Jump to content

Muninn77

Members
  • Content Сount

    603
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    4961
  • Clan

    [STURM]

Community Reputation

333 Excellent

About Muninn77

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

1,370 profile views
  1. Muninn77

    STOP charging us to play higher tiers

    If you have spent money, especially on premium time and permanent camouflages, and still can't make money back, sorry to say but... PEBCAK.
  2. Muninn77

    "italain ships have good handling and maneuverability tho"

    Except Brindisi is the fastest cruiser at the tier (it only loses to the Saint-Loius using engine boosting), has the third best turning circle (20M behind the Neptune and 10M behind the Saint-Loius), and places forth in rudder shift (behind the Seattle, Ibuki and DM Donskoi). Honestly, barring the Neptune, she's the most agile cruiser at the tier, and she's still much better in a straight line than the RN ship. Seriously, why do you keep playing these ships if they work you up to the point you make multiple complaint threads per day? Play something you like, for Pete's sake.
  3. Muninn77

    DDs are NOT larger than they should be.

    Do you have anything to say about his other points? You know, that the game heavily buffs destroyers from the concealment system alone? Not to mention things like torpedo reloads, there being no rough seas affecting destroyer accuracy, and radar being much rarer in game than was historical? You know, all those things that are necessary destroyers to be relevant in a game where there can be just as many, if not more battleships than destroyers? And you are whining about shells having buffed hit rates, while overlooking the fact that having historical shell accuracy would make this game boring as [edited]. That's the root of the problem right there. You keep talking about wanting this game to be more "historical," (something that drastically contradicts your anti-BB bias, BTW) but missing the fact that that would make a absolutely terrible 12vs12 PvP game.
  4. WG, I honestly think you've made some good strides with the last few patches, with the general way you've handled the the RN heavy cruiser event. But I really have to ask: Why. The [edited]. Would you make the effort to remove in game information about our AA status? Well, I just took an HE salvo and lost a bunch of AA guns. Wish I could know what type of guns they were, but I guess that information was detrimental to my experience with the game. And I agree, WG, I should simply have memorized the different AA ranges on each ship. Silly me, wanting the in-depth information screen to have in-depth information. I realize that overall this is a minor thing, but it still blows my mind that they went through the effort to remove information on the current performance of your AA guns when one of the current biggest complaints is that they're isn't enough feedback on the current performance of your AA guns.
  5. Muninn77

    Is there a USN bias in this game

    He asked for a list of OP American ships, and I gave it to him. Nothing more, nothing less. And you're missing a few other clunkers in your rush to strawman me. Farragut, Phoenix, Ranger, New Mexico, Colorado, Marblehead, and Saipan, just to name a few. And finally, does every thread need to be about the new RU cruisers? This is a thread about OP American ships, there are plenty of other threads to talk about those in.
  6. Muninn77

    Is there a USN bias in this game

    Enterprise, Massachusetts, Georgia, Benham, Clemson, Kidd, Worcester, and Black, just off the top of my head. Probably a few I missed as well.
  7. Muninn77

    P button for shutting AA

    Sort of, but your air detection in a ship is much smaller than the surface detection. For example, my stealth built Daring has a surface detection of 6KM, but an air detection range of 2.8KM. That means a total spotting area of 24.6 square kilometers from the air. If my AA is on, however, planes will spot me in the air from 5.8KM away. That works out to a spotting area of 105.7 square kilometers from the air, more than 4 times more than if my AA is off. So, yeah. In most cases, wandering around with your AA on in a DD is just asking to get spotted.
  8. Sounds like it was in one of the weather patterns, either a thunderstorm or blizzard. Those reduce the detection range of all ships, as well as cutting the firing bloom penalty to 8 seconds, instead of twenty.
  9. Muninn77

    DD's Help me understand

    Sorry dude, but even taking smoke out of the equation, there are just too many possibilities for us to give you a concrete answer. Just off the top of my head: * He could have extinguished a fire. * He could have left someone's radar/hydro range. * Someone's radar/hydro ran out of time. * Twenty seconds passed since he last shot his guns. * He entered a thunderstorm/blizzard area. So...yeah, there are too many possibilities for me to say one way or another. And just an FYI, next time this happens, you don't need to capture a video. The game captures your last 30 replays in a file, (called "replays") automatically for you. You can use the WoWs game to open them, and then you can post the file here so we can look and give you a definitive answer. Hope this helps.
  10. It's got something to do with the blast radius of the torps, right? In fact, I recall that you said the torpedoes were bugged way back when the ship launched. Was that just...whatever is going on? I gotta admit, as someone who's been playing a lot of the Black lately, I'm curious about what's going on with the torps.
  11. Muninn77

    WOWS -Profanity filter

    So, the OP has gone from whining about his chat ban to requesting a profanity filter. This isn't some guy who is super offended by some four letter words, this is a guy who wants WG to prevent him from getting chat banned because he can't be bothered to just not say anything.
  12. Muninn77

    DD's Help me understand

    We'll need the replay to figure out what out of the many, many, possiblities happened.
  13. Well, that would at least be more relevant, and would fit into his whole "if you don't think this mod is OP, you hate DDs" narrative he's got going on. Still, I'm gonna pretend that he thinks that not hating absolutely everything WG does makes you one of the 1% or someone who wants to eat the 1%. Its more amusing that way.
  14. Considering he's now bringing up "class warfare" in this discussion, I have to assume that he's just flailing insults in every direction to try to distract from his utter lack of logical reasoning.
  15. I'm curious, how is LWM saying that WG failed to deliver a viable alternative to the concealment module actually defending WG?
×