Montana: The Wild Mustang

[TenguBlade]

Doing something different and making a reveal thread after getting some first impressions of the ship.

 

It's been a while since I've haven't played a battlecruiser-type ship, or at least one of the faster BBs at its tier, on the live server, with all of the handicaps and differences from PT that entails.  Getting the Montana forced me to get back into the groove of playing an actual battleship pretty quickly: On PT, I could get away with using her as a battlecruiser due to the prevalence of aggression and never having anything less than full stealth build, but once I was on live server, without credits to upgrade her fully or a fully-trained captain out of the gate, that notion was pretty quickly banished after I got surprise buttsexed by a GK at point-blank range.  Other BBs pull maneuvers just as fast as you do, and that 3 knots of speed lost made a more tangible difference than I gave it credit for.

 

But compared to Iowa, Montana has some pretty good armor.  Enough that I don't have to worry about anything but Yamato shells beyond 12km, just turn the rudder in and slightly angle, whereas in Iowa that would be within prime citadel-printing distance.  The ship actually has a tangible range of angles that I can be at to stay relatively protected, something I didn't have trouble dealing without in the Iowa but that I'm finding myself needing with the Montana's significantly-worse rudder shift.  While the increase in tier means that 9 out of 10 times you will see a Yamato on the other team, I've still found Montana's armor to be pretty good: the fact that anything that defeats it results in a citadel is about the only weakness I can find with it.  Bow-rushing BBs is less about whether you have an aneurysm from the stress before you kill them and more about actually outplaying your opponent, for one: I won't miss that aspect of playing the Iowa too much.

 

The extra turret is extra damage, and makes a pretty big difference in some situations, but honestly, with its mediocre firing arc, I'm not finding much use for it other than finishing people off when I bow-charge them, since I usually only flash the #3 turret if I'm wiggling due to the Montana's slower rudder response.  Her AA is really powerful, as expected (can't get 100 AA rating with just AFT though), however T8+ CV players aren't as dumb as T7 ones and won't rush you with their planes very often.  What's more important to me is that the secondaries finally become something worth investing in.  9.1km range with full secondary build, combined with the highest innate RoF and fire chance of all T10 secondaries makes for a pretty nasty barrage that can often add those extra few bits of damage you need to finish people off, not to mention that unlike the German and IJN secondaries, their arcs of fire are quite wide.  It's just a shame that I can't use them too often (even with Yamato's 10.6km ones, I rarely had much use for them, enough that I'm considering a swap to APR1).

 

Which brings me to my last point: the meta.  I.  Hate. T10. Meta.  The Yamato already fostered that hatred, but the Montana has cemented it and made it all but permanent.  With the Iowa, I at least at the speed to outpace anyone else, not to mention be able to see T7 BBs which can get lolpenned by the main battery.  With the Montana, I'm reaching for HE far more often, even against cruisers, usually Zaos and their stupid 30mm upper belt, although non-burning Hindenburgs and bow-on Moskvas are also ships I'm commonly reaching for HE to deal with.  This is where those extra 3 guns are really useful: they're often the extra kick I need to start a fire and the damage is always welcome, but I digress.  I don't have the speed to outflank people anymore, and Montana's stealth, while it can be good, is compromised by the fact that planes spot her from much further away relative to her surface spotting range than Iowa, and thus those leftover spotter planes could be flying at over twice the max range of your AA guns (even with AA build) and still be spotting you, which is a real nuisance.

 

The end result is that I have to partake in the bow-tanking and HE spam to even do my part, let alone carry a team.  My first match, of 89k damage, 58k of that was in HE and another 10k in fires, because I was up against a pair of Hindenburgs and a bow-on Moskva that were being walled off from me by a pair of Shimakazes.  Most matches so far in the Montana I'm also doing in the quintuple-digits of HE damage from the main battery alone, whereas I would hardly ever use it in the Iowa.  I hate the HE spam, and I especially hate bow-tanking but I'm not going to sit on my [edited] and let myself be picked off, which makes it all the more annoying.  Not helping is that because this ship plays much more like a standard BB and not a somewhat-clumsy battlecruiser, the high citadel's effects are much more tangible.  Guess Iowa put me very far out-of-touch with what the high-tier meta is really like.

