Is the atlantis useless?

[lebensnebel]

Hey,
I don't play very many games, but I recently noticed that the atlantis is pretty easily countered with groundfire (from destroyers, battleships, exp...bobmers?) as it is way to big to dodge.
I think there was a similar discussion about sera t3 subs and it was concluded they should be vulnerable to groundfire, but the atlantis is just a sitting duck.
When my tempest kills atlantis I feel it's pretty unfair .

What are your thoughts?
Cheers lebensnebel

[Apofenas]

First of all, Atlantis is an "Experimental aircraft carrier",it costs 12000 mass: and 150000 energy, while the Tempest is an "Experimental Battleship" and it costs 24000 mass and 350000 energy. Atlantis have to lose against tempest or it will be absolutly unfair because tempest costs at least 2 times more. Then tempest is designed to fight with naval units and building capability is a side effect; while atlantis is designed to produce air units and torpedoes are side effect, which have beed made because of UEF no subs on t2 and t3 stages and aircraft carrier on T3.

The second thing is that if you are facing destroyers and cruisers, you should better build battlecruisers; If you are facing battleships, you need to answer with battleships and shield boats. Against T1-T2 sub forces you should use cooper forces and only if your enemy uses seraphim sub hunters, you should add in those forces a couple of atlantis.

Atlantis is a good unit. You just need to use it correctly.

[lebensnebel]

hey,
thank you for your response!
-the atlantis is cheaper - point taken
-the atlantis is a primary carrier - I think this is open for discussion. I would think it's primary an awesome sub which can also(2ndary) launch planes^^
-the tempest is designed to fight naval - well the tempest is also designed to bombard your base, which the atlantis can't! it's also pretty good at bombarding... while not really exceptional vs navy?
-there are different counters to naval for uef - yeah that's true, but I would still like to see the atlantis as a primary experimental sub (vs navy) and not a primary carrier, if you know what I mean. To do this, it should not be totally helpless vs every decent navy unit.

Or what do you think?

[FunkOff]

I think the biggest difference between the atlantis and the tempest is engagement range: The Atlantis is designed to get up close and deal damage to all sorts of naval targets. The Tempest cost twice as much but only does a little more damage. It's primary advantage against all sorts of targets is the range on its main gun. The tempest needs to be protected against nearby threats to be useful... the Atlantis is the reverse.

[SC-Account]

To answer your question: When an Atlantis encounters ground fire it is indeed useless, except for maybe one thing (intel).
It also cant take on any other submarine force for equal mass.

Oh I forgot another point also, nowadays Atlantis are really epic against huge amounts of air (they deal splash damage).

[ZLO_RD]

Biggest difference between atlantis and tempest is that tempest can shoot ground and kill bases, while atlantis only work vs navy

closer to topic, yes looks like atlantis really vunerable to groundfire,
but what can we do here?

at least atlantis have shitload of hp and epic vision radius, i think it is good to have some atlantis while UEF batleships dominate and deal real damage

[SC-Account]

Biggest difference between atlantis and tempest is that tempest can shoot ground and kill bases, while atlantis only work vs navy

closer to topic, yes looks like atlantis really vunerable to groundfire,
but what can we do here?

at least atlantis have shitload of hp and epic vision radius, i think it is good to have some atlantis while UEF batleships dominate and deal real damage

Yeah, Atlantis is pretty much a support unit. You don't really need more than one at the time (except vs. air eventually). It also counters Cybran navy stealth.

[Apofenas]

hey,
thank you for your response!
-the atlantis is cheaper - point taken
-the atlantis is a primary carrier - I think this is open for discussion. I would think it's primary an awesome sub which can also(2ndary) launch planes^^
-the tempest is designed to fight naval - well the tempest is also designed to bombard your base, which the atlantis can't! it's also pretty good at bombarding... while not really exceptional vs navy?
-there are different counters to naval for uef - yeah that's true, but I would still like to see the atlantis as a primary experimental sub (vs navy) and not a primary carrier, if you know what I mean. To do this, it should not be totally helpless vs every decent navy unit.

Or what do you think?

Yeah the problem with atlantis is that it can't be used as a sub and carrier at once. Units in SC can't build while moving and build queue disappears when you start moving unit.

If you are using it as an aircraft carrier, you use 4500 mass and 45000 energy that you invested. This is a cost of Aeon Keefer(which can build all aeon T3 air units, have SAMs, a bit less vision and radar radius) + difference in stats(because Keefer has less vision and radar radius and build power).

Submerge ability , i think, costs 2160 mass and 27000 energy. I took these numbers from difference(%) between cooper (which can't submerge) and vesper/barracuda. (these numbers may not be correct)

So using atlantis as an air craft carrier, you use about a half of its cost; using it as a sub, you use more, but still wasting a lot. As SC-Account pointed atlantis is more a support unit, if you want to use this thing on 100%, you need to build/repair/refuel planes at every moment, when your navy stands and use those to fight with enemy navy/air support, when you use it as a sub. So, as i said, it is better to use T2-T3 navy.

I don't like UEF experimentals: they have a most expensive unit in this game, almost absolutly useless satelite and 2 mobile factories, that are not only factories...

[Hawkei]

The bulwark can intercept groundfire shots.