Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Montana'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Surveys
  • General WoWS Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Team Play
    • Support
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Player Modifications
  • Support
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests
  • Support


  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Found 88 results

  1. Hello everyone, recently I produced a YouTube video featuring replays of the USS Montana at tier 10. If you are bored and can use a distraction today, feel free to check it out. But rather than a typical ship review video, I've kind of noticed that the footage in the video showcases various issues and things that can be improved with game play at tier 10. Among the things I noticed (and suggestions for improvement): #1 Most maps features a Littoral environment with close by shorelines, islands, shallow water, and straits. I think although ships did fight in environments that fall into this category in history, it did not happen nearly as frequently as it has in game. Arguably it's probably not a good idea to sail capital ships in such confined waters in real life due to various asymmetrical threats that they cannot sufficiently defend against. Mines, attacks from much smaller units like torpedo boats that thrive in the environment, shore batteries, air attacks, arguably even sabotage largely renders heavy ships vulnerable in a littoral environment. For example, in the Battle of Surigao strait, the IJN Fuso and Yamashiro fought a futile suicidal action in such confined and unsuitable environment. Meanwhile, the attack on Pearl Harbor, the British raid on Taranto, and the Italian raid of Alexandria were extreme examples of what happened to capital ships when they can't maneuver while attacked. Obviously the game cannot be completely realistic or faithful to history, but maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing to look into this and come up with maps that features different types of environment. #2 The roles caps play in game aren't always good nor are they always conducive of good game play action. I think winning a fight in terms of damages, kills, and spots while losing because the enemy has more points is not an ideal situation. When there are more than two caps (i.e. WOT style set up) in game, the presence of the caps alone often promotes passive game play. It takes away the focus of the fight from engaging and annihilating the enemy. Rather camo, capping, spotting, and area denial become important. I think it is rare to have a situation in the history of modern naval warfare where it was key to control or contain a small patch of the ocean like a cap on WOWS. Sure if there's an amphibious or combined arms operation at play, it could happen. But then that's not a factor in WOWS. When a team's stealthier ships are not up to par or incidentally get taken out early, the team will watch victory slipping away due to having a major disadvantage to contest the caps. At this point, the team with the points lead often farm damage and/or hide and milk the caps, while the losing team becomes either passive or reckless: either way it often ends badly. What if we try to set up games that has no caps at all? Not even 2? This will bring the focus of the fight back onto engaging the enemy. The points count could be determined by the number and types of surviving ships, like the way historians look at the tonnage sunk and human casualty after the Battle of Jutland? What if as an alternative to having caps, the game offer an option for damaged ships to withdraw by offering them a chance to limp away to a designated part of the map's edge? I think this is also a game play mechanic faithful to history as the withdrawing of damaged ships often have strategic implications. For example, the USS Enterprise was seriously damaged in the Pacific multiple times but its survival proven crucial. Meanwhile the survival and withdraw of the German High Sea's fleet's capital ships after the Battle of Jutland was key to the strategic situation then. I think it would be good to make people fight