Jump to content
CCastiello

Is the Alaska worth it?

17 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[-RM-]
Beta Tester
1,998 posts
7,981 battles

Yes. Put a tanky stealth build on it and play it as a mid range support ship. You are really tanky with solid AA, 'Murica AP and radar to top it off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-SOG-]
Players
404 posts
8,363 battles

It is such a versitile ship, I have same captain on my Alaska, DM and Missouri and it works wonders on all three of them. Alaska bridges the gap perfectly and it feels so flexible, I think I enyoy it the most of the trio! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MORIA]
Players
7,162 posts
33,559 battles
52 minutes ago, affie said:

It is such a versitile ship, I have same captain on my Alaska, DM and Missouri and it works wonders on all three of them. Alaska bridges the gap perfectly and it feels so flexible, I think I enyoy it the most of the trio! 

Missouri and Alaska yes cause you need the shorter duration of fire. But on DM? I have another commender for the DM.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BGNAV]
Players
201 posts
8,095 battles
45 minutes ago, MacArthur92 said:

Missouri and Alaska yes cause you need the shorter duration of fire. But on DM? I have another commender for the DM.

+1

I would understand using a tank/stealth build on Montana/Missouri/Alabama (etc) and slapping the same commander on Alaska. This build fits all those ships. For DM however such build makes no sense. Stealth is good but a tanky build on DM sounds kinda silly (most BBs will citadel it through the bow and fires are not really a concern). Alternatively, all good builds for DM can make some sense on Alaska, but not as much on the BBs.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-SOG-]
Players
404 posts
8,363 battles
9 hours ago, MacArthur92 said:

Missouri and Alaska yes cause you need the shorter duration of fire. But on DM? I have another commender for the DM.

 

I use Commander Halsey as my Des Moines captain and my build is:

 

- Priority Target 

- Expert Loader

- Expert Marksman

- Adrenaline Rush

- Superintendent 

- Demolition Expert 

- Vigilance 

- Concealment Expert

 

It may not be the perfect build for the Missouri in particular but I have never had any problems and it preforms decent on all three ships (+ Texas). I know many who say they need the Fire Prevention skill but I can not say that I have felt the need for it on Alaska (I use flags to reduce the fire impact). If that was the case I would have used my spare John Doe instead of Commander Halsey. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MORIA]
Players
7,162 posts
33,559 battles
10 minutes ago, affie said:

 

I use Commander Halsey as my Des Moines captain and my build is:

 

- Priority Target 

- Expert Loader

- Expert Marksman

- Adrenaline Rush

- Superintendent 

- Demolition Expert 

- Vigilance 

- Concealment Expert

 

It may not be the perfect build for the Missouri in particular but I have never had any problems and it preforms decent on all three ships (+ Texas). I know many who say they need the Fire Prevention skill but I can not say that I have felt the need for it on Alaska (I use flags to reduce the fire impact). If that was the case I would have used my spare John Doe instead of Commander Halsey. 

In the spam of HE meta (incoming Smolensk and Colbert) I really recommend it. 

Ustny DE on Missouri is a real point waste. Use other commander for her. While on Alaska still is useful, on a BB... Nope. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-SOG-]
Players
404 posts
8,363 battles
4 minutes ago, MacArthur92 said:

In the spam of HE meta (incoming Smolensk and Colbert) I really recommend it. 

Ustny DE on Missouri is a real point waste. Use other commander for her. While on Alaska still is useful, on a BB... Nope. 

 

This might be true and probably I will change this when I take my time grinding down the USN BB line and find some tanky build that suits the Montana (already using tank builds on IJN & RN BBs). But so far I have gotten good results and fun games with my build, it suits my playstyle for the trio. 

 

But to get back to the topic of this thread, my point was that the Alaska is very versitile and fun and can preform good both as a CA-build and as a BB-build.

 

What I would warn players whom consider getting her about is that she is a CB and have more or less the same armor as a Des Moines and shall be treated as a battlecruiser. I have met players playing her more like a battleship while using BB-builds and they usually end up in similar fashion as the Royal Navy battlecruisers at Jutland... These players usually complain about Alaska being to squishy and their problem is that they try to play her more like a battleship rather than the battlecruiser she is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MORIA]
Players
7,162 posts
33,559 battles
9 minutes ago, affie said:

 

This might be true and probably I will change this when I take my time grinding down the USN BB line and find some tanky build that suits the Montana (already using tank builds on IJN & RN BBs). But so far I have gotten good results and fun games with my build, it suits my playstyle for the trio. 

 

But to get back to the topic of this thread, my point was that the Alaska is very versitile and fun and can preform good both as a CA-build and as a BB-build.

 

What I would warn players whom consider getting her about is that she is a CB and have more or less the same armor as a Des Moines and shall be treated as a battlecruiser. I have met players playing her more like a battleship while using BB-builds and they usually end up in similar fashion as the Royal Navy battlecruisers at Jutland... These players usually complain about Alaska being to squishy and their problem is that they try to play her more like a battleship rather than the battlecruiser she is.

Yes she can counter other cruisers but not tank a BB, especially T10. It's dependent on the caliber of the enemy. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OCTO]
Players
386 posts
7,560 battles

I am also interested in Alaska but I also got the Kronshtadt. I looked at some reviews and comparisons but still I can't decide if she worth 1mil xp compared to Kronshtadt at 750k.

Anyone has them both and can give some hints ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,979 posts

When t come to actually sailing her, is she like the other US cruisers where you island hump? I have not seen many do this and in some instances in my Alsace, he Constantine secondary fire hardly touches her, how ever when  play her, that is not the case, really confusing ship as she is not a BB,  and not the typical cruiser, a little bit of help on how to position her in game etc, maybe a replay or two would be well handy for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-RM-]
Beta Tester
1,998 posts
7,981 battles
On 8/20/2019 at 3:56 PM, NoobySkooby said:

When t come to actually sailing her, is she like the other US cruisers where you island hump? I have not seen many do this and in some instances in my Alsace, he Constantine secondary fire hardly touches her, how ever when  play her, that is not the case, really confusing ship as she is not a BB,  and not the typical cruiser, a little bit of help on how to position her in game etc, maybe a replay or two would be well handy for me.

She can't island hump that good due to similar shell velocity to that of a BB, so the arcs are not nearly as lazy as the other US cruisers.

 

I would say that she works quite well as an open water boat, due to 38 mm deck and great angling potential. The real selling card about her for me is that great tankiness for a cruiser. Using your good gun angles and putting a lot of hope in your deck armor you can soak a suprising amount of damage.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×