgotten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
276 posts
6,042 battles

I went head to head with a Moskva the other day in my Tallinn. He had to disengage and run because I was penning that many citadels. Sometimes a Mosky can be quite the challenge. Depends on how it's played I suppose.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,090
[151ST]
Member
4,125 posts
13,669 battles

Nope nope nope.

Moskva is balanced and not really an SC so comparison is poor, although yes she has been powercrept a tad.

The issue you are running into is where Moskva sits in the battlespace.

She's functionally a tanky sniper with situationally useful bow tanking ability and radar.

Considering a 'buffed' version with better AP is Stalingrad and she's objectively OP, you are basically called for Moskva to be Stalingrad.

And Stalingrad and her AP are bad for the game, much the same as Petro.

AP traditionally is a skill shell, those with a better understanding of armour and ships will be able to use it better. When you turn ships into 'AP just works' you are taking away the point of having 2 shell types.

It's the same issue with SAP and HE on most ships. Making a 'one shell works' is bad IMO.

It also means that things like angling stop being as effective as a damage mitigation tool which is also a bad thing (see overmatch, Musashi, Yamato, 457 saturation at tier 10 and HE spam).

Moskva, Stalin and Petro don't need improved pen angles, they should be functioning in the same boundaries that most other ships function in. Scope creep is worse than power creep and power creep is bad. WG are traditionally very poor at understanding and managing both. Their games have longevity because of continual content release, not because they are good at design and balance.

Edited by S4pp3R
  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,084
[CLAY]
Member
3,684 posts
15,723 battles
16 minutes ago, S4pp3R said:

Moskva, Stalin and Petro don't need improved pen angles, they should be functioning in the same boundaries that most other ships function in.

Agreed.

Guns that big and accurate do not need improved pen angles.

Improved AP pen angles should be reserved for smaller caliber guns who may otherwise have issues with HE pen, such as UK DDs.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,777
[TLS]
Member
5,518 posts
22,365 battles

The Cow doesn't fit on the server meta. That is the problem. It is supposed to be a tanky cruiser and plays quite static. While I was grinding the legendary a few months back, I discovered changing playstyle from a mobile cruiser to a bowon tanking one worked much better. A Cow can tank yamato shells at 10km and laugh. While reversing.

When it tanks, the other players need to get rid of the shooters. However, this is Asia where running away and leaving your tank to die is the norm even when the odds are in your favour.

Edited by dejiko_nyo
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,639
Member
6,150 posts
10,628 battles

"The only CB with CA guns"

Do you really think that Mockba has a CB hull? That ship has like 6 inch belt, which is thinner than any other CB in the game, and is severely under armed for that size.

Also depth charge racks because reasons 

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
356
[MALD]
Member
544 posts
14,661 battles

Moskva is not that bad, a kiting/bow tanking Moskva is incredibly hard to kill compared to other soft shell cruisers, if there's no AP bombers in the field. 

Her HE dpm is the best among 3 Soviet T10 BB wannabees, and couple with a reliable dispersion she is a bit more flexible in randoms. But she indeed gets power crept hard in terms of competitiveness, she doesn't have the hp of Stalin or BS hull profile of Petropavlovsk, and she does not have bias AP. Petro has better AP penetration than her for some reasons, literally a 100mm better overall pen, even if they are the same gun by name (maybe due to the shell used).

She is actually balanced compared to the other two sisters. But that makes her pale in comparison, and totally not worth it to get with coal. 

So, she doesn't need that much of a buff but WG might need to justify her relevance as a expensive coal ship. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,988
[FORCE]
Modder, Member
3,516 posts
15,419 battles

When a Soviet ship is not OP = WG pls buff [insert ship here]

When a Soviet ship is good at one thing = REEEEE Bussian Rias OP

This is why we can't always blame WG's inability to balance the things properly....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,084
[CLAY]
Member
3,684 posts
15,723 battles
48 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

"The only CB with CA guns"

Do you really think that Mockba has a CB hull? That ship has like 6 inch belt, which is thinner than any other CB in the game, and is severely under armed for that size.

