Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Tenkafuhime

What's wrong to Montana?

123 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Big_Spud    2,284

You aren't getting my point.  My point is lowering the citadel makes it easier on the Montana driver due to the citadel being a smaller target even if the splinter deck is thin enough to be overmatched.  If the splinter deck is too thick to be overmatched, all the better.

 

On a side note, has anyone else besides the OP actually logged on to PT to confirm this?

 

j4yxq9E.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1nv4d3rZ1m    3,419

You aren't getting my point.  My point is lowering the citadel makes it easier on the Montana driver due to the citadel being a smaller target even if the splinter deck is thin enough to be overmatched.  If the splinter deck is too thick to be overmatched, all the better.

 

On a side note, has anyone else besides the OP actually logged on to PT to confirm this?

 

I guess not, it sounds like you are incorrectly assuming that the Yamato wont be able to penetrate the forward transverse bulkhead below the water line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KaptainKaybe    345

29mm is small enough to get lolpenned by the german 420s.

 

This HAS to be a mistake. No battleship tier 8 and up is supposed to be penned by AP while bow on by anything other than Yamato guns.

 

Did WG have some sort of dev meeting where they debated on how Montana could keep being easily smashed up by the GK after the citadel drop? Because if this change goes through, every single T9-10 german BB player will be switching to the 420s.

 

What's the deck armor on Yamato and GK?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
YamatoA150    1,151

I wonder if WG is reverting back to their version of Garzke and Dulin that they had shown us where they got their values from, in exchange for the completely lowered citadel.  I recall WG has one revision, and others here had a later revision, or something along those lines, with conflicting statistics.

 

That aside, they've been resistant to buffing Montana for a long time, since they still take into account that Montana has the biggest broadside alpha and even mix of RoF, accuracy, and traverse (420 GK/FdG trade RoF and accuracy, while Yamato trades traverse and broadside alpha).

 

I'm hoping this doesn't affect Missouri (and by extension, Iowa, just to be fair) though; she had cost me most of my FXP I already had at the time (only spending about 20~30 USD to finish out converting the remainder, which doesn't count).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exciton8964    102

This has to be a mistake.

 

If they don't correct it before 0.6.6 goes alive, I have to srsly question WG's dedication to this game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Air_0374    5

 

I'm hoping this doesn't affect Missouri (and by extension, Iowa, just to be fair) though; she had cost me most of my FXP I already had at the time (only spending about 20~30 USD to finish out converting the remainder, which doesn't count).

 

They aren't affected, they still have 38mm weather decks.

 

What's funny is that the thickness change isn't listed with the citadel volume and superstructure/extremity hp changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KaptainKaybe    345

I don't see why they even need to worry. Yes, Montana has a very powerful broadside. But her shells are too floaty to be useful firing at ships more than 15km away in any reliable fashion. Whereas Yamato can and regularly does, plus she has has those crazy penetrating shells.

 

And Montana doesn't have the strong layered armor GK has. Even with her citadel stopped to waterline, she can still be citadeled by a well aimed shot into an exposed broadside, just like North Carolina.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lampshade_M1A2    601

It truly seems as if WG intends for US battleships to be punching bags for everybody else. Just about every non-American ship can get a realistic armor model but American ships need armor nerfs for "balance" despite the fact that they made the ships so mediocre in many areas.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phoenix_jz    1,642

It's curious that the leaks a few days ago didn't mention this change...

 

So, for this who have access to the PT client, I have two questions;

 

Is the side of the casemate armor still 38mm, or was that lowered too?

 

And did they actually lower the citadel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TenguBlade    2,581

I don't see why they even need to worry. Yes, Montana has a very powerful broadside. But her shells are too floaty to be useful firing at ships more than 15km away in any reliable fashion. Whereas Yamato can and regularly does, plus she has has those crazy penetrating shells.

What?  You do realize that American shells have the lowest drag coefficients in the game, right?  The MK8 SHS retains energy across distance better than Yamato's AP shells as a result of this (especially since WoWS atmosphere has about twice as much drag as normal atmosphere from what people have said), even though the latter have higher kinetic energy leaving the barrel.  The muzzle velocity is also only 18m/s slower.  In practice, one is hardly any floatier than the other.  The bigger killer of the Montana and Iowa's performance at longer distances is that their turrets have more dispersion despite also having less maximum range.

