Jump to content

We're moving to Discord!

Come join in the discussion here!

You can also still find out all the latest news on TWITTER and FACEBOOK

Thank you for your continued support, and we look forward to welcoming you shortly.

The Warcradle Team


When did the Suvorov become obsolete?

Recommended Posts

Thematically and logically, Russian non-mortar primaries should have one of the following perks to reflect the concept that the nation has literally focused completely on conventional kinetic weaponry: devastating, redoubtable, or close quarters gunnery.

All of those buzz words hail amongst the most powerful weapon MARS in the game. It is a risk to even suggest such things without shaking the AppleCart.

Honestly since I started to play 2.0 again just after its release, I was rather stunned to see Close Quarters Gunnery absent from thier list. Seemed designed for them conceptually. Unless the designers wanted to convey a degree of ineptitude of the Conscript crew with shooting despite the ample armaments!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find myself agreeing with several of the ideas in this thread, but ironically not the OP's premise - I don't think the Suvorov is obsolete. It isn't really a general-purpose cruiser (compared to some of other factions) since the other medium naval options do other jobs better. The Suvorov is the best medium the RC has for boarding (21 Conscripted AP per squadron) and, potentially, battering (three cruisers with IR 5 all ramming an enemy medium ought to pulp it).


On the subject of weapon-based MARs, I would like to see something like those mentioned in this thread. Personally, I'd be torn between Redoubtable on Primary weapons (or turrets) or getting Devastating Ordnance. The first option prevents a model from losing too many dice on its attacks, and the second offsets the dice you've lost with (possibly) greater results. Close Quarters Gunnery works for the KoD and the PLC because they have the speed to reach RB1 before they die to massed enemy fire, while the RC doesn't. The trouble comes with interactions for other units: the Tunguska large skyship has the same turret load (albeit in different arcs) as the Borodino battleship, while all the units with long-range piercing guns have them as Primary weapons. Considering things like this, I'd rather see Redoubtable on those guns than Devastating Ordnance just to keep the sheer number of potential dice rolled down (let alone what a squadron of Chany subs with Devastating munitions would do to something :o ).


To end this with a question, has anyone played much with fortifications? I ask because (like most) the RC Bunker Complex, Tower Defensive Line and Large Infantry Bunker all have (or can have) Primary guns with Redoubtable. Do those units seem overpowered with that MAR for their cost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not make the Suvorov tougher? It has the weakest DR and CR numbers of any heavy cruiser(except Italians?), and the faction is supposed to be tough. Even if you gave it the average 5/6 with +1 ablative, it is still not exceeding CR ratings from other heavies, but the DR number makes it something you cannot ignore. 


I love the ship, and would like to see it get something within the bailiwick of the RC theme. Without a sea change to gunnery and such, toughening it up would seem to me to make it better at what people claim it is supposed to do. Heck, the idea of a cruiser that can actually make it to effective gunnery range without needing a task force to protect it from fire excites the heck out of me.


I don't know if giving the gunnery of the faction a MAR would be a good thing -- too big a change, and balance goes poof. However, right now the gunnery units of the faction are expensive, fragile, and far(FAR) less flexible and able than similar units in any other navy. They can only do one thing effectively, fire at RB2 -- but they are too slow and too fragile to make it there and retain effectiveness without some sort of major or heroic effort above and beyond what other factions need to exercise. Given how ridiculously expensive the units are right now, would toughening them up by a point or so under that ablative armor seem reasonable?


I want to see the Fleet of Big Guns sail again under the RC flag. Right now, it seems to be everyone but.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say that I almost never use Suvorovs. I my experience they are too slow and unreliable to be the boarding ship and are too expensive for that amount of firepower. Broadsides are nice but if I want to use them I'm not heading to the enemy so I can't use boarding and they are outguned for their size by almost all other nations..

I hate to say it but if I want my Russians to win I have to dump all "Russian" units and use only Khatanga, Tiksis and other ships with RB 4 (excluding submarines). And that's sad and the reason why I focused more on my Danish and FSA ships

I think that Borodino should drop back to 180p to be worth the points or get advanced engines 1". Suvorovs should become faster eighter be having advanced engines 1-2" or Movement 8"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I haven't played a Tiksi or Khatanga in two years now. The Khatanga, while an excellent ship, is 210 points of stuff that isn't a Medium and doesn't help Mediums, so it doesn't fit really my playstyle. I prefer the Kostroma for the air support, the Borodino for the fun of rolling dice with a shovel or the Dudinka for its ability to make any list look friendlier.


