Full Bomber Loadouts

[Saxxonknight]

Please bar people form using this in random.  Getting very tired of auto losses when I get grouped with someone that uses it and getting destroyed by the other team with a 2, 3 or even 4 to 1 fighter advantage because my teammate was stupid.  That loadout would be ok if you were coordinating with another player that could take an all fighter loadout that compensate (ie like clanwars if it were implemented), but in random very frequently I've seen pairing with these fools when I am working the default new ship with 1 fighter wing.

Stuff like that doesn't make the game look better.  Its a Marianas Turkey Shoot and no one wants to play the Japanese for that battle.

[Arzoo]

Bomber loadouts outperformed air superiority ones so much that they had to nerf it for the IJN.

[Palladia]

One of the worst things you can do in any MMO of any sort is rely on random people.  Either run a full fighter loadout yourself ((Staring from the Bogue or Ryujo)) or get used to the peak-a-boo game.  Tier IV and V thats kind of iffy since AA is so sparse but at T VI you'll learn to love and hate Cleavlands and New Mexico's in equal degree.   Past that get used to browsing through ships in the pre-game to see what sort of AA they have so you know where to lead your flight groups to help take care of enemy fighters.

Personally?  Only on the Independence myself but right now I don't hate to see any sort of loadouts.  I'm running a balanced loadout myself right now and seeing a full bomber squadron means that A: the enemy CV's are going to spend more time going after him and B: he's going to sink things a heck of a lot faster then I am.  I just focus on keeping as many fighters off of him/her as I can,  while doing damage.  Full fighter loadout allies mean I focus on dealing as much damage as I can,  while balanced loadouts mean I need to work in tandem with them.

[sargentmki]

To put it simply A bomber loadout can get countered but not be totally useless. Obviously if there's billions of planes flying around JUST LAND. 

So idiots who lose all their planes, are just that idiots.

Smart players wont lose planes easily and get more damage going.

 

Air Sup just doesn't give enough exp to warrant the usage of them ATM. I use to go them just because as you said its easy to get negated and become useless. But over time It takes forever to rank anything up, and thus I adopted Strike setups. 

[BoreSight]

Nerf someone else because I lose!

[The_Chieftain]

I'm OK with the all-strike wings. Yes, it's a gamble. If the opposition went all fighter, then you won't be doing much damage. Then again, his carrier isn't going to be doing much damage either, because he doesn't have the strike assets to do it. If they went a general purpose route, then you should be able to get some strike aircraft past. And if he also went all-strike, then it's just a damage race. That said, there are other concerns now. Recently, fighters are getting more XP for shooting down aircraft. Also, some CVs, such as Ranger, come with enough spare aircraft that even if you lose every airplane on your strike runs, you can send up over three waves and will do damage.

[Ujenele]

 

I was in a Tier8&7CV Vs Tier8&7CV match in my bomber loadout Lexi the other day. The dont really rmember what the friendly CV had but the enemy CVs must of both been fighter loadoats there were so many fighters in the air. The had air supiriority, One enemy CV got clear skies, someone else on there team did too, didnt check to see if it was the other CV.  But we still won.  Why? Maybe because we CVs were able to out damage the enemy CVs ie - have more effect on the battle. I lost a lot of planes doing it, and if the battle had dragged on, I would have ran dry. If fighters could straff even for just a little effect, end a repair, slow down a fire crew, slow reload time, damage a module, something, then air supiriority would be more relevent.

 

It was really funny that the enemy CV was getting rage from his team in all chat for not protecting ships. He cant be everywhere.