 

I really want to like the Montana, and I'm seeing her potential even though I've yet to play a match without a retrained captain and only had two where the ship was even fully kitted-out (the three key ones - MBM3, SGM2, and CSM1 - got installed at the start, but everything else had to wait until after I got a credit reward from a campaign task).  There's a lot that she can do, and she's quite flexible in both build possibilities and combat.  I can see that, and I love that aspect to her that was missing from Yamato.  But I can't feel out a niche for her, even with the build I've chosen.  It doesn't feel as concrete as with other ships: even though my secondary-build Yamato is pretty much obsolete with the introduction of the Germans, I can still use her as a supportive gunnery platform, with secondaries adding to the barrage as I get closer.  My Iowa is one step short of being a sexual predator with a full stealth build, while my Amagi and North Carolina are both all-rounders: the former having secondaries, stealth, and main battery all improved but not specced for, while the latter trades secondaries for AA.

 

Yet, even when I built the Montana along similar "all-rounder" lines, I never seemed able to connect with her identity like I could with other battleships.  All the characteristics are there, but they don't seem as...drastic.  The weaknesses aren't as amplified, the strengths not as emphasized.  Make no mistake, she's very all-rounded innately: a little too much so for her own good.  I think that, as much as any material weaknesses, is what holds back a lot of Montana drivers: the flexibility has its own unique set of rewards and demands, but in terms of how you approach playing the ship, it sets Montana apart from almost every other battleship in the game, and certainly every one that I've driven on the live server.  It's more about capitalizing on opportunities and less about trying to create them, more about minimizing your own mistakes (on a platform that's very hard to do so, I might add) than trying to make up for them by pressuring enemies to make more errors than you.  It's more passive, but more active at the same time.  You feel less in control of both the battle and the ship than usual, but then there are brief moments where nothing between heaven and hell will stop you from getting your way: all that remains is for you to act.

 

The ride's already been quite a roller coaster, Montana.  Wild, unpredictable, and by no means controlled, but at the same time alluring, much as that one stubbornly independent horse somehow ends up bringing equal parts fasciation, infatuation, and frustration to its trainer.  You've drawn me like no other ship has, and now I can't walk away until one of us emerges dominant: either I bring you heel, or you break my resolve.  Time will tell whether diving back into this contest of wills was an act of warranted faith or blind foolishness.

 

 

[Peacemaker100]

Quite an interesting thread you have here.  Definitely agree with you that the meta at T10 can be annoying.  I find that in my case, it's just that potato tactics get amplified tremendously at this tier.  You spawned right and your team goes left?  Great!  By the time you get to the action (sub 15km), the reds have been dealt with.  On a team where no one wants to shoot the dds?  Great!  The game's already lost.

 

On another note, I'd love to see a well played Monty.  It's very rare that I see a good Monty player, and usually, they're on the other side of the map cuz they're smart enough not to try to bow tank a Yammy.  Currently on NM right now, and I'm debating whether to fxp from her to NC.  MM combined with horrid dispersion and speed make for a literal hell-grind.

[Sir_Davos_Seaworth]

Very interesting indeed! Still my dream ship, even though I would have to change my play style. Weird I know, but there it is...

[Killjoy1941]

Pretty spot-on assessment of Montana, though that flexibility is what I like about her. Oh, and with APR2, she's easily the most accurate BB under 10km at tier 10; a superb cruiser-killer and terror for DDs. Yamatos and GKs are annoying, but they generally don't like you as a target if you put them at 30º on the open maps. Where hard cover exists, Montana really shines. Being able to prowl the approaches to caps and one-shot DDs with AP or massively punish CAs is fun, and the ability to execute high speed, island-rounding, surprise jousts with BBs all but guarantees kills when your salvos form great balls of citadel-piercing light at 10km or less.

[Thresh_Express]

I just bought my Montana last night and oh my GOD does it feel better than that joke of a ship called the Iowa. I was stuck on the Iowa for the longest time because I just could not bring myself to grind up the tree with the Iowa. It just felt like far too much of a struggle to me. Everything you said about the Iowa is exactly how I felt about it, the lack of armor being the worst part about it. The Montana on the other hand can actually bounce shells, so its a very welcomed change. 

 

I also totally agree with your burning hatred for T10 play, its absolute cancer and is not nearly as enjoyable to me as say Ts6-8 battles. When I'm up against a T10 cruiser and he can go bow into me and bounce a good number of my AP rounds at 10kms, that sort of stuff just makes me feel like absolute crap. Here I am with my big guns firing them at a cruiser and landing 4-6k damaging salvos... meanwhile he is just sitting there laughing at me while he sends round after round of HE at me, burning my ship to the ground, its just not fun.