As for the Tiksi, I don't even understand what people find in this ship. Yes, it packs a ridiculous firepower but it's stupidly expensive and very rigid tactically, two traits that really don't go well together and bring down whole lists by themselves. Playing a squadron of Tiksi is like playing a Dreadnought, the whole game is about them - except the Tiksi is frail. It dies to RB4 firepower, it dies to RB1 rushes, it dies to your opponent not clumping everything under your templates, it dies to LoS blocking terrain and it dies to non-surface models. And God help you if you're bringing them to a scenario instead of the standard "Murder everything" game. Seriously, for the price of 3 Tiksi you can get 3 Chany and 4 Rostov which do the same job of sniping priority targets while not being prize bait, having less tactical blind spots and giving the RC player a say in how the first turn unfolds.


On the contrary, I appreciate the Suvorov because I can take a squadron in every list, against every list, in every scenario and on every table. It's about as neutral as it get. Thinking back, I have used my Suvorov in half a dozen battlefield roles and, while they aren't flashy, they never really disappointed. They are the one and only generalist ship the RC gets, everything else is either heavily specialized or too valuable for suicide missions.


If people want more diversity (without playing scenario), I would rather suggest retrofitting a couple of the White Navy's oldies for frontline duty.  There's only so much a cruiser can do when all the other should-be-frontline ships (frigate, heavy frigate, battleship, assault carrier) can't lace their shoes without a babysitter. Or with one, for that matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with much of your points on the Tiksi Seph. I certainly think its a solid vessel, but it isn't the dominator that I see many people paint it to be. For me its just too expensive and it was made a bit too fragile to enemy boarders with the drop in crew.


What I think most people land on in their praise of it... is that its just one of the better ships in the category (again showing some of the problems illustrated by this topic). The other options just fail to compare to its capabilities. Couple that with the entire "no band 3" and its easy to see why the ship gets the love it does. Personally I don't even run them. Too many points for a lackluster performance. I spend my points on Azovs or Chany these days, commit the points to the larger category to hopefully have a chance at surviving to make an impact beyond turn two.


Russian Coalition has issues: ablative armor doesn't match up with other defensive MARS, and Primary Turrets needs a looking at and re-imagining. These problems layer onto the entire factions vessels, save for the few that have glaring differences (mortar boats / fixed piercers).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree about the Tiksis. They are the work horse of Russian fleets. Solid in RB 3 and deadly in RB 2. But thats mainly because of the gaming style in my community. We often plays battles od 1000-1200 points. We use usualy 4-5 pieces of terain on a table 4x4 ft. or 4-6 ft. and the terain size is aprox. 5x6" All my usual opponents try to kill me as fast as possible. I face most often KoD, LoIS, RoF, CF, KoB, Fr.Austr. fleets.  No long hiding behind terrain and occasional IDF shots (exept for the KoD fleets). We use the standrat missions and occasionally the missions from Ironclad pack. We almost never use Advance Deployment or Flanking as, those units that are in advance deployment are usually killed in turn 1 some time even before they are activated. Our games almost all the time ends in turn 3 sometimes even in turn 2. Turn 4 is really rare. I face most often KoD, LoIS, RoF, CF, KoB, Fr.Austr. fleets. 


In  such conditions Suvorovs and Borodino are really ridiculous. Facing 2 squadrons of MK II. Skageraks, or 2-3 Minervas with at least 3 spotters in KoD fleet usually means that Borodino ends Turn 1 with 2 crits on it. I can´t hide (because of the spotters), and 18AD in RB 3 (from the Skageraks) is enough to score a crit even on Borodino. Suvorov is usually dead by then, mostly 2 Suvorovs are dead by Turn 1 as it is almost impossible to hide completedly from 2 enemy squadrons.


Also Boarding Rush with Suvorovs is not the best idea when you are facing KoD mines, LoiS tiny torpedo boats or RoF or Australian Tiny Subs. Also boarding with Suvorovs could be achieved by turn 3 and by that the battles, I play, are usually over.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Similar to your situation Bratr, my club plays almost exclusively 1000 Pts standard naval core heads up Dystopian Wars. Right out of the book rolled terrain and all! And we have a great group of dudes with literally every army being played!

My experiances are relative in that borodinos are just flat pointless and have never made it to combat functioning. However every time I play the Tiksi, they just get prioritized and gunned down to worthlessness but superior range three firing. Then they drift hopelessly as a 1.5 man squad doing much of nothing until some random pair of Prussian frigates cruises over and takes them both! As I mentioned earlier in my posts, the only medium that gets mileage outside of cruisers and subs is when I concede to take the Suverov and basically expect it to do the exact thing as the tiksis in the above mentioned scenario... They just fair better with 7 dudes on deck... And having written that out it sounds even sadder than just thinking about it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I usually try to hide them (Tiksis) and wait with them untill the last activation in turn 1 and then activate them as the first thing in turn 2. If I am lucky than it works well and the brutal firepower they have will crush enemy so he is no longer able to retaliate. 16 AD and 27 AD in RB 2 can crush things pretty well, Even dreadnoughts.