eagerly and then withdraw. It's a better situation than the passiveness or recklessness found in game now. #3 Some maps by design forces a team to split up into multiple sub fleets to contest different areas of the map. This seems like a forced gamble, and it often was in history. Sometimes a smaller or weaker subfleet's demise in the hands of a stronger opponent often snowballs quickly and makes the team's success elsewhere irrelevant. Some maps also kind of isolate the subfleets by the design of their geography so that once the team has been split, it's hard to once again combined forces for cooperative play: distance is too far for effective engagement or timely relocation and line of sight is blocked... This often means doing your part isn't enough for a win just cause the team kind of went the wrong way or ran into the wrong enemies. #4 Ships, battleships in particular tend to not move much but rather try to function as bow tanking artillery barges. I would say that usually the Yamatos are probably the worse offenders of this. In a sense I don't blame them cause they have the guns that can go through bow plating, their citadels are exposed on the side, they aren't particularly fast, nor do their turrets turn quickly enough for shooting while turning. But ultimately this situation is kind of odd and not fun. It penalizes ships that don't have most of its firepower concentrated in the front and devolves games into a strange naval version of trench warfare where ships try to hide while bow on behind islands and mountains and take pot shots at each other like soldiers in neighboring trenches tossing grenades over the top. Although nobody likes to eat citadels, I still think this situation is not good for the game. #5 Destroyers' playerbase seems to have the highest skill floor and ceiling in game at tier 10. As a BB player, it seems that sometimes the cap situation is already a done deal due to the DDs even before I get to engage anyone. A good DD player can take out a not so good DD player extremely quickly. How good your DD is often puts a hard limit on how the rest of your team will fare. If the friendly DDs die early or are less skilled, the BBs often suffer tremendously due to not being able to anticipate enemy intention or have sufficient situational awareness. #6 I in particular dislike having torpedo boat style Japanese DDs (Shimakaze line) on either teams. As enemies they often come in divisions and can torp spam and/or snipe in ways that's almost impossible to counter in a BB. Ever been targeted by 45 torps at once? I have. It was not pretty. As allies, the Japanese DDs often do not counter enemy DDs. They might spot and cap. But when they run into the enemy DDs they will often run away while dumping their torps which aren't always good for attacking DDs. I've noticed that many of them almost never fire their guns. An enemy's on 500hp at 6km? They fire torps but their guns stay silent. They are also often so obsessed and tunnel-visioned that they will try to saturate an area where friendly BBs are engaged in a brawl with the enemy with torps. I've lost count how many times I've been torpedoed by friendly DDs while brawling. (my video shows this happening 3 times...) #7 Ironically, at tier 10 cruisers seem to play very differently versus at mid tiers, especially from a BB player's perspective. Maybe due to their vulnerabilities to big guns, they'll often play 2nd line at most. This often means they aren't close enough to the action to counter DDs or close enough to the BBs to provide AA. So much so that DDs and BBs often fight their own fight without help. The cruiser at tier 10 seem to focus on farming damage and opportunistic moves, on a good day they usually chime in and engage enemies that are already being engaged, distracted, or has overextended. But them as a defensive screen and support against enemies BBs can't see or maneuver against, often don't exist... Just some of my observations thus far. I'm obviously a fan of the game and I want it to improve and fulfill its potential. Feel free to discuss share your thoughts on the points I brought up and how things could be improved.
  2. Small Montana Buff

