![]() ![]() (Somewhere, once I read Moskva is visible as Yamato, correct me if I am wrong)Īnyway, long story short, Petropavlovsk is (again IMAO!) better cruiser than Moskva. 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. ![]() Maybe more skilled player than me can do wonders in direct fight without cover, but I cannot. Their poor manouverability greatly assist your doom. Once these ships are out of their comfort zone, adios. Same or similar scenario with Moskva, in majority of games. It was Thunderer, as I turned bow to torps. But when Halland appeared on my flank, it was death by torps or by Thunderer citadell. 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.ĭid 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. (A,B,C games)Īnd then, when enemy flees, problems started. ![]() They both are tanky, Moskva with much larger HP, but both suffer from same illnes.įew 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. I was playing today with Ppavlovsk and Moskva, and I know why I like Ppavlovsk more than Moskva.ĭespite 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.Īlso, Ppavlovsk has much better concealment than Moscow. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |