Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
godzilla5549

Revert the Montana Citadel Lowering

231 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

968
[KTKM]
Beta Testers
2,081 posts
4,012 battles

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.

  • Cool 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,607
[INTEL]
Members
8,410 posts
25,242 battles

It's wonderful. It's made the Montana competitive and very enjoyable to play. Fully support the lowering. 

  • Cool 22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,506 posts
1,138 battles
2 minutes ago, godzilla5549 said:

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.

 

Doesn't this apply to quite literally an entire line of BBs?

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
968
[KTKM]
Beta Testers
2,081 posts
4,012 battles
1 minute ago, Taichunger said:

It's wonderful. It's made the Montana competitive and very enjoyable to play. Fully support the lowering. 

 

Montana was completely fine before the change. Anyone who says that Montana was bad or "not competitive" had no idea how to actually play the ship.

Edited by godzilla5549
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,607
[INTEL]
Members
8,410 posts
25,242 battles
14 hours ago, godzilla5549 said:

 

Montana was completely fine before the change. Anyone who says that Montana was bad or "not competitive" had no idea how to actually play the ship.

 

Of course, it's the only possible explanation for you. otherwise, you'd have to face the possibility that you are wrong....

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
968
[KTKM]
Beta Testers
2,081 posts
4,012 battles
Just now, Taichunger said:

 

Of course, it's the only possible explanation for you. otherwise, you'd have to face the possibility that you are wrong....

 

And yet I have talked with people who are in the top 25 players for Montana on the server, and they agree that the citadel buff was the dumbest thing and never should have happened.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
371
Members
2,274 posts
7,311 battles
4 minutes ago, More_Witches said:

Doesn't this apply to quite literally an entire line of BBs?

German BBs are hard to cit but they have bad guns to compensate.

 

Iowa and Montana are hard to cit now and they have good guns. They lost nothing for that.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,021
[OPG]
Members
3,882 posts
5,476 battles
7 minutes ago, More_Witches said:

Doesn't this apply to quite literally an entire line of BBs?

*two lines now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
108
[MKF]
Members
399 posts
14,817 battles
3 minutes ago, Xlap said:

German BBs are hard to cit but they have bad guns to compensate.

 

Iowa and Montana are hard to cit now and they have good guns. They lost nothing for that.

I have no problem at all hitting the citadel of either of those ships. You guys must be doing something way wrong...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
371
Members
2,274 posts
7,311 battles
1 minute ago, Dath_1 said:

I have no problem at all hitting the citadel of either of those ships. You guys must be doing something way wrong...

Never said i cant. But OP has a point. Before the buff you could delete Iowa and Montana. Now its very rare. You can get some good damage but not delete. They can make mistake and get away with that. And the problem is that they dont trade nothing for being more tank.

 

IJN BBs: good guns, not tank.

KMS BBs: poor guns, very tank.

USN BBs: good guns, very tank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,757 posts
7,968 battles

I think it needed to be lowered but they lowered it too much. Montana has very accurate guns and godlike AA. It also has amazingly good firing arcs for its size. Why does the GK have terrible firing arcs when it's practically twice as big? Also GK range is similar to Moskva, wth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,366
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
4,929 posts
6,433 battles
29 minutes ago, godzilla5549 said:

 

Montana was completely fine before the change. Anyone who says that Montana was bad or "not competitive" had no idea how to actually play the ship.

so, getting Citadeled to death by a CRUISER was perfectly fine for a battleship? the citadel is fine, it wont stop them from being citadeled to death if they show broadside though

Edited by tcbaker777
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,492
[NSF]
Beta Testers
4,975 posts
5,679 battles

"No"

 

You can still citadel broadside idiots in Iowas and Montanas easily, you just can't do the epic "Yamato just deleted you with 6 citpens from 15 km because you were angled incorrectly by two degrees" epic meme anymore.

 

The Germans are still functionally immune to citadel penetrations, and come equipped with hydro from tier 8+ in addition to the pants on head retarded secondaries, with mediocre gun handling. The new Royal Navy tier 7-10 ships are totally immune to citadel penetrations, AND they get a super heal starting with Lion, AND they get good gun handling, ridiculous self defense AA, incredible maneuverability, and literal cruiser tier concealment to boot. 

 

In terms of durability at high tiers, it basically goes like this now:

 

Royal Navy>KMS>>>>>>>>>USN>IJN.

 

Feel free to find me a server where the Montana or Iowa is actually over-performing stats wise in the hands of the average player, because this game is NOT balanced around the "top 25 players" of any specific ship.

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
121
[FG]
Members
398 posts
3,709 battles

Personally I'd like them to revert the Iowa/Montana citadel lowering, but swap the rudder shift times of them with the RN BBs. 

 

The Monty and Iowa go back to taking massive damage from broadsides, but now you are giving "power" back to the player to avert staying broadside. Bad players will be punished, good players will make use of the lower rudder shift to angle in quicker. 

 

Reverting the citadel change now alone with the introduction of another BB line with basically impossible to hit citadels would be a poor decision imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,344
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,177 posts
2,029 battles

Well, this thread is going places...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
67 posts
7,993 battles

BB's getting punished for playing poorly?  WG does not want this it seems.  I thought at the time it was an unnecessary buff and I still think so.  Montana was always a good ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,009
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,019 posts
11,538 battles
19 minutes ago, RHINO_Mk_II said:

Another godzilla thread asking for nerfs to USN ships... why am I not surprised.

It's never someone without an anime avatar either.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27
[POET]
Members
300 posts
1,784 battles
2 minutes ago, crzyhawk said:

It's never someone without an anime avatar either.

Well, I'll bite.

 

If anime avatars are the ones always making complaints like these, couldn't we try to figure out what's up with that?

 

I assume you are completely serious about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×