    Montana is a fairly strong ship, and I love playing it, however, I think that she needs a small buff to her maneuverability in forms of rudder shift, turning radius and speed concerns. Montana has the slowest rudder of the tier 10 battleships, and a larger turning radius than Yamato, and Conqueror. While having the smallest caliber guns at tier 10, and doesn't really fit any niches that are noticeably great other than the AA suite. Kurfurst has brawling power, Yamato has the long range, very hard hitting guns, Republique has speed in both Main battery reload and its sailing speed, Conqueror has the HE, stealth, and repair potential, while Montana has only the AA niche that stands out. Almost every player knows AA isn't very relevant in this meta so i believe it is necessary to buff Montana slightly to keep her up with the current Tier X bbs. So, I propose these revisions- 1.) Reduce Montana's standard rudder shift time from 22.2 seconds to 17 seconds. This would give Montana the fastest rudder at tier 10 BBs, and the rudder shift module would reduce this to 13.6-second rudder shift without sacrificing any non-normal modules. 2.) Reduce the turning radius from 950m to 910m. This wouldn't make it the best turning compared to Yamato or conqueror, but brings it a little bit more in line with the Tier 10s, this would also help against aircraft carriers and their bombers. 3.)Reduce speed lost in turn very slightly not by much, however, in a turn she slows down very quickly. Doing these changes I feel would put Montana in the maneuverability niche that I think she needs, and would make her a bit more viable in the current meta that lacks a super maneuverable tier 10 battleship
  3. Need help, can't decide.

