Jump to content
HaachamaShipping

Monarch - Sharing Thoughts and Tips

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
8,199 posts
9,087 battles

Hello Reader, I decided to create this thread to share some of my personal thoughts on the Monarch, a ship that I saw already many people complain about, but which I came to appreciate ever since I started playing it. Given there might be players who struggle with the ship and who might be looking for how to put Monarch to good use (even if just so as to get to Lion faster without spending free exp), I thus wanted to share some of my personal thoughts on the Monarch, hoping that this might help fellow captains and maybe make the ship more enjoyable for them.

 

Personally, I don't like the British BB line too much and I have been grinding the line only every now and then, giving it a chance, dropping it later on when I grew bored. It didn't help that I own three RN premium BBs that all were more fun to play than the Queen Elizabeth (which isn't a bad ship, just not very exiting for Warspite owners). I also didn't really find the appeal in the KGV and the later supposedly HE throwing BBs, so, yeah. But, for certain reasons, I recently decided to get to Monarch and tried to get at least decent at it, even if people told me it's an absolute turd. As I had enough time, credits and free exp to get past QE (would not recommend this to new players, but for seasoned players with a Warspite, QE offers pretty much nil learning experience) and work my way through KGV. Playing Monarch, I was pleasantly surprised by a ship that isn't OP, but also isn't anywhere as terrible as most people make it out to be. I had a few harsh experiences at the beginning too, learning quickly some of the limitations of the ship, but keeping these in mind, it didn't take long for Monarch to become a ship I got decent results with and that I felt confident taking into battle.

 

I'm not going to say Monarch is the best T8 BB or that it doesn't have some noticeable weaknesses, but Monarch by all means is a ship that can be competitive in randoms. The greatest reason I'm not citing other game modes is that I had no means of testing Monarch in other game modes. We had no T8 Ranked in a while and T8 CB ever. If I had to make a guess, I'd say though that Monarch in Ranked is likely not top pick, but still decent, especially in early Ranks where gameplay differs hardly from randoms in the skill displayed. In higher ranks though, Monarch likely takes a backseat to the North Carolina for most people, though I wouldn't dismiss it completely. It's certainly not a case like T5 Ranked Sprint where Giulio is basically just outright better than some of its competition and there is practically no reason to ever bring a Bretagne, if you have any other T5 BB. Monarch is better than that. Also, I'm talking about playing for the win here. I'm very much aware that Monarch likely still is one of the easiest star-saving damage farmers at its tier (though not as silly as Conqueror). For CB, I'd argue Monarch is basically not recommended for the same reason as to why conqueror sees little use: Monarch just does not have the resistance against HE shells and the accuracy at range leaves something to be desired. You'd likely be better served with North Carolina or Amagi.

 

In my opinion, to make the most of Monarch, it is best to take a good look at the ship and recognise its strengths and weaknesses. By translating the results into gameplay, Monarch delivers, at least for me. At its core, Monarch basically is what the description of the ship tells you: A King George V-class battleship that has been upgunned with 15 inch guns. Monarch keeps a lot of the traits of the T7 KGV and has only very few changes, which can be summarised as follows:

  • The main battery changed from 10 356 mm guns to 9 381 mm guns.
  • The light plating changed from 25 mm to 32 mm, which is normal for T8.
  • The fifth upgrade slot has been added, which also is normal for T8.
  • The AA got a few touches. This isn't really too special though.

Compared to something like Colorado to NC, this looks pretty lackluster for an upgrade and there are quite a few weaknesses that stem from the design being basically an uptiered KGV. Overall, the weaknesses are very similar to the predecessor:

  • The range is the same as on KGV. For a T7 that often is top tier, KGV's range was kind of okish, for a T8 that often sees T10, this range seems very punitive. Spotter plane helps, but still.
  • The rear turret angle is pretty bad, same as with KGV. This makes it very hard to get all guns on a target without offering a ot of broadside.
  • The ship has an all-or-nothing armour scheme that allows it to be penned by cruiser HE consistently. Same as KGV, though 32 mm means it now no longer gets overmatched by most BB AP and some cruisers of lower tiers like Atlanta/Flint and common DD guns will no longer penetrate the deck.
  • The speed is the same as on KGV. 28 knots was good at T7. It certainly is not good at T8. Thankfully, it still is enough.
  • The hp pool is the same as on T7. Lowest at T8. Thankfully, it this is still a very manageable gap to better ships at the tier, compared to cases like Lyon getting far less hp than ships like Hood and Nagato and being outdone even by the Kongou. Yet people won't raise a massive fuss about Lyon being super squishy.
  • The torpedo belt sucks. Same as KGV.

