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

Does Montana need a re-balance?

71 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

41
[PRSR-]
Members
171 posts
6,090 battles

Firstly, before the WoW salty virgins start responding with "uninstall" and the like, note that I've suggested a re-balance not a nerf or buff. 

Now, to the actual merit of my point. On my Kurfurst I recently switched to the dispersion mod (from the secondary extensions mod). The ship is infinitely better this way and, due to the caliber of the guns and newfound accuracy, has begun to encroach upon the territory my coveted Montana used to hold in terms of twelve gun accuracy. It made me think about whether the Montana is still my favorite ship.

Here's my issue: AA. I've unspecced AA on all my ships. I get a CV in my games once every 6-7 games and even then, there is no guarantee the (a) the CV will focus me (b) the CV is tier 9+ (tier 8 cv is not a huge threat) or (c) the adverse CV is any good. As a result, AA has become somewhat of an irrelevance. And yet, it is one of the shinning points of the Montana. 

Yes, I appreciate the Montana is still more accurate than a Kurfurst with the dispersion mod. Yes, I appreciate that it is more maneuverable and harder to hit than the Kurfurst. But what burns me is that balancing the Montana by giving it good AA (rather than, for example, gun caliber or tankiness) actually unbalances the Montana due to current meta.

Maybe, trade its AA for more maneuverability? Maybe trade its AA for better concealment? Just some thoughts. 

I figured I'd post and get everyone's thoughts. Please let me know what you think. 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2
  • Bad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
108
[MKF]
Members
399 posts
14,817 battles

I love playing Monty and find the guns to be very accurate. I am running full AA build as well and she is my favorite T10 BB. I'm not against any changes but don't really feel them necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
109 posts
2,416 battles

Strong AA is completely wasted in random battle on NA server because there is very little CV play.

Who cares about god-tier AA when there are no planes to shoot? I think the CV rework will help if it ever comes and CV play becomes a thing again, but until now it's disappointing, mostly for the US lines where AA is one of the main selling features.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,062 posts
4,736 battles
14 minutes ago, gonowgetdown said:

Firstly, before the WoW salty virgins start responding with "uninstall" and the like, note that I've suggested a re-balance not a nerf or buff. 

Now, to the actual merit of my point. On my Kurfurst I recently switched to the dispersion mod (from the secondary extensions mod). The ship is infinitely better this way and, due to the caliber of the guns and newfound accuracy, has begun to encroach upon the territory my coveted Montana used to hold in terms of twelve gun accuracy. It made me think about whether the Montana is still my favorite ship.

Here's my issue: AA. I've unspecced AA on all my ships. I get a CV in my games once every 6-7 games and even then, there is no guarantee the (a) the CV will focus me (b) the CV is tier 9+ (tier 8 cv is not a huge threat) or (c) the adverse CV is any good. As a result, AA has become somewhat of an irrelevance. And yet, it is one of the shinning points of the Montana. 

Yes, I appreciate the Montana is still more accurate than a Kurfurst with the dispersion mod. Yes, I appreciate that it is more maneuverable and harder to hit than the Kurfurst. But what burns me is that balancing the Montana by giving it good AA (rather than, for example, gun caliber or tankiness) actually unbalances the Montana due to current meta.

Maybe, trade its AA for more maneuverability? Maybe trade its AA for better concealment? Just some thoughts. 

I figured I'd post and get everyone's thoughts. Please let me know what you think. 

Monty's AP works at a much better angle than the GK's, and the GK has to stay pretty shallow in its own angling if it wants to put 12 barrels on target.  The GK may not take citadels often, but it takes a lot of pen damage and it is way bigger than any other ship in the game so it is really hard to miss.  I think both have benefits and drawbacks.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
383
[WOLF2]
Alpha Tester
2,208 posts
7,240 battles

I would rather them not weaken Monty’s AA at all since WG has repeatedly claimed that CVs are being reworked. Assuming CVs will eventually begin popping up again, I have no desire to see another BB with weak AA for them to feast on.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,356
[O7]
Supertest Coordinator, Supertester
6,387 posts
7,321 battles

Montana is incredibly accurate and has reliable 406mm guns. I see no issue with Montana; it is one of the most comfortable and solid T10 ships in the game. IMHO Requires no re-balance.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,268
[HINON]
Members
8,796 posts

There are many reasons monty is the preferred bb in clan battles and it is not because she is outclassed by the gk.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,114 posts
3,141 battles

Montanna is one of the best overall tier 10 battleships. Sure, Yamato can overmatch everything and Conqueror can farm salt like no other, but Montanna has good accuracy and velocity on a large number of guns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[GRRR]
[GRRR]
Members
586 posts
20,555 battles

   Speaking for competitive play, Monty is in a very good place being probably the best BB to bring to competitive if by a very small margin; the runners up being Yamato and Republique (I personally run the Pub). If GK is a point of comparison, then for randoms they are comparable, GK is maybe more fun even. But for competitive, GK is significantly less capable than the good 'ol Monty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,203 posts
6,433 battles

Montana's key feature is not the AA, it's her ability to reliably punish mistakes. There is a reason for why she has been a top choice for Clan Battles, and it was certainly not her AA.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,363
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
4,925 posts
6,423 battles

i dont have Monty yet, still have about 120K to go with Iowa, but that AA is strong, and its better to have it and not need it, that to not have the upgraded AA when you come across a CV game, its got 12 16 inch guns that i assume are about as accurate as the Iowa's, and decent enough secondarys for a USN BB, i think the ship will be just fine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
171
[DAKI]
Members
183 posts
7,115 battles

I really hope you're joking. 

