Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Admiral_Turing

Question for cv players

26 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
563 posts
4,686 battles

Seriously, why you guys pick the fighter loadout? Remembering in the next update wg buffed AA (again). Encountered a fighter loadout will be a lot more stressful than before.. And do remember you can't use friendly planes as bait to strafe anymore ( check pt section)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,452 posts
2,950 battles

It takes a CV to suppress another CV.

 

With the new AA buffs, strike loadouts will be prone to losses- This translates to more post-battle expenses. On the other hand, while limiting potential exp-gain for aerial superiority, it guarantees that an enemy strike CV's damage potential would be lower- Which means less damage taken for your team, and ultimately, a win.

 

In short, riding along with the victory train.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
563 posts
4,686 battles

And it also usually(in my experience of always winning against them) costs them the whole game by missing on the damage output. I prefer the basic loadout

This. I also prefer balanced loadout. But fighter loadout will make balanced-strike loadout struggle. And this is what I don't like. AA is already a big headache to cv, please don't give another 2-4 fighter squadron to worried about. and yes you can still sneak a few attack runs, but you can't quite get the damage you and your team need, and you can't shoot down a lot of planes. And again, the gameplay of ft loadout is very passive. You can compare it to bb camping.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
507 posts
9,827 battles

USN cv's do that more often cause you know they keep complaining how their strike is crap and stuff,i wont be surprised if i see a Ranger running 202 but i find it kind of sad to see Hiryu's running 312.that's just wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

 And do remember you can't use friendly planes as bait to strafe anymore ( check pt section)

 

Implying that I'd care about being marked as pink for a strategically sound decision.

 

Heck, in WoT when an ally is in close combat with an enemy I'll still fire an

arty shell on the two duellists if my teammate is about to die.

Either I hit the enemy and save a tank, or I finish what the enemy tank would've finished moments later.

 

A couple credits and potential temporary markings for team damage aren't going to stop me from making the right call.

And these situations are too rare to give me a ban for tking.

 

And it also usually(in my experience of always winning against them) costs them the whole game by missing on the damage output. 

 

So what you're saying is that I could improve my Indy's win rate by using the strike loaodout?

Man, I'll be looking forward to improving my 71% wr from now on... Strike loadout and 99% wr here I come!

Edited by Retia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
147
[BLUMR]
Member
1,134 posts
1,377 battles

Seriously, why you guys pick the fighter loadout?

 

To think that around this time last year, people were saying the opposite how no one would pick the Fighter heavy loadouts and CVs only ran the skyhammer builds. 

 

Back on topic, unless I'm in my IJN CVs which then I normally run the balanced loadout (2/2/2) I would typically run the fighter loadout cause I know that unless they buff AA to ridiculously high levels (CBT USN Tier 8+ BBs) its better to intercept the enemy bombers way before they have a chance to drop on a target than to leave it until they're are within strike range of a ship in which for most ships is also their AA range. 

That and I don't really care for XP/credits while in my USN CVs and I prefer knowing I kept the skies relatively clear for my allies and doing stuff like stalking DDs with fighters e.t.c

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
211 posts
9,931 battles

Because, for me atleast (T7) USN 1/1/1 vs 2/2/2 is kinda trash and don't want to use strike loadout until 1000lbs bombs.

Sometimes Air Superiority is just the better option.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
450 posts
7,896 battles

One more idea.

 

Please, WG, if you read this, please don't put two fighter loadout CVs in the same team. The game is just ruined. In a few game, we had four CVs, two on each side. My teammate and I were normal loadout, where the enemy CVs were fighter loadout. I felt, what the hell, 5 fighter squads, 25+ fighters in the sky, what can we do? I was a bit luckier as I was sailing with my Hiryu, but not my teammate who is sailing with his Independence. He just sat there and sail his ship for most of the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
563 posts
4,686 battles

Because, for me atleast (T7) USN 1/1/1 vs 2/2/2 is kinda trash and don't want to use strike loadout until 1000lbs bombs.