    So, I have read all the guides, and read all the different threads, compared stats, and I still can't decide. Looking for some real feedback from people who are playing the ships. Trying to decide which Battleship I want to grind, Montana (US) or Conqueror (UK). Does anyone happen to have experience with both? Any big differences between the two? I'm not super aggressive when I play BB, but I do like to keep moving. Just can't decide. Any help is appreciated!
  4. Hi all, Since I recently achieved Rank 1 this season, I made a compilation video of 100 random kills I made during the season. The action starts out with some sniper shots, but as the video progresses the kills pile up faster and faster. Enjoy! My channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEr9cXayl6GQAoqSqUgYuxQ
  5. USS Montana In Gi-Joe

    As it turns out, while USS Montana was never built, she does appear in an episode of Gi-Joe, in a demonstration of what happens when some admirals take marrying a certain ship a bit too far.
  6. Montana Captain Build Opinions

    So I play on NA Server and I just got my Montana, only 30 battles with it so far. I'm in the process of building up my captain and I'd like to hear some feedback. So far I have preventative maintenance, adrenaline rush, basics of survivability, and concealment expert. My intention is to go with fire prevention, superintendent, and high alert as my remaining 9 points as I earn them. Looking for a stealthy-ish survival build. I've had only two matches so far with CVs so AA build beyond the AA module/upgrade slot I chose seems mostly a waste to me. This build seems like it will mitigate damage and help keep me in the game longer and healthier. Does this seem a good plan or do experienced Montana users feel I'm making a mistake? I would appreciate any comments or criticisms from those who e spent time with the ship. Thanks!
  7. I found a book in the library at my house, four actually. All published about the USN USAAF US army and British armed forces. All published in the range of 1942 to 1948. I saw some things I never knew. In one of the pages, there was a diagram of the Merlin engine that powered the P-51, and naval action plans from Midway Island, 1942. There were also diagrams on ships, like USS California and USS Brooklyn. Then, late into a book on the US Navy, a four-fold paper fell out, along with a single form(it was a stat sheet). I am used to seeing stuff fall out of old books, but this one caught my eye. It was about the Montana, and it was like nothing I have ever seen (its probably old, I cannot find it anywhere on the internet.) here are some stats it gave me: Main Battery: 4x3 457mm guns (modified BL-1s (?) super heavy ap shell, 3 shots a minute, 6 deg./sec traverse shell weight > 1 ton Secondary battery: 2x3 203mm guns, 6 shots a min centerline mounted (think that they are ones from Baltimore or Oregan City.) 4x2 152mm guns, "around" 10 shots a min 2 twin turrets per side 14x2 127mm 55 cal guns, 15 shots a minute, also used on USS Midway. Torpedoes: 4x4 Mk 15 2x3 Mk 16 These already exist in game, so not a big problem to Implement AA: (70)-100 single and twin 12.7mm brownings (60)-100 + Oerlikon 20mm cannons 60 + Bofors 40mm guns Dual purpose 5-6 inch guns Size: Over 1000 ft long and 150ft wide Armour: Mainly outer (though has inner armor too) up to 750 mm of armor on turret faces and 558 mm of outer belt armor plus 305mm of belt armor in the inner hull, 52mm bow plating, 25mm front superstructure 20mm rear 18mm top. Geez, I'd like to imagine that in game, what a terror it would be. I think that in this design it would be a PERFECT ship for tier XI, but wargaming cant implement this ship without rivals? what would they be? The challengers: H-42: Main battery: 4x2 480mm guns Secondaries: 12 × 150 mm (5.9 in) guns, 16 × 105 mm (4.1 in) guns, AA: 28 × 37 mm (1.5 in) guns, 40 × 2 cm (0.8 in) guns Torps: 6 × 53.3 cm (21.0 in) torpedo tubes A-150: Its got 6 or even 9 20-inch guns in three turrets, do you really need me to explain more? Ok ok, its also got a 460mm belt and 20 or 30 4 inch dual purpose guns. So there we have it: three tier XI battleships I want to see in game soon. Do you? leave comments below! Also, if you have other ships (not necessarily battleships) go ahead and list them below as well.
  8. While tier 5-7 USN BBs were slow and could be overmatched by a wide variety of opponents, one thing that they all benefitted from was a tremendous amount of side armor and torpedo protection (New Mexico has 42% lol). While sometimes AP shells could randomly penetrate, most of the time proper angling meant that they would harmlessly bounce off the side or bow armor. Now with North Carolina and above, that is no longer the case, so it would seem. Attempting a typical 25-30º angling that I used to do with Colorado or New Mexico only results in regularly receiving 3k-8k penetrations somewhere (along with the occasional what-the-heck-just-happened citadel). Pretty much the only thing that works consistently is bow-on, which isn't very conducive to a healthy BB playstyle, IMO. Now, I've managed to sail through (heh, sail) NC with a 63% wr, but part of the reason I got away with certain mistakes was due to its rather good maneuverability and stealth. Having finally ground out all the xp needed for Iowa, I'd like a final work on the USN fast battleships: is bow-on now the only angling that works, or is there a different path?
  9. Hi guys, After a lot of grinding, I finally got the Missouri before the 7.2 patch. I'm also getting close to getting the North Carolina. So far I haven't used the Preventive Maintenance skill in any of my battleships but I've noticed that some people use it with the Missouri and some don't. I really haven't experienced any issues through tier seven with my BB modules becoming incapacitated so I'm wondering if there is much of a need for preventive maintenance for the higher tier ships or not. Do you use the Preventive Maintenance skill for your US tier 8+ BB commanders? Please feel free to share how you've used your commander's skills. I look forward to your responses, thanks for reading my post!
  10. Hi Commanders, Clan Rental ships go back to virtual world. Commander is put in Reserve or on T1 ship. No problem there. The doubt is the cost in Credits for the Upgrades and consumables. When the ship rental ends, does the credit value get returned to the account? if so is it at 100% or the usual "sale" value,? or do they pocket the credits? Reading the pages for the Clan battles I didn't find a clear answer regarding the upgrades. Thanks Marlin
  11. From Iowa to Montana