Inheriting this much from a T7 is a bit iffy at first glance, given that, as said before, other lines have far bigger upgrades. NC doesn't inherit the Colorado's 21 knots, gets a better deck, gets much better AA, Amagi also gets more speed, a whole gun turret more, better citadel protection, better torpedo belt. But I think it should be kept in mind that for what its worth, KGV is a pretty good T7 BB and Monarch did inherit also good features, together with improving in certain areas that make up the strengths of the ship:

  • Monarch inherits the 25 s reload of KGV, but on 381 mm guns. While KGV guns do reward proper ammunition choice and have a higher HE dpm and fire chance, KGV needs the HE to actually have a fighting chance against BBs as the AP at range struggles to do consistent damage to BBs. Monarch guns meanwhile are proper high tier guns and Monarch still has the best dpm at T8.
  • Monarch inherits the KGV underwater citadel. Like with German BBs, a hard to hit citadel does not mean you should broadside like a scrub, but it means when you have to turn or are in a crossfire, you have a way easier time to not get taken apart with citadel hits. Ships like NC, Alabama, Massachusetts or Kii all have a far harder time there.
  • Monarch inherits the KGV concealment, but adds concealment systems mod on it. It's one of the stealthiest BBs in its MM spread, outspotting some of the poorer cruisers.
  • While it has "only" 35% fire chance (which is still best at T8), the HE shell damage is higher than normal and only second to IJN 41 cm HE. Due to 25 s reload, the HE dpm beats IJN HE dpm though. Both can give DDs a nasty surprise though.

While I can see why people might get frustrated with some things, what I see here is basically a BB that symbolises exactly what WG advertised when they released these BBs. Good concealment ships that are a bit lackluster in tanking, but with good positioning can have a great impact. It might be, that ironically, Monarch is the "lackluster" ship, because it isn't the cancer that its brethren below and above in the tiers often represent, when many people just fling HE across the map and annoy both teams with their gameplay. Monarch certainly can do that too, but the fire chance and the need for spotter plane make HE spam a tactic that is often not available and almost never rewarding enough to be standard MO. HE spamming in a Monarch is about as effective as HE spamming in an Amagi. HE shells have their use, but few would ever recommend using Amagi HE as standard ammo. Similarly, Monarch is a very AP focused ship. And it has the AP shells to actually pull it off. Given that Lion and Conqueror AP also is serviceable, it might even be that Monarch is supposed to serve as a learning experience to get away from habits that were often necessary in KGV, though the return of high fire chance shells lead many to return to brainless long range HE spam.

 

What gave me results in Monarch was to play it like most other BBs, with a few quirks that were situationally handy. Play at medium range, try to put the dpm to good use. In regards to tankiness, top tier, Monarch is usually tanky enough to not worry too much, as T8s can take apart T7s easily if they play their cards right. Monarch especially outspots T7s and at 12 km with its dpm advantage is a foe that is very painful to deal with when it suddenly shows up. Bottom tier, Monarch naturally has to keep its armour in mind. With stuff like Worcester, Des Moines, Harugumo, Yamato and Musashi being very common (as well as the other cruisers with less dpm), Monarch can take some hits, but it is not some Bismarck that can just shrug off considerable amounts of damage. Here again, medium distance is advised. Monarch makes a great second-line BB (which means, you sit a couple kilometres behind the tankier BB, not half your range). If you find some ship to accompany that draws attention, you might easily be able to use the rear turret and use your dpm that is comparable to T9 levels really. Just keep the guns singing, smack those people with AP. If you actually do get attacked, angle in and go invisible, if the tank starts dying and the situation looks not good enough for you to keep pushing, just start your turn and kite. Obviously, Monarch often cannot afford to just play second fiddle to some bigger BB and might have to play on its own. In that case, use your concealment, islands, the minimap (with settings that are useful anyways, like enabling last known position) and your brain to plan out your positioning. Even at T10, Monarch can tank, if it is controlled tanking. It cannot Yamato-style sit bow-in and let a Worcester rain on its deck for 5 minutes and not care (which btw is also only something I'd recommend, if it actually means that it takes the Worcester dpm away from hurting allies that can actually be reliably penned by it). Monarch can still tank normal AP rounds and while HE hurts, often it might be that taking a few hits for the team is better than forcing some ally with less hp to take it or having the enemy overrun a position. However, as with all BBs, it's best to know how to avoid getting locked down in a position by being able to just vanish or duck into cover and Monarch is good at the first and second is up to you to plan out. Going up against targets that can hurt you, the best approach often is to use your dpm and just kill it faster than it kills you. Overall, Monarch needs positioning skills. It might have 28 knots and poor range, but if you ever tried make USN BBs in the mid tiers work, then you should know how to plan ahead. Monarch is not even that bad and it gets some tools like the concealment, which Colorado for example doesn't get. It also pays off to note that Monarch while not a Bismarck is not that special in its vulnerabilities either. Amagi, Kii, Richelieu and Gascogne are all as much coated in 32 mm armour and arguably worse off in the citadel protection. NC has a better deck plating, but when caught broadside, it gets citadelled easily. Basically, the only thing outright tankier in every aspect is a Bismarck or Tirpitz. But that shouldn't be too surprising.