Sometimes Air Superiority is just the better option.

 

You can try strike. Ranger has 73 hangar capacity. You can just throw your plane to rearm faster.. I think the problem is in tier 6. MM can give you tier 8, you can't do anything, AA is crazy, you don't have many replacement. And fighter loadout just make this problem worse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

I felt, what the hell, 5 fighter squads, 25+ fighters in the sky, what can we do? . 

 

If memory serves right, then what you can do is use the AS setup and stop hoping for being in a 2v2 cv situation with

your teammate using the AS setup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
211 posts
9,931 battles

You can try strike. Ranger has 73 hangar capacity. You can just throw your plane to rearm faster.. I think the problem is in tier 6. MM can give you tier 8, you can't do anything, AA is crazy, you don't have many replacement. And fighter loadout just make this problem worse

 

I play Strike Ranger sometimes, but yes its can get shut down hard vs AS CV or strong AA, with AS you can still be effective no matter the MM with Scouting, Countering the enemy CV and harassing DD's,

Also think USN CV's suffer a hefty rearm penalty for lost squads, over a minute or something on the Ranger i think, not like IJN who re-arm fairly quickly (IJN  always balanced 2/2/2 is glorious)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
11 posts
322 battles

 

 

So what you're saying is that I could improve my Indy's win rate by using the strike loaodout?

Man, I'll be looking forward to improving my 71% wr from now on... Strike loadout and 99% wr here I come!

you got 71% wr on a AS loadout? o_O i dunno man, if it works for you, good for you. but what ive encountered so far on my bogue is that balanced loadout always beats AS and Strike loadouts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

Also think USN CV's suffer a hefty rearm penalty for lost squads, over a minute or something on the Ranger i think, not like IJN who re-arm fairly quickly (IJN  always balanced 2/2/2 is glorious)

 

To be fair though, the long rearm time isn't too bad if you keep your carrier somewhat close to the frontline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
11 posts
322 battles

This. I also prefer balanced loadout. But fighter loadout will make balanced-strike loadout struggle. And this is what I don't like. AA is already a big headache to cv, please don't give another 2-4 fighter squadron to worried about. and yes you can still sneak a few attack runs, but you can't quite get the damage you and your team need, and you can't shoot down a lot of planes. And again, the gameplay of ft loadout is very passive. You can compare it to bb camping.

 

 

yes it is a pain that we need to live with indeed :) AS bogue could never out perform a 1 successful torpedo strike from a balanced bogue :) and im willing to have 1 fighter squadron compared to 2 DBs :)

 

against a zuiho, its just a matter of out playing the 112 :) 

 

but there was this one gameplay i had xD which my team had to deal with AS bogue and Strike Zuiho xD frustrating lol hahaha xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
211 posts
9,931 battles

 

To be fair though, the long rearm time isn't too bad if you keep your carrier somewhat close to the frontline.

 

Oh,  i mean the rearm times when a squad gets wiped, it seems like the time is doubled or something. 30-35 seconds rearm ends up being over a minute to rearm a wiped squad,

So i don't like purposely wiping squads with USN, works great with IJN but,

 

 

In other news, OMG Strike Ranger is fun :)

 tFLHyy6.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,923 posts
4,018 battles

Seriously, why you guys pick the fighter loadout? Remembering in the next update wg buffed AA (again). Encountered a fighter loadout will be a lot more stressful than before.. And do remember you can't use friendly planes as bait to strafe anymore ( check pt section)D

 

Depend on the situations.:sceptic:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
341 posts
2,790 battles

SEA players are too defensive and most will choose a fighter load out. Compare this to NA and EU, they will most likely choose the strike load out. That being said, you can almost count the fighter load out to be more useless than the strike load out. Want to have more strike load out opponents? Move to NA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
563 posts
4,686 battles

SEA players are too defensive and most will choose a fighter load out. Compare this to NA and EU, they will most likely choose the strike load out. That being said, you can almost count the fighter load out to be more useless than the strike load out. Want to have more strike load out opponents? Move to NA.