    I'm an Iowa main who is almost done with the Montana grind after a long time. While the Iowa isn't always the easiest ship to use, I have already fallen in love with this ship after more than 100 games in it, to the point where I even bought it a permanent camo. Now, my question is, will there be another radical gameplay shift if I buy the Montana, much like how I had to relearn USN BBs from scratch (and get my [edited]kicked by T8-10 games over and over for my first 70 or so matches) when I moved from the Colorado to the NC? Or is the Montana still generally played similarly to the Iowa? Are there any useful tips and information that Iowa captains need to know when moving on to the Montana? And which one of the two ships is generally considered to be better and more fun nowadays? I tried doing research on this, but I just couldn't find the exact answers I was looking for, so here's hoping some seasoned Montana captains would share their thoughts.
  12. Iowa C Hull or Montana

    So my question is should I buy the Iowa C Hull or just keep grinding away and save for the Montana? I do have my 1st 19 point Captain. What on the skills should I change? I'm still trying to figure out how to maximize having a 19 point Captain with the ships I currently have. I'm thinking I need to get a higher tier premium ship but don't quite understand moving Captains in and out.
  13. On the internet I see a bunch of size comparisons between the Iowa and Montana classes, and unfortunately some of them get the proportions of the Montana comically wrong. So, to set the record straight, here's an actual size comparison of the Iowa and Montana classes, with specs below. The drawings are from shipbucket. Montana (1942 design) Iowa (WW2 configuration) Length (waterline) 890.0 ft (271.3 m) 860.0 ft (262.1 m) Length (overall) 925.0 ft (281.9 m) 887.3 ft (270.4 m) Beam 121.2 ft (36.9 m) 108.2 ft (33.0 m) Draft 36.9 ft (11.2 m) 37.2 ft (11.3 m) Displacement 70,965 long tons 57,540 long tons Power 172,000 SHP 212,000 SHP Design Speed 28 knots 33 knots Armament 4x3 16"/50 Mark 7, 10x2 5"/54 Mark 16 3x3 16"/50 Mark 7, 10x2 5"/38 Mark 12 You can see that dimensionally, in terms of length the Montana isn't much longer than the Iowa. However, it is considerably beamier and also has a fuller hull form, allowing for an additional turret and much more extensively sub-divided machinery spaces. The armor is considerably thicker as well, 409 mm on Montana compared to 307 mm on Iowa. Note that the Montana displacement would probably be 2,000-3,000 tons heavier than the listed design value due to the large increases in AA guns that would've been carried had the ships actually been completed. EDIT: Added top-down view comparison.
  14. Hello everyone, I recently accumulated enough experience in the Iowa to have finished researching for the Montana. Originally the Iowa, not the Montana was my end/high tier grind target, and I suspect the Montana will cost too much for me to run regularly should I have it. But now the ship is on sale and I don't know if it makes sense especially in terms of game economy for me to get it. I currently have about 20 million credits. Buying the Montana while it's on sale would leave me with 3 million, which's not enough to fully equip the ship and probably not all that much for me to run the ship. On the other hand while I slowly accumulate credits, I've been waiting for several ships to go on sale so that I can purchase them. (KGV, Fiji, and Budyonny...) So my choices in effect probably are a) Get the Montana in place of the other ships and slowly get it equipped and make it playable, while taking an hiatus from the other lines' grinds and new ship purchases due to the lack of credits... or b) Pass on the Montana for now so that I can have the other ships, especially since they'll probably be sale over the holidays... So from your perspective, what's the better bet for me given the situation? P.S. I am mostly a battleship player wit 3 tier 8s and a tier 9. In terms of cruisers I have one tier 7. In terms of carriers I've played up to the Hiryu and Ranger. And I've only played DDs up to tier 3. Please feel free to chime in. Thanks.
  15. One of the most miserable experience in WoWs is playing a tremendous game in your battleship that puts your team in a good position to win, provided you survive, only to be burned to death by a Conqueror which you swore was down to 5% HP a minute ago. I have yet to come up with any semblance of a solution, and have watched numerous instances of lone Conquerors taking on 2-3 other T10s with 40-60% HP successfully. My hope is that in this thread, the USN playerbase can put its heads together and develop a strategy that can give a MT a fighting chance against a Conqueror in a 1v1 situation where the fate of the game hinges on you staying afloat. Some basic questions I'd like to prose: How late is too late to use damage control? Have you ever citadeled a Conqueror in a brawl? How did you do it? The Conqueror is damage saturated, how can you reduce the number of half-damage hits? Do you ever indicate via teamchat when the Conqueror has used his Repair or Damage Control? His turrets have relatively thin armor (only 7 inches on the sides), is it possible to disable them by aiming at them rather than the waterline? How far above the waterline should you fire in order to maximize damage? This thread is NOT a space to detail how broken the Conqueror is. There are already plenty of places to do that. This is also NOT a space to deride the USN BB playerbase as "BBabies" who need to "git gud." This thread is to try and channel shared experience into a "Buff" of sorts against the Royal Navy menace. On a personal note, it took me several weeks to figure out that it was better to fire at the exposed broadside of Kreigsmarine battleships rather than concentrate fire at the waterline. Also, a fellow player told me how the HP distribution in their superstructure is different than other lines, making it a smart target if the hull is saturated. The culmination was the departure of the "WG has completely screwed us with this new line, we'll never be able to compete" feelings I used to have. The solution to the Conqueror problem does not lie in a nerf, it lies within our collective heads. (But for real, WG, you need to nerf the HE, it's completely broken.)
  16. Montana Carries

