Kreatillion yeah I kind of wish that in the 2nd cylon war a bunch of colonists found one in a scrapyard or something and fixed it up enough to escape and join the fleet. Would've been a good story point
@@firestorm165 Any of the old ships TBH, in the games some of the older ships were just hanging out like memorials or Museums and weren't Networked. There was that whole mission with the Janus that had them come back to readiness even though they were old ships just sitting in space.
The good old Artemis. Quite possibly my favorite ship in the game. Faster than the bigger Battlestars, able to quickly get in close and deal a ton of damage to the enemy while effectively tanking enemy fire in order to protect less armored ships at the same time. She takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin'!
I LOVE the inclusion of this ship. Much like how the TOS inspired Basestars, Raiders and Centurions shown off in Galactica's museum in the miniseries is a nice nod to the original Battlestar Galactica series, it's great to see the Artemis and Viper Mk I's inspired by the Original Series showing up as the oldest stuff in the Colonial Fleet during the First Cylon War.
This was my most used ship, loved diving below cylon groups as I watched the battlestar artillery rip them to shreds from long distance. Nothing better than the battelstar artillery salvos...
Actually, I'd say like... 1948-ish, in-universe, according to the Colonial Timeline... but technically you're not wrong when it comes to behind the scenes.
I had an Artemis, the Theia, that I took with me all the way through the Base game, Broken Alliance and Sin and Sacrifice. When Theia was destroyed during the final battle of S&S it really hit. Truly heralded the end of that campaign, and Fleet Group Daedalus
Artemis is definitely a cornerstone of my fleets later in the game. The last time I played Deadlock, I didnt even bother to build a single Jupiter class. The Artemis is so much more maneuverable & faster than a Jupiter. A Jupiter is always targeted and cannot get out of trouble if a Cylon Revenant or other gun-laden ship gets in range, whereas an Artemis can keep pace with a cylon fleet and choose the angles of engagement to its advantage. The Jupiter's extra armor doesnt compensate for all the extra hits it takes. 3 Artemis costs about the same in tylium and fleet costs as 2 Jupiters, plus you get 2 additional squadrons.
At best, I have only one Jupiter in my fleet (usually the Galactica). The rest are Artemis. I can crack out one Artemis in only 4 turns as opposed to 5 need per Jupiter, using only half the resources, and have a ship that's only slightly less powerful than a Jupiter while having higher maneuverability. I end up spamming them a lot to the point they are more Artemis than Adamant at the end.
Currently playing base campaign plus "Broken Alliance". Not building any Jupiters or Minervas. Their higher performance is more than offset by their higher cost in tylium and fleet points.
I always preferred the Remake Pegasus over the Remake Galactica design, mainly because Pegasus looks closer to the TOS Battlestar. But seeing the Artemis, I think it might be my new favorite.
It's a lovely throwback and homage to the original Battlestar. They did a great job in taking that original design and tweaking it visually so it doesn't seem incongruous in the later series.
lore-wise, I would argue the Galactica in the state that it was in makes sense. She was the last Jupiter still in service and was being decommissioned when the Cylons attacked. most of the armor, weapons, and fighters had been stripped to be used on other ships.
@@achangeapproaches7648 she was not the last Jupiter in service just the last of the original 12( though seeing how only 2 of them where confirmed to survive the first war not to surprising Galactica ( Caprica) and Athena (Picon) also her starboard flight pod was nonfunctional cutting it's ability to store and support air groups by half she also lost at least 2 squads of viper mk 7 (40) maybe even 3 or 4 squads to the CNP virus. on top of missing most of her armor ( none of the ribbing should be visible) and 26 of her heavy guns where missing (Galactica had a refit in the first war to 50 main guns 24 was what the base Jupiter had for full cover when they where first launched but that changed fast with them being up gunned as the war when on) we also know she was missing some point defence guns though not how many just that the minimum was that she had 512 at the start of the series
@@briansouthparkstudio1357 I am pretty sure in the mini-series that they say, "The Galactica, the last ship of her kind still in service, was constructed over fifty years ago during the first Cylon War" etc. Which implies she is the last Jupiter class battlestar that the Colonials hadn't decommissioned. Till the time the mini-series takes place, that is.