If I have high internet connection damn I will. But come on, 4-7 out of 10 matches in my indy I face an AS.. Ranger,indy, even ryujo and hiryu. Come on people.. Do you really enjoy seeing those purple ribbon more than the blue, red, and yellow ones? Why can't people take the risk? Do people really enjoy shooting down enemy plane while seeing their ally wrecked by enemy capital ships they supposed to destroy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
783 posts
4,819 battles

I personally don't really care much for what the loadout a CV player chooses since there are different successes to be had in each one.

 

Only rule of thumb I follow whenever choosing a loadout is:

I need to be confident enough to clear the skies of enemy planes if I plan to go Air Superiority. If the enemy can still drop their payloads comfortably then what's the point? Since AS loadouts tend to be better the later the game is, I just have to make sure that key ships on my team stay alive as much as I can from air strikes and provide scouting intel or torp screening.

 

I'm also against the saying that picking an AS loadout is only effective when you shut down the enemy CV. It can still do some sort of damage(especially if you time it right) and can also effectively shut down some DDs. They also help the team a lot psychologically for them not to worry about enemy planes and I think Retia is one of the better examples that AS loadouts can achieve success.

 

If I go strike, then I need to make sure I do more "effective" damage than the enemy regardless of the other's loadout. Shutting down 1 or 2 ships before most engagements start is ideal that it helps the team a lot. Conserving planes while playing cat and mouse with the enemy CV but still doing good amounts of damage is both the fun and difficult part of going full strike. (By shutting down, I mean doing enough damage to make them retreat from engagement areas or be low enough for allies to finish off)

 

Going balanced is being greedy to get the best of both worlds while ramping the difficulty up a notch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
783 posts
4,819 battles

If I have high internet connection damn I will. But come on, 4-7 out of 10 matches in my indy I face an AS.. Ranger,indy, even ryujo and hiryu. Come on people.. Do you really enjoy seeing those purple ribbon more than the blue, red, and yellow ones? Why can't people take the risk? Do people really enjoy shooting down enemy plane while seeing their ally wrecked by enemy capital ships they supposed to destroy?

 

Problem is, the SEA server has a lot of players which run AS but only a number actually clear the skies consistently enough. This gives the impression that AS isn't effective in which it has the potential to be.

Main reason to go strike anyway is the amount of EXP and Credits it gives which not all players even consider.

And to answer, yes I do like seeing a lot of purple ribbons especially when it's coupled with a badge which gives flags.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

SEA players are too defensive and most will choose a fighter load out. Compare this to NA and EU, they will most likely choose the strike load out. That being said, you can almost count the fighter load out to be more useless than the strike load out. Want to have more strike load out opponents? Move to NA.

 

NA, where players think it's a wise idea to actually sail in tight formations and dodging torpedo bombers is "officially" impossible without twenty AA CAs next to a BB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,452 posts
2,950 battles

 

Problem is, the SEA server has a lot of players which run AS but only a number actually clear the skies consistently enough. This gives the impression that AS isn't effective in which it has the potential to be.\

 

Because clearly, fighters are escorts to your clustered, easily-strafed formation of 3-4 strike squadrons.

 

Fighters not dogfighting is a silly sight to see. Only a few people actually care to remember the number of plane squadrons someone has, so once the 'escort' squadron 'defends' the strike squadrons, I often see them start retreating rather than advancing while the fighters are stalling for time- When clearly, the enemy CV is also using a strike loadout and has devoted one of his few/only fighter squadrons to brawl for no reason.

 

AA-CVs have that odd 'wrecking-ball' formation of 2-3 fighter squadrons clumped up to 'guarantee aerial superiority'. Nothing strafes can't fix.

Share this post


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

×