 

As for gunnery, Monarch gets a lot of flak for having inconsistent gunnery. Which kind of is the case at times, but nowhere close to how much people like to complain. Monarch's guns aren't earth-shattering like some Musashi at T9, or West Virginia at T6, but they are certainly nothing to scoff at. What causes people to be annoyed the most is their supposed inaccuracy. The issue here is, Monarch is not inherently more inaccurate than your average BB. It pretty much is your average BB at T8. It has British/USN dispersion model paired with 1.8 sigma, so it will get outperformed by IJN at long range due to better base dispersion and by NC and Alabama at all ranges due to better sigma (or standard deviation). It still is more reliable than the Germans and French with their worse base dispersion and same sigma. There is a certain truth to the statement that Monarch cannot exploit is concealment that well, because it lacks accuracy. I'd not say it is 100% true, but yes, NC can do it at times better, having also great concealment and incredibly accurate shells. However, generally, you do get results and compared to most others, if you miss, you get to try again sooner than anyone else (except Vanguard that shares your reload). Additionally, Monarch's AP is basically standard T8 AP. It is not like with QE, Warspite, Hood, Nelson and KGV, where the AP at times sucks massively, because base penetration is in the dumps. Monarch gets modern AP that is comparable to Bismarck's in base penetration and shell speed. There might be some that think that short-fuze aP will cause more shatters on BBs, but that's nonsense.  Apart from the obvious anti-cruiser advantages, against BBs, the short fuze matters only at range and all it does is cause a shell to detonate early after hitting a thick enough armour plate. In practice, most of the time, it will not matter, because the fuze time is still more than enough to go through a belt, it just will not reach the citadel all the time. Considering how many T8 BBs actually have a citadel that can be reliably reached though, it's often more of a minor issue and when you brawl other BBs like NC, the fuze is long enough to citadel the crap out of that ship. And for all its worth, I citadelled Colorados at 13 km through the bow, because I guess the shell only armed at the frontal citadel bulkhead, not the flimsy 25 mm bow plating. Also, worth noting is that Monarch's shells have over 800 m/s shell velocity, being on German levels there too. Thus, while Monarch is worse than NC in the accuracy department, if you get surprised by a Monarch at anything but short range, you certainly get less reaction time and Monarch has an easier time to snap shots before something can get into cover. It likely isn't a replacement for stellar accuracy, but it is useful. Same deal as to why cruisers hate Republique more than Yamato.

