Make Atlas a true carrier.

[Supreme Doge]

As of right now, Atlas Carrier is a rather weak addition to the colonial fleet. As a fleet flagship it is outperformed by Artemis Battlestar (which has munition as well as better firepower), and its carrier ability is generally hampered by Adamant Frigate or Berzerk (both of whom are better in combat and more mobile). So, Atlas Carrier is left as a rather weak choice compared to the other ships and is in a bit of a design dead zone. I personally did not find myself using Atlas Carrier while playing as it is inferior to other, more powerful ships.

I propose that this is changed by adjusting Atlas Carrier's squadron count from 2 (currently) to 3 squadron slots. This will make Atlas Carrier unique because it will be the only Colonial ship with 3 squadron slots and be the ideal choice for viper-based fleet compositions. I believe that this would only be fair as Cylons already have a ship with 3 squadron slots and therefore Colonial Fleet should have its own signature carrier in the form of Atlas Carrier. It is already a rather slow and weak ship (its only strong point being the armor), so having an additional squadron to compensate for that would be nice.

TL:DR
Atlas Carrier should have another squadron slot because there is currently no point in using it when better options exist. Having another squadron would make it much more appealing to use.

[Nox]

Agreed, It dose not really feel like a carrier right now.

[Colonel Clank]

I agree, i've never fielded one because I'd rather have a battlestar's firepower if i'm getting the same Viper capacity. The Atlas is a huge ship, but it doesn't make sense to have so few squadrons and a uselessly slow and undergunned ship in your fleet.

[TheMadTypist]

The "brick" is already the best carrier of the colonial fleet:

Atlas has the best vipers of any two-squadron ship the colonials can field, with 35 evade vs the Artemis/Jupiter's 20 and the Minerva's 15. Essentially, the squadrons can tank more than other ship's squadrons. Only the Berserk offers more (with 50 evasion), but it only brings the one squad.

The Atlas is also, bar none, the most point efficent option for getting vipers on the field at 1050 points. Effectively you're only paying 525 per squad slot, and getting better than average slots into the bargain. Nothing else in the lineup can offer that deal. The battlestars can fill more roles, but you pay for that extra capability in fleet points. If you want to maximize your fighter cover, adding an Atlas or two to the formation is the best way to do it.

You do need other ships, because it's a support ship, like the Ranger. It isn't a replacement for a battlestar, or on par with one, it's a defensive back-up to a battlestar to ensure you get and maintain fighter superiority for the most economical cost, so you can devote fewer fleet slots and points to fighter cover and more to those fun things like battlestars, janus, and rangers.

The fact you can also hide behind it as a giant floating barricade is just icing on the cake.

[Supreme Doge]

Originally posted by TheMadTypist:

The "brick" is already the best carrier of the colonial fleet:

Atlas has the best vipers of any two-squadron ship the colonials can field, with 35 evade vs the Artemis/Jupiter's 20 and the Minerva's 15. Essentially, the squadrons can tank more than other ship's squadrons. Only the Berserk offers more (with 50 evasion), but it only brings the one squad.

The Atlas is also, bar none, the most point efficent option for getting vipers on the field at 1050 points. Effectively you're only paying 525 per squad slot, and getting better than average slots into the bargain. Nothing else in the lineup can offer that deal. The battlestars can fill more roles, but you pay for that extra capability in fleet points. If you want to maximize your fighter cover, adding an Atlas or two to the formation is the best way to do it.

You do need other ships, because it's a support ship, like the Ranger. It isn't a replacement for a battlestar, or on par with one, it's a defensive back-up to a battlestar to ensure you get and maintain fighter superiority for the most economical cost, so you can devote fewer fleet slots and points to fighter cover and more to those fun things like battlestars, janus, and rangers.

The fact you can also hide behind it as a giant floating barricade is just icing on the cake.

I'd say that while Atlas seems like a super-efficient option, I highly doubt that it is as much of a game changer because I can easily substitute the Atlas with Artemis - it can carry munition, the same squadron count (albeit with a bit of a penalty), have much more firepower and it comes only at the expense of 500 additional points. Why would I not take an Artemis which is much better at holding it's own as well as taking on other ships compared to Atlas?

And in the case of a support role, I can't see much of viability from Atlas because it does not have Berzerker's firing range or Ranger/Janus munition features. Those 2 squadron slots won't exactly impact me in combat compared to being able to launch barrages of torpedoes/missiles or dishing out high ranged turret damage with Berzerker.

