![]() You can use SI instead for extra heals if you prefer. BoS helps reduce the amount of time Fires burn and stacks incredibly well with 2-million Damage Control mod, reducing burn time to under 40 seconds. AR stacks up pretty quickly on BBs, and is quite noticeable after enough punishment. Preventive Maintenance makes it less likely to lose your guns. I, myself, use Preventive Maintenance, Adrenaline Rush, Basics of Survivibility or Superintendant, and Concealment Expert. USN AA is strong enough as it is, and it's preferable to focus on anti-ship duties. You're wasting your time with dedicated AA builds. Combine that with an almost 2x range difference I would say your still not gonna match its power. You forget GK's also run adrenalin rush standard so that 7.5 comes down to 5 or lower pretty often. Survivability build? Show me a good one and ill do that. Just because theres nothing better to do, go secondaries. Montana has better secondaries than the Iowa, and the Iowa/Missouri is great for a secondary build too. Therefore, you must go for the only alternative, a secondary build. This isn't enough to justify an AA build. CV's are rare, and when they are around, you already have killer AA. I love this ship, it is easily my most played ship right now. I'll be switching back to the Attacking Montana prior to the 30th when the redistribution costs go back up, we'll see then. So looking at Peace's Montana vid and hearing that the RU server actually has a Montana win rate over 50%, could this be their take on the ship as well? RU guys are supposed to be prototypical brawlers, I wonder if this is one of their builds. After that, running the typical AA and stealth builds, I'm back down to a 50% win rate or so. Just following your team into a cap, laying down a volume of fire, pouring 10k AP salvoes into red destroyers, tanking damage, the ship I believe had a 65% win rate. I only just lost to a Yamato, though he was backed by a Roon and I was burning pretty decently. With Yamato, main gun HE to help the fires get started then AP for when he turns out. If it's a GK, I haven't lost an encounter yet, just using main gun AP and secondaries. But if I can, I close with enemy battleships, maintaining a bow on attitude/angle that doesn't quite permit the rear turrets to engage, 7-9 k out. If I have to turn out and trade fire in the 15k or so range bracket because there are too many enemies, then we all know that the Montana can hold her own with her excellent accuracy. I follow my CA's and DD's towards the cap and just keep angling in. My 30 or so battles in this spec of the 75 or so total I have in Montana seem to say so. Since Montana gives up no main gun upgrade in the second upgrade slot (other than the mostly unnecessary APR1), she's in the ball park. Monty comes in at 9.1, GK/Yamato at 10.6. So these specs are a push or possibly favor the Monty (she has generally good secondary arcs as well) other than range. Given that half the secondary armament fires at any one time, this means that the GK puts 165 rounds out per minute via her secondaries, Monty at 157 or so. Compare that to the GK's 28 tubes, some with 7.5 second reload, some at 5 lower he damage, 5%/8% fire chance. They fire at a base reload of 3.8 seconds, do 1800 he damage with a 9% base fire chance. It's based on secondaries - and stop! Before you say but Monty's secondaries only have a 6k base range, only have 20 tubes etc., look a little closer. Been experimenting with a 19pt Montana build I call the Attacking Montana.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |