Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Afghanicus

Alaska VS Puerto Rico

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
2,106 posts
9,536 battles

I guess many of you saw this video...

 

 

What do you think after watching it?

 

Is the Alaska really a better ship overall even tho it's A LOT easier to obtain. (I believe, in theory, you could obtain like 2-3 Alaskas for a grind needed for PR)

 

Is this just a result of too much PR hate (expected) or a true, objective opinion?

 

I mean nobody (well, almost) has the Puerto Rico to say from experience but knowing PR has Montana's dispersion and having access to the stats as well as some CC's video about it.. we can form an opinion I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,404 posts
9,218 battles
1 hour ago, Yoshanai said:

Imagine having a Montana occupying a Cruiser slot. 

It has its benefits. 

PR is not a Montana though, just like Yoshino is no Yamato and Stalingrad is no Kremlin. Not saying Puerto Rico is without merits, but it certainly would be misleading to consider it a Montana in a cruiser slot. It is a tankier cruiser in a cruiser slot.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LADA]
Players
596 posts
8,985 battles

Alaska has quite a lot going for it. It's a very good ship without being OP - nor does it rely on gimmicks or quirks to make it work.

 

1) It's a classic T9 supercruiser - so the firepower of a BB with the utility of a cruiser.

2) It can take on any T7-10 cruiser with a good chance of winning. It can punish BBs. It can be used vs. DDs if need be. It has decent AA. What more do you want?

3) It's at T9 - so you can potentially go up vs. T7s and cause untold carnage. T9 MM is actually one of the better tiers. 

4) It's a real design with real history in real life. Did I mention it's real? 

5) Anyone can grind FXP for it in a reasonable amount of time - it IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE to earn it for free, without spending a penny. Just play the game at your own pace - play the ships/tiers/modes you enjoy. 

6) In the real world (using the front two turrets most of the time) the Alaska has equal firepower to the PR. 

 

So if you are after a decent supercruiser - get the Alaska. If you MUST have 12 guns at T10 - you may as well use a Montana. 

 

That's my take anyway. 

 

 

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,106 posts
9,536 battles
6 hours ago, Yoshanai said:

Imagine having a Montana occupying a Cruiser slot. 

It has its benefits. 

PR has the Montana's dispersion, nothing else as far as I know.

 

So your comment is quite poor IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
5,760 posts
14,436 battles

PR is tankier at close range (actual underwater citadel), but also clumsier.

Also, her higher broadside weight comes into play at close range.

If WG didn't try to prank us that hard, I'd 100% get her for 47€ (two boosters).

She's way closer to BBs in all her characteristics apart from gun caliber.

Tier for tier, Alaska is probably the better ship. Pretty sure, actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
10,364 posts
9,122 battles

People tend to forget, that you have to compare what the enemies get for a ship if you take Alaska or PR. Alaska is matched against Seattle or Roon. While PR is matched against much stronger TX ships.

Alaska on T9 is on the strong side compared to other T9 Cruisers. PR not really.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RO-RN]
Players
901 posts
11,489 battles

Ah yes the ships with very slow shells, crap penetration for the gun caliber, and not so mobile! Meet a great player that is commanding a mobile/farming cruiser( zao,venezia,henry hindenburg) and your battlecruiser is done! Thats why I prefer azuma over alaska and krontrash...azuma gets the job done no matter the circumstances, the rest? I will not show you broadside and you dont have the DPM or the HE shells to burn me down, oh and I might as well overmatch you or burn you down!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
6,794 posts
18 hours ago, Palubarac said:

I guess many of you saw this video...

 

 

What do you think after watching it?

 

Is the Alaska really a better ship overall even tho it's A LOT easier to obtain. (I believe, in theory, you could obtain like 2-3 Alaskas for a grind needed for PR)

 

Is this just a result of too much PR hate (expected) or a true, objective opinion?

 

I mean nobody (well, almost) has the Puerto Rico to say from experience but knowing PR has Montana's dispersion and having access to the stats as well as some CC's video about it.. we can form an opinion I guess.

Alaska is probably better value and maybe better tier for tier then PR but better overall - that remains to be seen, because of the inductive way ballistics are calculated in this game 12 guns nearly always beats 9 guns in number of hits, badly beats them and esp in number of "critical" hits (cits and such) if they are roughly the same caliber and dispersion and your aim is true...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×