In short, I don't really see the gains of giving up a share of firepower for slightly better squadrons that will maybe situationally make a difference on the field. And in case of support there are better options for filling out the backline.

[TheMadTypist]

Originally posted by LV Liffeh:

I'd say that while Atlas seems like a super-efficient option, I highly doubt that it is as much of a game changer because I can easily substitute the Atlas with Artemis - it can carry munition, the same squadron count (albeit with a bit of a penalty), have much more firepower and it comes only at the expense of 500 additional points. Why would I not take an Artemis which is much better at holding it's own as well as taking on other ships compared to Atlas?

And in the case of a support role, I can't see much of viability from Atlas because it does not have Berzerker's firing range or Ranger/Janus munition features. Those 2 squadron slots won't exactly impact me in combat compared to being able to launch barrages of torpedoes/missiles or dishing out high ranged turret damage with Berzerker.

In short, I don't really see the gains of giving up a share of firepower for slightly better squadrons that will maybe situationally make a difference on the field. And in case of support there are better options for filling out the backline.

Why take an atlas instead of an artemis? Because you already have another artemis, and you want to get enough free points to upgrade it to a Minerva. It's not just about 1-1 comparison, what the Atlas brings, it brings to the whole fleet lineup, it's all about being a force multiplier within an 8000 point/seven ship limit. those 500 point increments add up, given the limits we have to work with. You're not necessarily getting just the Atlas, you're also getting more somewhere else because you only took an Atlas.

Take, for example, the following skirmish lineup:

2xAtlas (4xmk II)
1xArtemis (2xmk II, 1xTorp)
1xRanger (2xTorp)
1xMinotaur
1xJanus (3xTorp)
1xAdamant(1xAssaultRapt, 1xTorp)

With skirmish mode pricing, this lineup + equipment comes to the 8000 point cap. It has 6 fighter squads (7 if you swap out the assault raptors) 7 missile tubes, and lots of guns. The atlases together save you 1000 points compared to taking more Artemis for the same fighter cover. That's pretty much the worth of an entire individual support ship there.

You could drop the Ranger altogether, which would give you the points for the dual artemis-swap. It even keeps the number of tubes the same. But what you lose is the unique element of the ranger; its fast missile reload, as well as the tougher squadrons of the Atlas- and you have one fewer target for Cylon ships to focus on.

You could drop the Minotaur, and downgrade the Ranger to a Janus, and make the swap that way instead- you get more raw missiles, and the additional guns make up for the loss of the minotaur- but you still have fewer ships to split fire between, those missiles take longer to reload, and your fighters are squishier. These sorts of swaps start to get at what I'm talking about, it's all swings and roundabouts based on what you value in a fleet- there are things you can't get otherwise, that the Atlas can give you. You could go cheaper, Adamant or Berserk, with fewer fighters- but Cylon fighterspam can get brutal at high point costs, and being on the wrong end of that without a proper counter does hurt- especially the berserk, who even fighters can damage.

To put it in a smaller context- Three Artemis are still 400 points more expensive than two Atlas plus a Jupiter. those 400 remaining points could turn an adamant into a ranger, or a manticore into a minotaur. That in a nutshell is what the Atlas provides- the ability to go "wide" with a fleet build, rather than "tall", and still get good defensive fighter cover.

And one last little addition- the Atlas also boasts 110% squadron repair rate on its engineering section at neutral stance, versus the Artemis's 100%. At +4 defense stance, that goes to 132% vs 121%. Not always important, but if you can pull back a squadron for repairs, it'll repair that little bit faster than an Artemis, which can situationally stack with the increased durability to give you overall higher uptime on your squadrons.

[✌Husker54✌]

Agreed. honestly i think 4 slots would be nice including the current extra raptor slot just added.

[Tactical Fox27]

Honestly the Atlas (Praise be the Brick) withe the buff to coloniol hvys is pretty solid in a gunfight with it's insane armor already. its been made more mobile. and it has a utility slot that can hold ARPS, a free rapotor, or a sweeper. It's a dedicated carrier that is really really strong right now. Buffing it would be beyond ridiculous.

[Supreme Doge]

Originally posted by WritingRiolu:

Honestly the Atlas (Praise be the Brick) withe the buff to coloniol hvys is pretty solid in a gunfight with it's insane armor already. its been made more mobile. and it has a utility slot that can hold ARPS, a free rapotor, or a sweeper. It's a dedicated carrier that is really really strong right now. Buffing it would be beyond ridiculous.

The original post was made before the Anabasis/Infinity update, in which Atlas received the utility slot.

[Tactical Fox27]

That is fair. still worth saying...