 

Monarch's HE is kind of interesting too. As said before, HE Monarch isn't really that much better than HE Amagi. However, there's two things to be kept in mind: Monarch has 381 mm guns and better concealment. First is a downside that Monarch shares with the Germans and French, having a gun caliber that can be tanked by quite a few cruisers. Unlike the French and certainly unlike the Germans, the high HE dpm of Monarch means that if a cruiser just keeps tanking your AP, switching to HE allows you to still do quite a number on them. If you can avoid getting torp-rushed, something like a Hipper certainly is far less of an issue for a Monarch than it is for a Bismarck. Similarly, if you are in a bow-in contest, 1v1 you win against basically any other T8 BB. The second factor of concealment is basically just that Monarch can try what often is more of a cruiser thing: Move up behind a friendly DD to a cap, wait for the enemy DD, then throw a salvo of HE in their face. Unlike the Japanese, the Monarch has the concealment. Unlike the NC, Monarch has shell speed and damage. You might not hit a lot of shells, but even just hitting two will be over 4k damage. Even for an Akizuki, that is about 20% of its hp. As well as some disabled modules. Monarch's HE is basically what British HE in my opinion should have been: a useful tool for certain tactical uses. Not an almost universal shell that replaces AP as the standard ordnance. Also, it is worth noting that while Monarch has lackluster speed, for when you have to duel DDs, you do have pretty solid turning qualities. while the unicum DD captain will still get torps off on you, it isn't rare to see people underestimate the Monarch in this regard. Given the torp belt though, I obviously cannot recommend blindly rushing DDs though.

 

For build, Monarch is unsurprisingly best with a standard tank build. So:

  • PT (helps with assessing when to use your rear turret, as well as being useful in general)
  • EM (Monarch turrets aren't glacial, but always helps to be faster)
  • SI (extra repair party)
  • CE (get that meme concealment)
  • BoS (would get this first, given that it really helps when you are a prime HE target)
  • AR (your dpm is great and one of the assets of the ship. A percentage buff to your dpm is thus very valuable. Lose half your hp and you are at Jean Bart or FdG levels of reload).
  • FP (likely the best finishing touch. If you actually try to AA spec this ship, which I wouldn't recommend, take either BFT+PM or Manual AA instead)

Module wise:

  • Main Armaments Mod 1 (your secondaries are poor and the AA is too fragile, so it either dies anyway or you don't get shot at)
  • Damage Control Mod 1 (nothing else is worthwhile here)
  • Aiming Systems Mod 1 (only alternative would be AA Mod 1, which would give quite the respectable amount of explosions, thus I wouldn't dismiss it completely. However, the AA is concentrated in mid-range and that's where most of your explosions are, like on all high tier RN BBs. They can't kill a plane in one shot either, which kinda sucks)
  • Damage Control Mod 2 (reduce fire damage further. Rudder is fast enough. Propulsion mod on a BB is questionable)
  • Concealment Systems Mod 1 (what else?)

 

In closing, I want to say that Monarch likely paid a hefty price for its dpm and concealment, but I do see it as the challenge to the player to make it worth the trade. I'm not going to argue that people who hate Monarch are just scrubs without skill, many certainly have good reason to prefer the NC or Amagi or even Bismarck over this ship. Maybe their strengths suit their preferred playstyle more. I'm not going to deny that the others are strong ships in their own right, as I do not think there is such a thing as a truely bad T8 BB (though I did not enjoy them all equally, I can see different strengths and weaknesses, much unlike the aforementioned Bretagne for example, which just begs the question of why it has to be outright worse than everything else). Monarch might look like an NC for people who are too dumb to protect their citadel and like to shoot some HE instead of using superior accuracy, yet, a Monarch that plays its cards right will still 1v1 beat an NC, by breaking the angling deadlock with superior HE or by winning the broadside exchange. This also, in my opinion, is its main upgrade over the KGV, beng actually able to go toe-to-toe with BBs even when not playing on most favourable terms (including the enemy BB having a worse player) and the amount of cruisers that can tank Monarch shells is far less than with KGV.

 

Thank you for reading this. I hope it helps.

 

P.S.: A reminder for people who like the Monarch, there is a free permacamo in the anniversary collection rewards.

 

P.P.S.: I am aware that WG is testing changes to Monarch's citadel. As I'm not privy to what will come of that, I did not comment on that in the main text. I'd argue that if the change goes through, Monarch might be worse off overall, as we can see with NC how waterline cit with overmatchable citadel deck works out. And even with the new repair party, NC isn't tanking citadel hits very well. In this case, Monarch will have to play much more careful. As an upside, the ship has quite the thick belt for its tier, so you can get away with some angling, but yeah, I'm not too convinced. Also, Monarch already should not try to bowtank Yamato shells, as shells falling along the ship very likely hit and overmatch the citadel instead of leaving on the other side or detonating above the deck. With the new citadel, I'm quite pessimistic about that as well. Monarch's new repair party is basically a Warspite heal, which is actually worse than USN BB heal found on NC and as the increase of recoverable damage will mostly just help with HE pens and overmatches, if you play it right (otherwise you might eat citadels outright), NC just eats less of those in the first place due to reinforced deck. Conqueror getting these changes and the lolheal on normal CD vs Montana with the standard non-improved repair party might be balanced, Monarch getting to be basically an NC that has less AA, less gun caliber, less accuracy and less effective hp in exchange for better dpm is kind of questionable. Even Vanguard gets a better repair party and Vanguard is a sturdier ship than Monarch_T for all its worth. Which is sad.

