On the first point, we have to remember that Soviet ships were also heavily armed for their size - for the reason that the failure rate of their weapons was much larger than comparable Western systems.
This is an outright wrong reason. Especially since the intended dud rate for weapons is more or less the same around the world, and salvo calculations for large ASM weapons don't take into account failure rates at all.
Ships carry more weapons for their purpose, i.e. doctrinal reasons.
In particular, Soviet and Russian ships(or Indian, or older Chinese) carry more, heavier strike weapons for coordinated theater salvos, something most western navies until very recently didn't have to even consider.
This use by default involves firing over larger distances, at better protected targets, in less than sure shots.
Russian ships carry more self defense weapons, too - expecting to lack any air cover, that's a very reasonable proposition.
Part of it of course is just shipbuilding school - Italians do the same, for instance.
Finally, Soviet and Russian weapons tend to be produced in Russia. I.e. they can better afford it, and have stronger industrial incentive to do it even when they can't. Factories want orders.
Otherwise, you're going to come to a conclusion that the worst ships in the world are likely Israeli ones, and recently quality of European weapons started to drop(weapon loads increased).
Yes, ships often make do with lesser weapon loads for other priorities. Limited amount of money, running costs considerations, and expensive ammo all play the role.
At some point, though, your economic Exeter runs into 10-gunned japanese cruisers with unreasonable torpedo loads.
And those torpedoes miss again and again. What matters is who gets to feed the sharks, though.
Erm, actually because we put less emphasis on range & seakeeping capability. If you look at Italian or French warship as counterpart, they would be almost as heavily armed.
Russian ships operate from (and are expected to fight in) some of the least hospitable seas and weather conditions on Earth.
Plus routinely go into long range deployments without friendly harbors in reach. They often, beyond intended purpose of their class, which is accounted for. ("cheap imperial policy")
There are savings in RU designs, but normally (failures happen) that's not sea keeping.
beyondparallel.csis.org