 

Overall though I do like the Montana, I primarily play destroyers and am not a very skilled battleship captain, but the Montana just feels like a good ship to me. Maybe its because I go with the stealth build, which is similar to my destroyer builds, and then beef up its AA to keep the sky cancer at bay. As a result I play with stealth as my main weapon, which is how I play my destroyers, so maybe I just feel at home with the Montana. I actually unlocked the Yamato as my first T10, and its actually one of, if not my worst preforming ship, so I'm not quite sure what it is about the Montana, but to me, it feels better than the Yamato.

 At least until you get lolpenned by the Yamato's 18in guns... AND TAKE !@#$ING 60,000 DAMAGE IN A SINGLE SALVO!!! !@#$%!@#$$!@!!!!!!!!!!

 

[_Sp1d3r_]

I'm still on the NC, but glad to know it gets better still.

[Killjoy1941]

Overall though I do like the Montana, I primarily play destroyers and am not a very skilled battleship captain, but the Montana just feels like a good ship to me. Maybe its because I go with the stealth build, which is similar to my destroyer builds, and then beef up its AA to keep the sky cancer at bay. As a result I play with stealth as my main weapon, which is how I play my destroyers, so maybe I just feel at home with the Montana. I actually unlocked the Yamato as my first T10, and its actually one of, if not my worst preforming ship, so I'm not quite sure what it is about the Montana, but to me, it feels better than the Yamato.

 

Yamato's cardinal sin is being boring. Her glacial turrets and octagonal citadel tend to push her into a very specific style of play inside the top tier foolishness, and it's, well... dull.

[HazeGrayUnderway]

Traditionally I was one of those guys that had always said, "Going up the USN BB line?  Stop at Iowa."

 

After more time, I have drifted away from that notion.  I love how Iowa looks.  She was the first ship I wanted to really get when I started WoWS.  She's an iconic USN warship.  But in this game, she is too far in her extremes.  She's great in certain things and her weaknesses are so huge, so well known that I can't help but sail with a feeling of paranoia when using Iowa.  You are always worried about that strike to the sides as anything, even those high tier Cruisers, will wreck you if they get even a remotely good angle on your sides.  You can be properly engaged, angled against a specific threat(s) but if someone you didn't account for (i.e. undetected by you) sees your side in that "proper engagement" of yours, Iowa is

D

E

A

D

 

At high tier, we all make a living padding our stats on citadeling the ever-living-s**t out of Iowa and Missouri.  It just can't be helped.  You take a p*ss off the side of your ship and the splash you cause my send some to a nearby Iowa / Missouri and citadel it 2-3 times.  Those ships can't help but get multi-citadeled.

 

Which is why I have come to accept that Montana is the superior USN BB between her and Iowa.  I still deride Montana as a "Tier 9.5 ship" but Montana has 2 things going for her that make her better than Iowa.

 

1.  12 16"/50 guns vs the 9 on Iowa, for the simple reason of having more guns to try and beat some respect out of people.

2.  Montana at least has some degree of protection and doesn't get insta-gibbed in one salvo like Iowa and Missouri does the moment you make a mistake or someone gets the drop on you.

 

If you're going to do high tier USN BBs, my saying now is, "Don't stop at Iowa, GTFO her ASAP and get Montana."

[TenguBlade]

Pretty spot-on assessment of Montana, though that flexibility is what I like about her. Oh, and with APR2, she's easily the most accurate BB under 10km at tier 10; a superb cruiser-killer and terror for DDs. Yamatos and GKs are annoying, but they generally don't like you as a target if you put them at 30º on the open maps. Where hard cover exists, Montana really shines. Being able to prowl the approaches to caps and one-shot DDs with AP or massively punish CAs is fun, and the ability to execute high speed, island-rounding, surprise jousts with BBs all but guarantees kills when your salvos form great balls of citadel-piercing light at 10km or less.

Hm, does everyone take APR2 instead of MBM3?  I'm still deciding which to use for my Montana, and while the DPM has saved me a few times I can't help but wonder if having APR2's accuracy would avoid the need to be saved by the faster reload to begin with.  Especially now that I've managed to grind out the 18th captain point for my secondary build.