 

Open this at your own peril. It's not important to the evaluation of the ship really.

Spoiler

__monarch_azur_lane_drawn_by_bailingxiao_jiu__sample-07af99050e1e518b055a63dc8f50a1af.thumb.jpg.5833e34e9b7f38d3744ce4b45af5450c.jpg

Couldn't help myself. Wouldn't be a Monarch thread without honouring the great design for Monarch in the AL collab. It's what made me actually get this ship and try to make it work, given how powerful she is in her AL version. I'd hope we one day get her as collab captain like Neptune and Azuma.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,199 posts
9,087 battles
8 hours ago, Cagliostro_chan said:

Obviously, Monarch often cannot afford to just play second fiddle to some bigger BB and might have to play on its own. In that case, use your concealment, islands, the minimap (with settings that are useful anyways, like enabling last known position) and your brain to plan out your positioning. Even at T10, Monarch can tank, if it is controlled tanking. It cannot Yamato-style sit bow-in and let a Worcester rain on its deck for 5 minutes and not care (which btw is also only something I'd recommend, if it actually means that it takes the Worcester dpm away from hurting allies that can actually be reliably penned by it). Monarch can still tank normal AP rounds and while HE hurts, often it might be that taking a few hits for the team is better than forcing some ally with less hp to take it or having the enemy overrun a position. However, as with all BBs, it's best to know how to avoid getting locked down in a position by being able to just vanish or duck into cover and Monarch is good at the first and second is up to you to plan out. Going up against targets that can hurt you, the best approach often is to use your dpm and just kill it faster than it kills you. Overall, Monarch needs positioning skills.

After having posted this and having gone to bed, I realised, I forgot to point out something:

Yes, I say if you play Monarch for support, try to apply your dpm. However, when I say work with smart positioning, then that includes naturally that you should keep an eye out for potential ambushes. For those, you might have to stop firing for a bit to get your concealment back, but if you can catch targets out, it certainly can be worth it. Catching something like a Russian cruiser broadside for example is an easy chance to remove some strong ship from the game, earn yourself a good bit of damage and maybe a devstrike medal. Bonus points when it is a Moskva or Stalingrad. Typically, I almost never play Monarch stationary, but move around at all times, which given Monarch's speed and range serves also to properly keep up with the flow of the battle. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ARYA]
Players
597 posts
15,541 battles

Nice explanations . i will try to use them on battle thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LAFIE]
Beta Tester
4,853 posts
5,332 battles

Same here, much appreciated. Not been sure what to expect of her now that I am closing in on her myself..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
181 posts
7,960 battles

I can see some problems with your post.

1- The DPM. It may seem very good vs a N. Carolina or Amagi but its only 1 second faster then Bismarck/Tirpitz. And they are faster and have much better secundaries.

2-Bow tanking vs other tier8 BBs. Most of the time the Monarch loses badly. I know this from playing other tier 8 vs him.

3- And most important. I 100% disagree with what you said about KG V AP shels. They can consistently damage to other tier 7 BBs. The same cant be said about Monarch AP shels.Same can be said about the armour vs AP shels.

Most of my bad opinion of the Monarch, comes from doing batlles against him and now that i have him, my opinion only gets worse with every game.It really feels a big downgrade from KG V.

Any way great post. I will try your advices, again ... Maybe i will change my opinion. :Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,199 posts
9,087 battles
4 hours ago, mirage77 said:

I can see some problems with your post.

1- The DPM. It may seem very good vs a N. Carolina or Amagi but its only 1 second faster then Bismarck/Tirpitz. And they are faster and have much better secundaries.

