As many high tier battleship players are aware, there is a noticeable difference between the three current tier ten battleships – Yamato, Montana and Großer Kurfürst (G.K.). As of the writing of this article Warships.Today reports the Yamato as the top performing ship, followed closely by the G.K. then the Montana (Table 1)[1]. Each ship has a slightly difference play style, which has largely been carried down through their respective tech trees. These differences in play style, in the hands of a good captain, should lead to similar performance statistics among the three top tier battle ships if the ships are truly balanced. Most players who have sailed all three, or at least the original two (Montana and Yamato), know that this is not the case and that the Montana tends to perform worse than the other two. This has also been noted by several community contributors in both the EU and NA. But is this a case of confirmation bias? As Table 1. outlines, though the win rates for the top two ships are identical, there is a difference in their damage, but is that difference significant? Further, there is a notable difference between the Montana and the other two ships, like before, are these differences significant? These are the questions I have sought to answer and have analyzed my current data batch to do just that.

The Data

All the data was obtained from which is using the Wargaming API to collect data on every player in every ship on both the North American (NA) and European (EU) servers. A statistical program called SPSS was used to download that data from and randomly selected 5% of the download data. This equated to over 3,250,000 cases of over 308,000 Players by 223 Ships, meaning for every player ID as many as 223 individual ship stats may be included, in the case of Testers and Community Contributors. From these cases, only those battles that included the ships with ShipID 4179572528 (Großer Kurfürst), 4276041424 (Yamato) and 4277090288 (Montana) [2] were selected for this analysis. This included 10,303 cases with an average of 85 battles in the G.K., 120 battles in the Yamato and 99 battles in the Montana[3]. It is worth further noting that this data is over 34 days old at the time of writing this article, and due to only being a 5% sample, and from both the NA and EU servers, there will be differences than those shown in Table 1.

The Analysis

Using the new filtered dataset of only the three tier ten battleships, as described above, a one-way ANOVA (analysis of variance) was conducted with Post Hoc tests to outline the exact differences between each ship. Both player average Win Rate and average Damage were analyzed along with the untrimmed versions[4] of the new Ship Rating and Aggression Rating (Fig. 1). The results of the ANOVA showed significant differences, beyond a 95% confidence interval, in all areas except Aggression (Fig. 2). Further post hoc analysis (Fig. 3) revealed that indeed, there are significant performance differences between all ships. Our current dataset showed a significant Win Rate difference between the Montana and other two ships, but not between the G.K. and the Yamato. Similarly, the same could be found for the average damage per battle. However, significant differences were found between all ships with the Ship rating, with the Yamato placing first with an average score of 125.96, followed by the G.K. with a score of 119.14 and the Montana being the poorest performing ship with an average score of 108.15.


Without a doubt, there are statistically significant performances differences between all the ships. Though it could be argued that these could be due to the differences in sheer battles played and each either as a result of popularity, ease of play or age in game, the analysis using the current data would nullify any of those arguments. It is now vividly clear that the Yamato still holds supreme as being the most powerful battleship in the game, with the G.K. close on its heels in second place. With time, however, I could see the G.K. contest the Yamato for first, but the current overall meta of the game would have to change for that to occur. Sadly though, the Montana is in a distance third place, easily out matched both the other ships. This can be explained by the fact that both the Yamato and G.K. simply have a better overall damage per minute when you include their secondaries. It is worth noting for the nay sayers however, that even though the Montana is easier to citadel than both the other ships, and has less of a heal; its survivability is not significantly different than the Yamato but significantly better than the G.K (see Fig 4. and Fig 5.).

If we hope to see the Montana become more competitive with the other two tier ten battleships, she will need a significant buff to her performance. This will likely have to be done by boosting her rate of fire. With time, maybe this will happen, but it seems that as far as Wargaming is concerned, the Montana is performing just fine so we will just have to sit and wait…

Table 1.

Battles Win Rate Damage XP
Yamato 791,630 51.23% 88,713 1,667
Großer Kurfürst 292,680 51.23% 85,851 1,576
Montana 579,381 49.17% 75,995 1,573

Figure 1


Figure 2


Figure 3


Figure 4


Figure 5


[1] – Only the NA server data, Accessed 5/9/2017

[2] Due to the limitations of SPSS, the WG API’s ship ID had to be used as a defining factor as opposed to the ships actual name.

[3] All means were rounded up to the nearest whole battle.

[4] Other versions of the ratings have been created that ignore players with ships that have less than 10 battles and less than 15 battles. This has been done to limit extremes which have a tendency to skew mean averages, but most importantly the standard deviations.

Liked it? Take a second to support Warship News on Patreon!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.