No navy built the imaginary perfect warship against which a list of deficiencies can always be assembled. An ideal type can still supply a consistent benchmark for asking where a real ship differs and why. The useful questions concern what each compromise achieves and which requirement caused it. A cruiser suited to the United States would differ from one suited to Britain, France, or Italy because those navies had different geostrategic needs. The Soviet case also differed in its relationship to the naval treaty system and in its geography. A comparison built around another country's preferred cruiser therefore risks treating Soviet requirements as design failures.
Notable Point · 1:17:26-1:18:52
Judge warships by their geostrategic compromises
A notional perfect warship helps only when it exposes real design compromises. National geography and treaty circumstances prevent one ideal cruiser from fitting every navy.