2-Bow tanking vs other tier8 BBs. Most of the time the Monarch loses badly. I know this from playing other tier 8 vs him.

3- And most important. I 100% disagree with what you said about KG V AP shels. They can consistently damage to other tier 7 BBs. The same cant be said about Monarch AP shels.Same can be said about the armour vs AP shels.

Most of my bad opinion of the Monarch, comes from doing batlles against him and now that i have him, my opinion only gets worse with every game.It really feels a big downgrade from KG V.

Any way great post. I will try your advices, again ... Maybe i will change my opinion. :Smile_honoring:

Tirpitz and Bismarck both have not just 1 whole second worse reload, they have 1 gun less. And yes, 1/3 of Monarch's dpm is on a rear turret with meh angle, but on the Germans it's 1/2 that is on back turrets with not really much better angles. As to the rest, it doesn't matter as much. Monarch has better concealment by far, especially if the Bismarck or Tirpitz run the secondary spec. In a 1v1, Monarch can basically crap on both, given you just turn around and kite, they do not have enough speed to catch you for Tirpitz torps and the secondaries mostly have so little pen that the main gun dpm advantage of the Monarch is more relevant.

As to bow tanking, Monarch basically only takes damage from superstructure hits, like any BB. The superstructure does not have enough hp to really sink the ship. Meanwhile Monarch HE pens pretty much anything. NC AP also might do some decent damage at range, due to being slow enough to plunge, but if you are losing vs a NC at range, there is something wrong about how you play this ship.

KGV AP is on Mutsu's level, but without the overmatch. KGV AP fails to do crap all if the enemy BB (or 25 mm cruiser) actually starts to angle. KGV AP also fails to pen even just slightly armoured belt of sturdier BBs at range. Yes, if you are firing at broadside cruisers or at broadside BBs that are sub-10 km, the AP works, but otherwise, it's worthless. As a result, KGV often will have to resort to HE, which is not an adequate replacement. KGV AP is workable the same way PEF AP is workable at T6. and yes, firing HE at bow-in BBs works, but can be not enough dpm to put a threat down. I know that from playing Gneisenau against them. If they are not kiting, KGV is like the most easy target to pick on, because they just cannot hurt you fast enough for you to not just delete them with torps. Similarly, other ships with overmatch can utterly demolish KGV, like Nelson, Hood, Nagato, Colorado, Ashitaka or anything of T7 and above and the KGV AP only really matters when you get their broadside at short to medium range. By contrast, Monarch gets shells that aren't exceptionally garbage for its tier and while it cannot pen other T8s through the bow, no T8 can do that to its peers. While you no longer get tanked by Clevelands or Mogamis.

 

Also, as a general update, as I heard of the changes to Monarch_T, the test version of new Monarch: as long as you don't run into Yamato/Musashi, this might just be straight up lulzy. Monarch likely will basically tank sub-46 cm AP the way Roma does, with proper angling and a ton of belt armour and while it still might eat pens, being able to recover 85% of that is just ridiculous. The 32 mm citadel deck also should make it far more resistant to anything not hitting the citadel belt. The heal buff looks nice, but basically adds up to giving her about as much potential hp as an Amagi (~121k). Though Monarch can likely get the full value out of most repairs if it doesn't eat citadels. Kinda like a different flavour of what we already got with Vanguard.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,199 posts
9,087 battles
4 hours ago, mirage77 said:

2-Bow tanking vs other tier8 BBs. Most of the time the Monarch loses badly. I know this from playing other tier 8 vs him.

 

37 minutes ago, Cagliostro_chan said:

As to bow tanking, Monarch basically only takes damage from superstructure hits, like any BB. The superstructure does not have enough hp to really sink the ship. Meanwhile Monarch HE pens pretty much anything. NC AP also might do some decent damage at range, due to being slow enough to plunge, but if you are losing vs a NC at range, there is something wrong about how you play this ship.

In the interest of being fair and making fact-based claims, I tried it out in training battle, matching NC vs Monarch, NC vs NC and Monarch vs NC. The results pretty much tell me what I suspected is the case.

 

NC vs Monarch looks like this:

Spoiler

shot-19_04.11_01_53.42-0060.thumb.jpg.01af38997194c912ac9df8c4f0394e4c.jpg

That's over 9k and a disabled turret from superstructure pens. Looks impressive and happens. The turret later got fully disabled. Bow itself was impervous.