4th turret Iowa is fine, its absurdly accurate and blaps cruises easily, that is why its everywhere in CW. It only struggles to blap Hindy which yammie does much better. Otherwise 4th turret Iowa is fine.

 

sigh

 

USN fanbois, no matter how much weegee buffs their ships, they are never happy.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
79
[UEFN]
Members
386 posts
11,570 battles

Yes, Montana need to be rebalance, it needs radar.... preferably the same one like Missouri.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
171
[DAKI]
Members
183 posts
7,115 battles
1 minute ago, Xcalib3r said:

Yes, Montana need to be rebalance, it needs radar.... preferably the same one like Missouri.

Please tell me you are trolling...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
671 posts
2,201 battles
1 minute ago, Xcalib3r said:

Yes, Montana need to be rebalance, it needs radar.... preferably the same one like Missouri.

No it does not need Radar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
79
[UEFN]
Members
386 posts
11,570 battles
Just now, MutsuKaiNi said:

Please tell me you are trolling...

Nope, preferably with long range radar like Mosvka but with duration like Des Moine, and make radar special upgrade module available.   Montana secondary is also a joke, need to buff it to match the french BB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
171
[DAKI]
Members
183 posts
7,115 battles
2 minutes ago, Xcalib3r said:

Nope, preferably with long range radar like Mosvka but with duration like Des Moine, and make radar special upgrade module available.   Montana secondary is also a joke, need to buff it to match the french BB.

Good lord the USN fanboi-ism is strong with this one...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,421
[OPGS]
Beta Testers
3,184 posts
5,658 battles
12 minutes ago, MutsuKaiNi said:

I really hope you're joking. 

4th turret Iowa is fine, its absurdly accurate and blaps cruises easily, that is why its everywhere in CW. It only struggles to blap Hindy which yammie does much better. Otherwise 4th turret Iowa is fine.

 

sigh

 

USN fanbois, no matter how much weegee buffs their ships, they are never happy.

I dispute the descriptive term 4th turret Iowa, there are a lot of differences between the classes. First, armor, the Iowa was designed to resist 2250lb AP shells. The Montana was designed to resist the super heavy 2700 pound AP shell. The Montana had 5 inch 54 caliber secondaries, much better than the 5 inch 38 caliber secondaries of the Iowa. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
171
[DAKI]
Members
183 posts
7,115 battles
1 minute ago, Belthorian said:

I dispute the descriptive term 4th turret Iowa, there are a lot of differences between the classes. First, armor, the Iowa was designed to resist 2250lb AP shells. The Montana was designed to resist the super heavy 2700 pound AP shell. The Montana had 5 inch 54 caliber secondaries, much better than the 5 inch 38 caliber secondaries of the Iowa. 

It literally looks like the slightly bigger Iowa, even if there are minor design differences, aesthetically it looks like an Iowa with an extra turret plopped on.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
79
[UEFN]
Members
386 posts
11,570 battles

Montana also need Defensive AA, preferably the same runtime as CV.  The lack of torpedoes on Montana is also unacceptable, it need the same one as Hindenburg, 8 torps per side, then we can call it balance.

 

Don't even get me started on the garbage concealment, how dare the Conqueror got better concealment than Montana?

  • Funny 4
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
671 posts
2,201 battles
1 minute ago, MutsuKaiNi said:

It literally looks like the slightly bigger Iowa, even if there are minor design differences, aesthetically it looks like an Iowa with an extra turret plopped on.  

 

Montana is an enlarged SoDak.  Iowa was designed for speed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,421
[OPGS]
Beta Testers
3,184 posts
5,658 battles
1 minute ago, Xcalib3r said:

Montana also need Defensive AA, preferably the same runtime as CV.  The lack of torpedoes on Montana is also unacceptable, it need the same one as Hindenburg, 8 torps per side, then we can call it balance.

 

Don't even get me started on the garbage concealment, how dare the Conqueror got better concealment than Montana?

Personally I do not think paper ships should ever out perform their real life counterparts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,421
[OPGS]
Beta Testers
3,184 posts
5,658 battles
Just now, SCygnus said:

 

Montana is an enlarged SoDak.  Iowa was designed for speed. 

It's funny I am one of the few people who think the Monty's speed should be nerfed to 28 knots which was her designed speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
79
[UEFN]
Members
386 posts
11,570 battles
Just now, Belthorian said:

Personally I do not think paper ships should ever out perform their real life counterparts.

but it would be a lot of fun.   LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
671 posts
2,201 battles
Just now, Belthorian said:

It's funny I am one of the few people who think the Monty's speed should be nerfed to 28 knots which was her designed speed.

It probably should go down to 28, maybe a little buff to maneuverability to compensate.  Montana is in a decent place right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×