[Unholy_Phoenix]

I thoroughly enjoy the Montana more so than my Yamato. As for switching to HE, I hardly ever find myself doing it. Montana is a Kurfurst worst night mare with the 20-30k Salvos into that super structure and Yamatos are easily dealt with as that turret traverse is so slow to keep up with flanking.

 

 

 

[HazeGrayUnderway]

Hm, does everyone take APR2 instead of MBM3?  I'm still deciding which to use for my Montana, and while the DPM has saved me a few times I can't help but wonder if having APR2's accuracy would avoid the need to be saved by the faster reload to begin with.  Especially now that I've managed to grind out the 18th captain point for my secondary build.

 

I switched to APRM2 for my high tier USN BBs.  With Montana's 12 rifles, it really helps.  Without it, she's at something like 294m dispersion.  With the upgrade, the 12 gun salvos behave better.  YMMV.

 

Regarding her secondaries, it's longer than what was previously possible with USN BBs but her competition have very fierce secondaries and GK in that kind of fight is a nightmare.

[AdmiralQ]

the US BB line needs work that is well known.

[Killjoy1941]

Hm, does everyone take APR2 instead of MBM3?  I'm still deciding which to use for my Montana, and while the DPM has saved me a few times I can't help but wonder if having APR2's accuracy would avoid the need to be saved by the faster reload to begin with.  Especially now that I've managed to grind out the 18th captain point for my secondary build.

 

I'm definitely a ROF guy for most things, but APR2 is amazing. DD inside 10km? Yeah, he's taking 8k-dead from a Montana broadside. Cruisers will fear you, and broadside BBs are eating 30-70k.

 

APR2 Montana is the queen of "SurrrPRIIIIIIISE!"

[tcbaker777]

some Mustangs were never meant to be broken

[TenguBlade]

I switched to APRM2 for my high tier USN BBs.  With Montana's 12 rifles, it really helps.  Without it, she's at something like 294m dispersion.  With the upgrade, the 12 gun salvos behave better.  YMMV.

 

Regarding her secondaries, it's longer than what was previously possible with USN BBs but her competition have very fierce secondaries and GK in that kind of fight is a nightmare.

I moved away from APR2 for the Iowa because I wasn't seeing the huge increase in accuracy (or any for that matter, my shells got worse dispersion if anything) that other people were saying the mod granted, and the secondaries couldn't be counted on to do much.  I know that even hybrid secondary build isn't the best option for either of them, but it's not worth building for AA when even a bottom-tier CV will kill you if he wants to, at least without AAGM3 - which I'm not taking over APR2/MBM3 - and there's not really any other build worth pursuing since extra main battery range is pointless.  HE spam will demolish your AA guns worse than secondaries, and unlike Iowa, Montana's 5"/54s actually have good fire chance and RoF; even if they don't lay down as heavy a barrage, they at least become notable.

[VTAdmiral]

 

 

 

You do a bit more damage on average in Montana, but you win a lot more in Yamato.

 

I don't see why you have to tease her, she's doing a lot better by you than Montana.

[TenguBlade]

You do a bit more damage on average in Montana, but you win a lot more in Yamato.

 

I don't see why you have to tease her, she's doing a lot better by you than Montana.

My Yamato WR has been in the 30s since I stopped playing her chronically. and pretty much at about the same time the "potato high-tier drivers" threads started multiplying in number.  My Montana overall may not be that much better, but I've never played her in a division, which is about the only way you can win with how [edited] the T10 meta is now: I'm pretty thoroughly convinced that the days of being able to solo into T8-10 battles and control the outcome the majority of the time are well and truly over.  I could care less about how much I win in a ship; there's 11 other people to change the match outcome, whereas nothing but my own success and failure determines my other stats (besides PKR).

[HazeGrayUnderway]

My Yamato WR has been in the 30s since I stopped playing her chronically. and pretty much at about the same time the "potato high-tier drivers" threads started multiplying in number.  My Montana overall may not be that much better, but I've never played her in a division, which is about the only way you can win with how [edited] the T10 meta is now: I'm pretty thoroughly convinced that the days of being able to solo into T8-10 battles and control the outcome the majority of the time are well and truly over.  I could care less about how much I win in a ship; there's 11 other people to change the match outcome, whereas nothing but my own success and failure determines my other stats (besides PKR).

 

That's why those Tier VII-VIII's are so attractive now.  VII more than ever before because they don't see Tier X matches