Jump to content

humusz

Member
  • Content Сount

    1,423
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    8728
  • Clan

    [SH0T]

Community Reputation

279 Distinguished

About humusz

  • Rank
    Captain
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

1,134 profile views
  1. Sometimes in future they will be reading lovecraft book and say "hey chap, how cthulhu for that bloody carrier"
  2. Here what I think Admirality office is actualy a pub, where admirals get drunk and pick ship name by Throwing dart then its all sudenly make sense
  3. Meh, from what I see. they random at naming. There Drake class Armored Cruiser (heavy cruiser predacasor) too. and 4th ship in the class named....................Leviathan 4 ship in same class. named after Admiral, a Place, a King and Mythical Creature yeah totaly not random, unprecedented WG mumbo jumbo ps: also it maybe British flavor - Random names lol
  4. from what I see, the TX light cruiser have myth names. if the heavies do the same wont it more consistent lol and they often reuse name of historical old ship, like Siegfried, Fredy, Kurfurst, Izumo, Roon, Hindenburg. which what Navies like to do like there is 7 warship named Enterprise you know. and britsh new SSBN was named Dreadnaught, which actualy not the first sub named Dreadnaught lol. they have more name reboot than holywood
  5. There NEP2 and MINOTOUR. Uk naming convention is always more random than anyone else
  6. humusz

    What the HMS Hood Should've been

    When its only colbert : Ok - it seems not bad Then Ohio come : This NTC will deffinitly trending lol
  7. humusz

    What the HMS Hood Should've been

    Despite how ntc is viewed by comunity, but when seeing how many Ohio in game - its deffinitly will become trending.
  8. humusz

    What the HMS Hood Should've been

    Hood alr premium, her final form would locked behind ntc wall
  9. humusz

    What the HMS Hood Should've been

    Gneisenau is what if too rite doesnt german line released close to hood
  10. also The Midway one is 127/54 Mk 16 (midway-harekaze) is diffrent from cold war 127/54 Mk 42. Mk 42 is freshly developed in 1950. it diffrent in Mk16 in everyway aside from same caliber. but they both can share same ammo
  11. 127/48 is design in 1940. It dont have autoloader. Your pic is 127/54 that like 1960 standard. It and actualy can fire 48 shell a min. Its mod still used by today navies lol. Its different gun, its mod 4 is like still used in Arleigh Burke class
  12. Thats why I said trading gun performance with less gun is marginal at best and We have sub soon aint it ? You can play harekaze with the setup, and consider if Gearing with same setup is worth losing 3 gun over
  13. That because seattle is a turd. the turret angle is one of the worst you have ever play, and the AA is laughable
  14. 127/54 mount is around 30 percent heavier. Thats why irl its canceled (the twin version). They see it no point if the increased gun performance be traded with ship carry less gun. Its marginal trade at best. The single gun version is ok though, its the one mounted on harekaze (and midway) btw. So if you want 3x1 settup for gearring its possible. But 3x2 need to be traded with like less torps launcher or something else prob - like speed. Or maybe same performance but layout is 2x2 There dd with 3x1 layout though. Jsmdf 1950 Akizuki and murasame class. Might be good premium candidate too
×