I will happily use Tambows instead or even Suvorovs like this but they lack the speed to make it into efective range in turn 2. Also the point difference is not so significant. Well for 3 Tiksis I got 4 Suvorovs in 2 squadrons of 2. That is pretty lame. But weakening the Tiksis would not work as that would weaken whole nation in comparison to other nations..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After looking at the new orbats for Danes, Italians, and Ottomans, I feel even worse.


The Danish and Italian cruisers bring more to the table, come with CQG on better ranged and BIGGER guns(!), with better movement and secondary systems/roles/functions. Additionally, Italians get elite crew.


The Ottomans, for a song, get a terribly effective cruiser at a bargain basement price, and it's pretty much a single-role vessel like the Suvorov. Except it is redoubtable. With superior crew. And a special rule depending on faction. And a skimmer. And always as hard to damage as a Suvorov with plating.


All of these, even the Italian light cruiser, are as tough or tougher than the Russian offering.


The Podaga is a sweet boat, CQG, shields 2, skimmer movement, 5 aggressive crew, gun and broadsides, and 5-10 points cheaper. I'm beginning to think I may want to invest in some allies if I want my mediums to stop being outclassed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going to call BS on the Danish and Italian cruisers being as tough as the Suvorov.... 4/6 is significantly less than 5/7, and the jammers means most of the time you want it, they have higher AA and CC. For a 5pt difference the Suvorov is much, much tougher than the Sigurd.... and 4/6 on 4HP isnt that sturdy, even with a shield 2- its easy to double crit out, something that takes.... 21 hits on the suvorov.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jammers are horribly conditional or you are list tailoring which i have nothing to say about it also does nothing against boarders.

honestly hitting 7 twice before having to hit less AND getting a free reroll crit effect is not hard at all. its just more chances of snake eyes which could and would be bad for the russian player


with shield two its basicly a 5/7 anyway you just get double critted easier which you at least get a chance to knock down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except it doesnt matter if theres a free crit roll after its taken half damage- because if takes a crit after taking three points its dead anyways. Vulnerable doesnt hurt the suvorov at all.

And with 7 AP it doesnt need the boarding defense, and having a higher AA and CC versus things that can actually kill you is fairly important, especially for mediums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having 7 Conscirped AP needs a anti-boarding protection. You are not so easily prized but you usually score less hits than the Attacker and thus suffer a sabotage effect.

Also any ship with DR/CR 4/6 and 2 shield dice is better than Suvorovs 5/7 Ablative as 2 shield dice are statisticaly 1,6 success, thus 4/6 turns to 5,6 / 7,6.


But the main poblem with Suvorovs is that they are outgunned. Italians, Danes, Americans, Indians easily outgun with their cruisers Suvorovs. If I want some decent firepower I have to choose Tiksi or Khatanga.. They are just so much better. I if I am to compete with other nations not just compare Russian ships between them I have to chose Tiksi even if it is more expensive..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm slowly being converted to the view that the Suvorov needs a slight buff. Compared to all other cruisers from Core nations, it's the slowest and worst defended. Move 7" and Sturginium Boost for an average move of 7"  :)  won't get you into the fight quickly enough. 2 AD at RB3 for the turret is much better than nothing, but not really what I'd call *firepower*. AA 2 & CC 2 means the Target Jammer's 2 dice won't help much to reduce most such attacks.


I need to finish painting my PLC forces so I can run with some Close Allies and compare performance, rather than just mimicking a Shield (2) Generator. Comparing the Marowit gunship (95 PV) with the Tambov gunship (90 PV) and Tiksi support cruiser (95 PV) should prove interesting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody ever jumps around begging and complaining about missing out on ablative armor and target jammers...

Just sayin!

Wanna trade up some shields and ruggedness? I'll throw in some slower movement with the sturg boost for your advanced engines too!

Seriously tho... The concept of the army is glorious. I stand behind the Russian Coaliton as my hands down favorite army, thematically and visually. But at this stage in this great games evolution, I would absolutely love to see the Russian concepts of war get some evolution too. Numbers need boosting, MARs need rethinking and redesigning, generators need to be considered. Many have said it above and before, there is an internal balance that needs looking, but also in the grand pool too. Especially now since we have had such incredible changes to the Minors. The last point change the Russians went through looked bad when it happened, now it's just even sillier given the currant they sit in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe drop the price and/or toughen it up? It's a wet sponge of a cruiser in comparison to its contemporaries and juniors. Why not give it the full Russian treatment and make it the toughest heavy cruiser afloat? Make it 5/6 with ablative armor?