Clearly, Monarch must be utterly crap! Well, let's test NC vs NC.

Spoiler

shot-19_04.11_02_03.26-0319.thumb.jpg.8d5a9547ea64b7a593698d98da402df0.jpg

7.7k to bow on NC. At times got more, at times got less. Nc overall also lost one turret fully and had a second one disabled.

So, it shows, this is a case of #JustNCThings, not of Monarch being especially trash. Also, highlights why main armaments mod should be taken.

 

Lastly, Monarch vs NC:

Spoiler

shot-19_04.11_02_14_14-0981.thumb.jpg.4ce93705ad6d58dc7f5a89bfbf10f537.jpg

While less frequent, due to the faster shells (making Monarch more comparable to what you can expect from non-USN BBs), these shots were possible. Just like with NC, there were lots of overpens and 1-4k salvos though, which I don't bother to upload, because that'd be tedious. However, there is the question why to bother with AP, when Monarch can do this too:

shot-19_04.11_02_16.31-0690.thumb.jpg.d852983e15b046cb7735c70da267a8b5.jpg

That's 11k damage and two fires.

Given that if you put them out Monarch likely sets more in two salvos (USN damecon is longer than Monarch reload), overall the combination of raw HE damage and fires will grind your BB down faster than Monarch succumbs to AP pens and overpens on its superstructure. Especially if the enemy is not an NC/Alabama/Massachusetts, but some Bismarck, Amagi or Richelieu. Note that IJN HE dpm isn't that far behind though and an Amagi/Kii could technically do the same if they actually realise that their HE shells are 6.5k alpha nukes.

 

Also, given 11k salvos with HE, why stay with AP you might ask? Why not just load HE all the time like the typical RN BB? First off, 4k salvos do exist too, but they can set fires. Issue is, only bow in, HE will do consistently more than AP. On broadside, at sub-10 km, you can load AP and do very consistently 10k and more, while HE can still give you those lulzy 4k salvos. I had salvos on Tirpitz do 19k in AP, which you wouldn't ever get from an HE salvo. Obviously against cruisers or BBs with reachable citadel, the difference is even greater. That's why you keep AP and use HE as some backup ammo that isn't bad, but basically your plan B. Also, the obvious, even if a 4k+fire adds up to maybe 11k too, in an engagement you usually want enemies to die sooner rather than later. Fire is damage spread out over time, pen damage is instantanous. A fire might be dameconned once one is no longer being shot at or if it gets too dangerous, pen damage has no such issues. Thus, HE is basically just best used when AP just cannot give the better result, so fighting against targets that you don't overmatch or DDs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
181 posts
7,960 battles

Again from recente experince with the KG V, i disagree with you 100%. I never had any problem doing damage to any Tier 7 BB with AP. At any range. Even in 1 vs 2 . In one of my last games with it, i faced a Gneisenau and a Nagato  and killed both.Ok they werent the best players in that batlle, but i did consistent damage with AP even when angled. Just aim at the superstruture. And when they arent angled...

As for Bismarck/Tirpitz, the Monarch has a 4km advantage in concealment. Ok thats a great advantage. But every time it fires, it disappers. Before Monarch goes invisible again, at least half of that distance its gone. The 2 times it fires, there is no more concealment advantage and the secundaries start doing damage. I dont think you are giving  enough atention to the damage they can do.

Any way thanks for your replay. I dint give up on the Monarch... yet. I just realy realy hate it. :Smile_great:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,199 posts
9,087 battles
35 minutes ago, mirage77 said:

Again from recente experince with the KG V, i disagree with you 100%. I never had any problem doing damage to any Tier 7 BB with AP. At any range. Even in 1 vs 2 . In one of my last games with it, i faced a Gneisenau and a Nagato  and killed both.Ok they werent the best players in that batlle, but i did consistent damage with AP even when angled. Just aim at the superstruture. And when they arent angled...

First off, good luck aiming at the superstructure specifically on a moving ship at range. Superstructure sniping you can do at short range. I didn't say the aP does not work at short to medium ranges. But KGV is the least effective BB at long range in regards to AP at T7. Only comparable case is the Scharnhorst. Additionally, when you only get to shoot superstructure on angled targets, then that's also an issue, as the superstructure will run out of hp. Meanwhile good AP will do decent damage also on the hull. It's like saying PEF AP is good. It can kill ships, it can be useful, but when you just shatter at range and can't overmatch, it is hard to categorise it as good. Meanwhile Monarch does overmatch 25 mm plating and can for example kill something like a Charles Martel before it torp rushes it.