Edited by TenguBlade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Edselman    267

My theory:

1. Lower the citadels on the American battleships

2. Model Special Treatment Steel in the game

3. Make it so that shell caliber is not the most important factor in penetration and damage in the game (it really isn't in real life)

4. Nerf the Russian ships to the crappy hulks of rusty s*** they actually were

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lampshade_M1A2    601

4. Nerf the Russian ships to the crappy hulks of rusty s*** they actually were

 

It's not the ships the Russians actually built you need to worry about. It's all of the paper designs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Edselman    267

 

It's not the ships the Russians actually built you need to worry about. It's all of the paper designs.

 

true, true my bad. How could I forget most of their tree is paper anyway. I'm just saying the ones that are real seem to be somewhat op and the paper ones have the advantage of being paper (and everything looks better on paper)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryuukei8569    514

Ugh, I guess wargaming really hates making any US ship compedetive with any other non US ship in this game.

 

On a side note, why the hell was public test 6.6 not even announced. Someone dun goofed. Or did the [edited]something else up and accidentally activated the public test server when they weren't supposed to. Wargaimg, your communication skills, please work on them, because they are really really bad right now. Considering the recent Foch scandal is pretty much all about Wargamigs appalling lack of effective communication.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mezurashi    367

Sensing some personal attacks here on this topic. Just a reminder to keep it constructive and civil.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francois424    512

K... Please tell me they didn't need the Iowa's armor even more, that thing already eats tons of damage from cruiser HE...

 

That is not Montana exclusive.  Cruiser HE mostly has been broken since CBT.  Made worse since IFHE of course.  At least IFHE reduces the fire chance, but not enough.

I fear HE more than AP in BBs nowadays, it's completely out-of-balance.

 

 

That said, the last thing Montana needs is a nerf.  if you want to do anything BUFF her armor.  Heck DONT buff her armor more.  WG once said she was an elite cruiser killed... Make her near-impervious to HE/Fires and let her be a Cruiser killer.  We need more of these types of BB in the game anyway to stop the HE meta.  heck you could give these BB less range so they don't stay back and snipe, lol.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryuukei8569    514

Sensing some personal attacks here on this topic. Just a reminder to keep it constructive and civil.

 

Thanks.

 

Do0 you mind actually addressing some of the concerns present, such as the test server being active unannounced, or the unannounced deck armor nerf to the Montana.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TenguBlade    2,581

Sensing some personal attacks here

:D

If this were only me he was referring to, I'd already have been given the banhammer with the posts moderated and no civil warning issued to the thread.  Fortunately for the provocateur, my skin isn't so thin as to beg the mods to punish people for defeating him in an argument.

 

Yet people accuse WG of trying to censor criticism...

Edited by TenguBlade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavairo    247

Wargaming you truly are a trash tier company. The ship is by every metric underperforming compared to its rivals. That means BUFF not NERF. Well since I tried Dreadnought tonight, I think Ships might find its self uninstalled in the future just like mwo before it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
m373x    1,029

 

It's not the ships the Russians actually built you need to worry about. It's all of the paper designs.

 

Implying the Montana was not a paper ship as well.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most deck armor is always within autobounce ranges, which is exactly why I said this hinges on how thick WG makes the citadel over the magazines.  I haven't been able to find any specifics, but I believe the splinter deck wasn't any thicker than Iowa's so I'm currently assuming it will be 25mm as well.

Pull you head out of your [edited], there have been multiple fixes that originated from NA forum threads.  New Orleans, Alabama, Nagato, and now Iowa/Missouri/Montana have all had armor model revisions based on threads that started here.  The devs may weigh RU and EU more heavily in balance discussions because they have more players, but when it comes to correcting mistakes they've shown no disinclination towards NA.

And with this, my work here is done.  Thank you for proving your own point: I may have replied just to spite you, but unlike you I can contribute constructively if I want to.

proves my point, word to the wise, this guy is an insult/cheapshot artist ....and he admits it ....beware....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×