Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

28 Neutral

About jss78

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Location
    EU main

Recent Profile Visitors

169 profile views
  1. jss78

    Whaddayamean the PEF is bad..??

    I've really enjoyed her, overall. Her single problem is the performance of the guns against tough target. The guns work very well against equal-tier cruisers etc. Apart from that, she basically only has strengths. Gun accuracy, speed, firing angles, secondaries and AA are all excellent. Tankiness is about average for a T6 BB, which considering the speed of this ship makes her relaxing to play. Any semblance of balance on this ship would probably involve kind of lacklustre guns, considering all these strengths. Like putting Bayern guns on this platform would create a blatantly OP ship at T6. But maybe they are just a bit too weak right now.
  2. I ran into two Minotaurs in a single game tonight. Was guarding a cap in my Musashi. Honestly, my experience shooting at them doesn't motivate me to grind these ships.
  3. A German speaker on the EU forums informed me that when used as a first name, the meaning is actually "Shining Sword", which is a bit more awe-inspiring. I presume this is what our Prince Eitel's father (Kaiser Wilhelm) was thinking of. Based on Wikipedia, it's a really old name among German nobility, and the meaning and usage has probably drifted over time.
  4. Out of interest, I looked up the translation of "Eitel". I think all you guys who hate this ship will find this humorous. Big Fred at Tier 9 now joined by Worthless Fred at Tier 6? (But I still like this ship.)
  5. I'm liking this ship quite a lot. Maybe it's because I really love the whole BC play style. I don't find the guns so hopeless. It's a bit like in the Hood, you just have to shoot a bit higher against tougher targets. I'm running a Bismarck manual-secondary captain, and while not optimal at T6, those secondaries are really good. Had some incredibly fun games charging down a flank and wrecking face in close quarters. I'm presently not at all convinced this ship needs a buff, but long-term stats will tell. If I WERE to buff this thing slightly, I'd love faster turning turrets and maybe a faster reload. Closer to Scharnhorst values. One thing's for sure -- with that speed, brawling prowess, and AA, it's going to be a super fun ship for Operations. And didn't cost me anything. Not complaining.
  6. Great ship, but not easy to play. 200 mm American AP and radar is a monster combo at Tier VII. But -- you have to position VERY carefully. When you show yourself, you NEED to achieve stuff quick -- but you do have the tools for this. I really enjoy the challenges (and rewards) she presents.
  7. jss78

    Downvote farming - controversial post inside!

    One thing I'd bear in mind is, there's really a limited supply of ship lines you can add anyway. This game is fairly young, as far as life cycles of generally successful F2P games go. And most "obvious" lines of ships are already in the game. Missing are essentially RN CV's (due in a couple weeks), French DD's and the Italians. And that's it. What this means is, this game will be getting lots of paper ships ANYWAY. And at that the Russian BB designs would have to be used anyway. And it's OK -- at least they had designs, and were (and remain) in the grand scheme of things a relatively important naval power.
  8. The way I see it, WG is actually handling battlecruisers ust fine. There were basically two types of ships that were variously called battlecruisers or possibly something else. First you have ships which were essentially down-armoured and/or downgunned BB's -- Myogi, Ishizuchi, P. Eitel Friedrich and such. These are WW1 or immediate post-WW1 ships. Then you have later Alaskas which were purely enlarged cruiser designs. In WoWS these are logically classified based on their design origins, with the first group put in as BB's and the latter as cruisers. I don't see the issue here. What does it matter what WoWS classifies a ship? Just look at the ship features, and if it seems like something you'd enjoy playing, by all means play it.
  9. jss78

    secondaries need major buffage

    My problem with secondaries is, we only really have a handful of ships that can do anything of significance with their secondaries A few Germans and Massachusetts -- and arguably some French BB's -- at T7 and above do work. These ships are not the problem. It's all the other ships. Manual Secondaries has this inexplicable, binary reduction in performance at T6 compared to T7. This skill is straight not worth 4 points at T6 and below. The end result is, if I take something like a T6 BB, with BFT, AFT and the secondary upgrade (but no manual secondaries) -- the secondaries are really, REALLY weak. I basically have to sail at 2 km of target to get a significant number of hits. Despite what's a fairly significant investment into the secondaries. Right now it's like some ships have these crazy secondaries everyone's conscious off -- and on all other ships they're nonexistent. Shouldn't be like this.
  10. jss78

    The hardest two ship grind?

    I struggled in really hard in Phoenix and Omaha too. It was more that they're hard to play ships many people hit very early in their Warships career. You come from the pseudo-BB St. Louis and come to these ships where WASD hax -- which you don't yet possess -- are the only thing keeping you alive. Today as an experienced player I adore my Marblehead. Pensacola and New Orleans, in T7-8 back them, also sucked. I rage-sold the Pensacola TWICE before finally making it to Baltimore. I think it was also a skill floor thing -- with those ships you need to position well and really know how to work that AP. Langley+Bogue were tough. It wasn't that they're weak (I went through them when they still had manual attacks), the 1/1/0 Bogue was excellent in fact. But they were so... very... slow. I died many times because at 15 knots you just couldn't keep up with your team. It was a breath of fresh air when you hit the Independence and literally went twice as fast.
  11. jss78

    Forced to play CV's

    You don't need to complete either of those missions to finish the directive. It seems someone is forcing you to play CV's, but it's not WG.
  12. I'm not too concerned about the AA at this juncture. That's a thing that can be fixed by tuning some parameters. I think I'll get flak for this but I believe WG are in fact not idiots, and will tune the AA strength as necessary. I'm more concerned about core gameplay mechanics which can't be easily fixed. I'm just really concerned that the gameplay isn't quite interesting enough. Already in test server I'm a little bored of the fly out-bomb-repeat gameplay. Maybe it'll turn out more tactically interesting in a "live" environment with 23 other humans -- I hope so. I'm also concerned about how fun these CV's are to play against. There's a real conundrum in the design I think -- you want to give the CV player an opportunity to fly out quickly and do strikes at a rapid pace. This is all there is for him to do anyway, and otherwise it'd get really boring. But for the ship being targetted, this will mean an ENDLESS stream of strike planes coming in. They said they hope to remove all limitations on CV's in MM. I think this would be a horrible idea. Being mobbed by three CV's coordinating on TS would be enough to make a person uninstall.
  13. jss78

    Playing the Kronshtadt

    I'm not the greatest player with her, but for me the TL;DR is ... she's still a radar heavy cruiser. I find her quite comfortable coming from 100+ games in the Des Moines. Against cruisers and (too) bravely angled BB's your AP does tremendous work. HE is useful enough to lean back on if necessary, but hopefully not too often. Like in Des Moines, I still try to support team mates in pushing caps. She's relaxing to play because it's still familiar enough, for a radar cruiser veteran -- I can do the same stuff -- but for the first time ever, I can actually tank quite a few shots (provided I angle well).
  14. I'm actually having a hard time thinking of an irredeemable stinker at T6.