42 minutes ago, mirage77 said:

As for Bismarck/Tirpitz, the Monarch has a 4km advantage in concealment. Ok thats a great advantage. But every time it fires, it disappers. Before Monarch goes invisible again, at least half of that distance its gone. The 2 times it fires, there is no more concealment advantage and the secundaries start doing damage. I dont think you are giving  enough atention to the damage they can do.

The concealment advantage is an advantage at the start, because it allows you to engage or just avoid engagement, or to get into a position to get a good shot at the enemy before they angle. Afterwards, the mere fact that 20 out of 25 seconds you are spotted from gun bloom makes it rather unusable, but by then you can just straight up trade blows. Monarch angled can tank Bismarck AP. And if Bismarck angles, just fire HE. If a Bismarck tries to do the same in return, German HE is terrible, Monarch should win every time. Secondaries don't matter. The 15 cm guns have terrible dpm, the 10.5 cm guns have not even enough pen to damage your superstructure. Bismarck secondaries are maybe intimidating, but not an existential issue and compared to Monarch main battery HE, even their fire setting is not good. If Monarch eats maybe the odd 4k per Bismarck salvo and 2 fires, that's a splendid trade compared to the 5-10k it will hand right back with even more fires.

49 minutes ago, mirage77 said:

Any way thanks for your replay. I dint give up on the Monarch... yet. I just realy realy hate it. :Smile_great:

As said before, I'm not going to argue that this ship is the best ever. But in my experience, it gets the tools to get the job done. In competitive settings, for CB, I'd likely prefer the NC or Amagi, while for ranked, I'd take NC or Kii instead. But the main reason for that is that in CB, accuracy trumps mere shell output and NCs HE resistance matters more than the better citadel protection, while for ranked, NC or Kii bring better AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
181 posts
7,960 battles

Actually the few time i have seen a Bismarck go 1vs1 with a Monarch, the Bismarck always wins. Maybe it was the players, but i never seen a Monarch win duel like that.

I dont think i will agree with on this but it was a nice talk.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,333 posts

I have the Monarch, in fact got her before I even got the Bismarck, I like the Bismarck, the Monarch is just a port queen, just something about her, maybe because she is British, which in most cases means crap, I may take her out later for a quick game, but what ca  she do, she has no outstanding range, neither does he have the awesome German secondaries, I fear I will not be carrying on with the Brit line of BB's as there seems nothing which stands out among them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,199 posts
9,087 battles
22 minutes ago, NoobySkooby said:

I have the Monarch, in fact got her before I even got the Bismarck, I like the Bismarck, the Monarch is just a port queen, just something about her, maybe because she is British, which in most cases means crap, I may take her out later for a quick game, but what ca  she do, she has no outstanding range, neither does he have the awesome German secondaries, I fear I will not be carrying on with the Brit line of BB's as there seems nothing which stands out among them.

Which is why Orion is a preferred sealclubber, Iron Duke is a solid T5, Warspite gets lauded as best T6 BB, Nelson leads T7 BBs, though KGV leads T7 tech tree BBs and Hood with recent buffs is going strong too, British cruisers past Emerald are consistently considered powerful high skill ships, British DDs also are hardly crap with stuff like Jutland and Daring being quite ok. Maybe Brit CVs are a bit underwhelming at times.

 

As said before, what stands out with Monarch is a 25 s reload on 9 guns. Highest dpm of any T8 BB. Also, great concealment.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,199 posts
9,087 battles

Alright, finished collecting 180k exp to get to Lion. While I also had a few terrible games (like with any ship really), overall, I found Monarch a somewhat reliable ship. It isn't outstanding in most categories other than reload, concealment and HE performance, but I find these easier strengths to put to use than for example secondaries. As I already stated in my first post, I do understand why some people don't feel comfortable with this ship, but I do think that the ship itself is still competitive.

 

Also, in current CV meta, it really helps not getting dumpstered by AP bombers like some Bismarck/Tirpitz.

 

Now, onwards to Lion I go, though Monarch will stay in port.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×