Hey Wargaming, why did USN CVs lose their AS loadouts yet the IJN got to keep them?

The IJN AS load-outs are not really a reliable threat, though. It's very rare to see them, probably because it takes a significant piece of your strike power, and there aren't that many scenarios where if you can't manage to wield 2 fighter squadrons to dominate the skies, you will with 3.

There's also a strong correlation between choosing AS load-outs (at least in random battles) and bad CV players who can't strafe themselves out of a paper bag. Like just bundling up their squadrons, ripe for mass-strafing them to smithereens. I think if you're good with fighters, you don't actually need an extra squadron to be a dick to the other CV.

For what it's worth, in Saipan I tend to have an easier time dealing with Hiryu than Ranger. Against ranger, you just can't afford to have a regular click-attack dogfight with his fighters to keep him occupied, you'll just lose the planes. You need to perform this strafing-tango to get anywhere, stopping you from being efficient with your bombers at the same time.

It is part of their continuing efforts to increase the differences and playstyles between the two current CV lines (3 if they ever decide the time is right to bring in the RN CVs), which is something they've already mentioned repeatedly (no copying of loadouts with only a plane swap and minor stats changed).

Wait for Tier8, pick AP bombs which are available only on US CVs T8+ (and GZ), and happily delete any German BB within seconds.

Because unlike USN AS loadouts, IJN ones had acceptable attack power, especially at T9-T10 and they are far better in scouting.

Personally speaking, im surprised that 211 isnt a thing for T7 and T8.

And first time u get 2 fighters is t9 when ijn has it since t7... thats why i abandon my ranger yesterday and grind hiryu. I find it much more consistent and enjoyable

First off saipan isn't that strong and a lot of bad players are out there. Don't be afraid. Saipan can only win air battles if they strafe. And your strike is always better then theirs. They can reliable target Dds that's the difference. Are you on na or eu? If you want we can do some fighter training room stuff. About hiryu as setup Idk but yeah I can imagine it's cancerous. Try to split up your strike. Most of these players are bad on multitasking. Sorry on mobile atm

This speaks more about the issues with Kaga or Saipan than it does about IJN AS loadouts.

2/2/2 Hiryu is more optimal for solo play, but 3/1/2 has better vision control thanks to having more fighters and is thus better for team play. In this kind of situation you can't act the same way that you would versus 2/2/2: you have to get him to fight you on your terms. Personally, I always relegated my fighters to bomber escort, with spotting done only if I have allied AA support or he doesn't have enough fighters in the area to challenge me. Especially now that she has 1/1/2, Ranger's strike package has a lot more bite than 3/1/2 Hiryu's, so if you make your strikes count his superior spotting work won't matter much.

If you insist upon trying to take the path of greater resistance, you need to accept that he has the innate upper hand, and do as any tactician will in this situation: attack from the periphery rather than head-on. Keep your fighters back, possibly but not necessarily guarding your strike planes, until he makes a move or spreads his squads out too far, then swoop in and destroy/damage the lone squad before the rest of his fighters can respond. Similarly you can play defensive and try to intercept his strike package, though this is riskier and requires you to focus on managing your fighters more often, which can hurt your ability to conduct strikes of your own (your primary advantage).

I know it all sounds vague and/or situational, but this is, unfortunately, the nature of playing a carrier. The level of strategy involved in playing a CV is not unlike that of a war game like StarCraft; there is no textbook way to win, or even one set of guiding principles to. Even with a unified loadout, your strategy needs to adjust based on your opponent's warship, flight control configuration, and, ideally, skill, although the last one is just really a bonus rather than a necessity. The best you can do is focus on a few short-term, quantifiable objectives (such as "force enemy planes at [location] to retreat or destroy them"), think about how to best achieve them, and carry it out as you intended. To that end, co-op is a good place to practice microing individual squads, but the bot CV's method of throwing planes mindlessly at the enemy doesn't allow you to practice formulating strategies. Still, as someone who struggled with every carrier up until Hiryu, practice, practice, practice your squad micro in this kind of environment, so that you can focus on planning your next moves or setting up a counter to the enemy's rather than scramble to figure out how to best react to a situation in the moment. It cuts down on frustration while trying to learn and takes a mental load off, something any carrier player needs. Whether you can handle the multitasking is irrelevant; the less you have to think about, the less-likely you are to mess up what you're doing.

Because USN fighters can already wipe out IJN fighters easily, and US AS loadout is just plain unbearable to play against in IJN CVs.

eventually they will lose them, they just weren't as big of a problem.

yup.
Imo, the ranger, T7, should have the option of 2-0-2, with the 1.000 LB HE bombs (AP bombs at T7 would be broken.. hi T5 BB..),

and the Lexington T8, should have then 'starting' as 202 from the Ranger, and upgrade into 2-1-1.

The Saipan, should have T8 planes, get +1 plane/squad to balance that, and lose the free strafe-out.
Also, the 3-0-1 obviously needs to be changed. If 2-2-0 is one option, another could be 1-2-1.

The reason is because the USN carrier setups were unbalanced so WG removed all but 1 so they could balance it. Obviously you could say the same for IJN but the WG intern was only paid for one tech tree.