Even then, would it be worth the price it sits at now? It'd be tough, but slow and weak next to contemporaries. However, with a price reduction, you get quantity. And, as had been said, quantity has a quality all its own...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe drop the price and/or toughen it up? It's a wet sponge of a cruiser in comparison to its contemporaries and juniors. Why not give it the full Russian treatment and make it the toughest heavy cruiser afloat? Make it 5/6 with ablative armor?


Even then, would it be worth the price it sits at now? It'd be tough, but slow and weak next to contemporaries. However, with a price reduction, you get quantity. And, as had been said, quantity has a quality all its own...

I though the Russian Treatment was to increase the price of everything without buffing or changing anything.


.too soon?


The low end would be nice but i think they should ether make it faster or just give it better guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The suvarov is not a heavy cruiser though, it is just a cruiser.

Baseline cruiser hull is dr4 cr6

Ablative 1 as a defence is worse than shield 2 but better than rugged 1 and retardant 1.

So comparing the toughness of the cruisers I can remember off the top of my head:

Cleomedes cruiser (dr4 cr6 inventive shield 2 and wavelurker)

Griffin (dr4 cr7 shield 2)

Tribal cruiser (dr5 cr6 shield 2)

Georgetown (dr5 cr6 shield 2)

Gladius (dr4 cr6 inventive shield 2)

Podaga (dr4 cr6 shield 2)

*Suvarov (dr4 cr6 ablative 1)*

Honshu (dr4 cr7)

Dao (dr5 cr6 rugged 1)

Uhlan (dr4 cr6 rugged 1)

Dieppe (dr4 cr6 retardant 1)

Sigurd (dr4 cr6 blind hope 3)

So in terms of defence against shooting, it is fairly middle of the pack (I was not sure where to rank the fettah with its weather gen, but I suspect it is lower).

Against boarders... well, firstly if my opponent is trying to board my cruisers rather than anything more valuable then I am generally quite happy. In such a situation, 7ap of any sort takes a lot of killing for relatively little reward and much risk. On the offensive, the suvarov 21ap punch, even as conscripts, is a very powerful hit since you only need to roll 2 or 3 6s to practically clear out any target. Just ask the Chinese!

So it is a middling defence cruiser with lots of ap. What about guns?

Well, looking at comparable cruiser turrets (no order this time):

Tribal 9/7/5/3 (redoubtable)

Cleomedes 9/7/5/3 sturginium (or 5/5/5/5)

Uhlan 8/6/4/2 (cqg)

Griffin 8/7/4/- (sustained 2)

Podaga 9/7/5 (incendiary)

Dieppe 9/8/7 (high angle)

Sigurd 11/8/5/3 (cqg)

Georgetown 10/8/6/4 (sustained 1)

Suvarov 11/8/2 (concussive)

Here, the suvarov looks a bit below average in main firepower.

So last comparison: points.

Cleomedes 80 points

Uhlan 65 points

Tribal 75 points

Dao 70 points

Honshu 70 points

Gladius 75 points

Podaga 65 points

Griffin 70 points

Shielded Georgetown 75 points

Sigurd 65 points

Dieppe 75 points

Uhlan 65 points

Suvarov 70 points.

So it is about average in points cost too.


Well, overall it seems like a very average cruiser (certainly not at either extreme of good or bad) that might be a little weaker in gunnery but trades a little speed for a high ap count.

I don't want to suggest this discussion is over nothing, but those who are looking in envy at other cruisers should remember to feel sorry for some of their peers too. I see little justification for saying the suvarov is particularly hard done by. However, the internal balance of the Russian orbat seems to need a look to ensure that the suvarov and tiksi and gunship are all viable choices against each other as well whilst preserving through external balance of the faction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless Markov has issued me falsified copies of the current ORBAT... methinks the Suv is a Capital.

Great overview you took the time to sum up Thamoz.

I think that there can certainly be an agreement that on paper a lot of what the Suverov is numerically falls nicely into the presented game averages. No doubt!

I personally fall into the category of thinking that the real problems with the Suv are more reflective of the entire Russian ORBATS theories and concepts in general in how they interact with "what works and what doesn't" in the game currently.

My experiences lean more to the "doesn't" category sadly. Internal balance and point costs. But mostly with just core concepts falling short compared to those of other nations.

BTW Thamoz... Blind hope 3... Lol fantastic. Gunna sling that to my Dane buddy this week!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with a strictly numerical assessment is that it does not take into account many MARs or synergies between those different quantities. The whole package is what adds up to the issue I and probably some others have.


I love the Borodino, Suvorov, and  Novgorod. However, unless I want to spend my time giving points to my opponent, they're not good choices for the battle theatre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.