    Today has been frustrating experience, but there was one game I decided to end on that provided not only a fun experience but a pulse-pounding match down to the wire. The match started out just fine and dandy, with out ream eliminating 4/5 enemy DDs. However, the gap we created in points soon fell apart, as more and more ships on my team were eliminated. After knocking out a Gearing, Chapayev, and a Baltimore who were pushing B hard, I turned my sights on a Conqueror, who started moving towards me. A brawl ensues where thanks to Fire Prevention (and my opponent only spamming HE even when I was broadside) I defeated the MegaZao. However, the brawl was costly as my HP was settled at 21k, and I only had one heal left. During my brawl with the Conqueror a Full HP Roon was moving towards me under the cover of the cyclone that had developed. Another brawl ensued where I had to dodge two sets of torpedoes, and delete the Roon at close range, where German citadels are nonexistent. Through luck I was able to survive and earn Kraken Unleashed. The battle was not over. The remaining team members for my team were myself, a Shimakaze and a Donskoi. The enemy team had a Full HP North Carolina and a Zao. Our Donskoi was engaging the Zao while our Shimakaze was trying to close distance on the NC. All of this was taking place during my brawl with the Roon. On my way to assist the Shima, the Zao kills the Donskoi and the NC detects the Shima, and while taking a torpedo deletes the Shimakaze. Now I have to contend with a 30k hp NC and a 20k HP Zao. I move for B and sure enough the Zao appears through the cyclone. He fires a few salvos, either missing or shattering, and then moves in for a torpedo run. I fire my first two guns and hold my last two in reserve. As the Zao gets ready to turn for torpedo attack I fire the aft guns.... and leave him on 100 HP. In a panic I smash the left mouse button just as my front guns reload and finish off the biggest threat. It was at this time the North Carolina appeared behind me at 6.4 km distance. He fired a salvo which shaved off 2.5k of my remaining 11k hp. I angled away and fired my returning salvo, knocking off 14k of his 35k health pool. It was do or die, whoever sunk the other first won the game. Salvos were traded, and minor damage was done. The NC smartened up and started using HE, which started a fire that was immediately put out with my DCP. It was at this time the NC made a crucial mistake. He turned broadside to a Montana just as my four triple 16 inch guns reloaded. I fired and finished off the NC ending the game in a win. This was by far my most intense game of WoWS I have ever played, and after a day of mediocre games and teams, this was a wonderful experience.
  17. I got separated (my own fault) and hounded for an entire round by four or five ships. While they were chasing me, the rest of my team dominated. Last week to enter for a chance at a USS Enterprise Premium. Also channel update stuff. TwitchCon and let’s battle. Hope you guys are doing well. Let’s hear your stories of turning tragedy into triumph.
  18. Hi all, I just got my Montana and I'm trying to decide between Artillery Plotting Room Modification 2 and AA Guns Modification 3, the captain is AA spec. With Artillery Plotting Room Modification 2: 265m main battery dispersion and 802 AA damage per second (when under 3km) With AA Guns Modification 3: 297m main battery dispersion and 1002 AA damage per second (when under 3km) How important is an 11% drop in main battery dispersion?
  19. Ever since the lowered citadel buff to the American BBs, the montana has become a much stronger brawler. Hopefully you'll enjoy this replay by kebob rocking the school bus camo.
  20. Montana might not be bad

    So the Montana was my first tier 10 ship. But once I started getting the others I pretty much abandoned it. However I may have had a change of heart after it's performance in this match.
  21. This change really needs to be undone. This is up near the top of the list of the dumbest changes to the game. It has completely ruined fighting Iowa / Montana. This allows complete potatoes to just sail full broadside and ignore what should be massive damage. Instead, they only take 20-30k damage, when it should be 50-60k+ damage. So many times now I have been in a situation where an enemy Montana lived even though I should have deleted him. A full Montana salvo and I only do 20-30k damage against a full broadside battleship beyond dumb. If players are going to make low tier mistakes in high tier ships, they need to be punished for it. The citadel change removed even more skill from the equation, as it gives potatoes a more even ground against skilled players. The "buff" to Montana's citadel needs to go.
  22. Hot off the presses, I return to the Montana after the recent change to her citadel height and this is the reward she gives me! Apparently I don't play her enough and she was just dying to show that she is capable! What's 197k damage, 4 sinks, Confederate, High Caliber, and Dreadnought between friends? :) How have your Montana battles been since the change? :)
  23. Which line next?

    So I have grinded all the way up to Yamato. I love it right now. Amazing ship. My thoughts have now turned to my next tier 10. I am a BB main so I'll grind the cruiser and dd lines later. My question is, should I grind the Kriegsmarine line or U.S. Navy line? I completed hunt for Bismarck already so I could just grind from Tier VIII to Tier X, but I want more experience with Germany Battleships, so if I choose to grind the Germans, I'll start from tier 4 (already unlocked Kaiser). I am also considering waiting for the British battleships, mainly so that I unlocked Conqueror. Any opinions will be appreciated. (Meant to post in 'Battleships', not 'Japanese Battleships'. Sorry)