Also depth charge racks because reasons 

Moskva is an early adopter. Classified by players as CB/super cruiser before super cruisers were actually introduced and proved that Moskva is actually different from them.

Its a cruiser with big guns for a cruiser, but not battleship caliber. And even before super cruisers were introduced, Henri IV had bigger guns than Moskva.

So, yes, It is a cruiser, not a CB. It was only even thought of as a CB back when it had the biggest guns for a cruiser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
183
[TF44]
[TF44]
Member
300 posts
21,398 battles

Moskva is and has always been a CA.

As a Tech Tree ship, Moskva is reasonably balanced, great guns but a weak armour scheme and poor manoeuvrability. Moskva retained these characteristics as a Premium/Special ship.

As a Premium or Special ship, Moskva fits in this classification very well. The play style that is required to get the best results is fairly unique to the ship. That is the reason for replacing it in the Tech Tree. Moskva was never a logical progression in the Russian cruiser tech tree.

Personally, I would not purchase the Moskva for Coal. However I have enjoyed and still enjoy playing battles with the Moskva.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
732
[GS]
Video Contributor, Beta Tester, Clantest Coordinator
2,918 posts
15,057 battles

Checking your Chinese meme-pholio this morning : wallstreetbets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,635
[REPOI]
[REPOI]
Member
6,817 posts
29,639 battles
14 hours ago, sfcgx3 said:

Don't say it's not a CB. It's 65k HP, its a special ship and it's large.

that dosnt make it a CB

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
974
[LBAS]
Member
5,568 posts
13,254 battles

Maybe poor just only concealment ,turning radius , HE pen and fire chance

overall are well deserved

YOU SHOULD ENOUGH FOR ASKING NERF/BUFF ALREADY

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
149
[AN-DO]
Member
392 posts
9,199 battles
18 hours ago, Taipan17 said:

Moskva is and has always been a CA.

As a Tech Tree ship, Moskva is reasonably balanced, great guns but a weak armour scheme and poor manoeuvrability. Moskva retained these characteristics as a Premium/Special ship.

As a Premium or Special ship, Moskva fits in this classification very well. The play style that is required to get the best results is fairly unique to the ship. That is the reason for replacing it in the Tech Tree. Moskva was never a logical progression in the Russian cruiser tech tree.

Personally, I would not purchase the Moskva for Coal. However I have enjoyed and still enjoy playing battles with the Moskva.

I agree with your view. It doesn't qualify for the Special status.

I think a buff to its surface concealment on par with Alaska is fair, especially given many of you think it's not a cb, rather a ca. Then 14km consealment absolutely makes no sense 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,635
[REPOI]
[REPOI]
Member
6,817 posts
29,639 battles
46 minutes ago, sfcgx3 said:

I agree with your view. It doesn't qualify for the Special status.

I think a buff to its surface concealment on par with Alaska is fair, especially given many of you think it's not a cb, rather a ca. Then 14km consealment absolutely makes no sense 

it's a ship designed to spam at long range and it's one of the tankiest ship at those ranges if you angle properly, the question is why you want a ship that works perfectly fine?

 

buffing a ship because it went into the armory as a special ship doesn't count

Edited by Drakon233
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,639
Member
6,150 posts
10,628 battles

Mockba is already a good ship when it was still in the tree. Tanky when bow on, relatively good RoF, longer gun range than some actual CBs.

Because it's already good, it needs no buff, doesn't matter if it's a tech tree or special or even premium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,741
[MRI]
Member
4,143 posts
18,750 battles

Don't think it needs a buff.

It works perfectly fine as a long range spammer or as a bow-tanker. I didn't have any issues when I was grinding out its Unique Upgrade.

Share this post


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

×