Splice Tape contrary to the claim that these ships are cheap to make, they are hugely overprized in the game. adamants are almost as strong with only a small stat difference, but they are almost 4 times cheaper, thus having 2 fleets with 2 adamants instead of 1 artemis does not only let you cover more systems, but each group will be stronger in battle than a sole battlestar. unbalanced (yet).
I think they'll be cheap in comparison to the Jupiter class and other large capitol ships, but still a major investment in resources and time to build and losing one still a potentially major loss. This is still a Battlestar afterall and so is far from expendable
From what I have seen in the game on youtube, unless they go through a MAJOR balance pass, it wont be, that said, if they do fix a few balance issues, make the cylons smarter (and give them different tactics to choose from), improve several mechanics such as giving you a reason to keep a fighter squad back and give all ships limited forms of point defense, make raptors more useful, and so on, Battlestars may become more valuable, one problem is that there is a frigate that costs 1/4th the Artimis with 1 fighter squadron 1 munitions bay, thats faster with slightly less armor and guns where the Artimis has 2 fighter squadrons, 1 munitions bay, and flak which doesn't always come into use, and in order for the vipers to be usefully quick, you need mk 2 because the ai goes into tail chase, as opposed to where a target is going to be. If they fix a lot of the balance issues, then I can see them being used as carriers, and making it practical to bring more than just vipers,
Micheal Halpern the adamant only has 4 light cannons on each broadside, cant shoot foward, has no flak screen, has less armor, cant shoot up or down, and to get similar effectiveness you need to take up 2-3 of your seven ships, while you could have one battlestar that has more more guns on one side than the adamant has on both, plus has very large cannons that can shoot up and foward and be able to put 1 or 2 more ships into the fleet
alot of ppl seems to complain abt the effectiveness of this battlestar in game. Its flak screen is very useful in taking down missiles from 4 or 5 missile volley attacks no prob.
Yeah if your not an idiot and keep the enemys with torps and nukes on the same level as your battlestar the flak screen will remove the cylons ridiculous missile volleys that wreck your fleet
I'm fairly new to the game but sofar i had to use flak only a couple of times. I'm more impressed with her heavy batteries and from what i noticed even the point defence guns chime in when the fight is getting very close. A glorious sight seeing a Talon obliterated by mass volleys of those
BGS Deadlock changed a lot of things: The Valkyrie class actually has less armor than an Artemis. Also, the Valkyrie is far more "pocket" than an Artemis is. The Orion class isn't considered a battlestar - it's a light frigate. Deadlock is supposed to be canon, so the retcon of the Orion class is interesting. I can't imagine they did that without blessing from somewhere - so whomever the rights owner is really, really doesn't like some of the stuff in Blood & Chrome, specifically the Osiris.
And then you lose two of them in the mission to get nuke tech. Seriously. Rough mission and the cylon just chew up your ships with surprising efficiency. Still. Put one BEHIND a Jupiter and you have a wall of death I dare you to cross.
grew up watching the 1978 BSG on syndication, and was a big fan of the reboot. Out of the two Galactica ship designs, I prefer the reboot Galactica. Still, props to the game developers for putting this in Deadlock.
Perhaps the most troublesome thing about Deadlock for me is that the previewers seemed to go through almost half of the campaign before they even had the resources to commit to an Artemis design (with the exception, I think, of the first/introductory scenario involving Athena). For a game about space combat, the battlestars are arriving to the party pretty late- but I suppose that's true of the Cylon Basestars . Balance doesn't merely refer to the tactical strengths of various ships, but to the opportunity costs of picking one ship design/fleet composition over another. The Artemis does not offer enough strengths to justify its costs over a flotilla of Adamants. I've enjoyed watching the previews, but this game still needs some serious work. Considering the late-August release date, I think I'll just watch some more videos of other people playing before I decide to get this title.
Out of about 120 battlestars (Kara Thrace described a loss of thirty as being "almost a quarter of the fleet"), relatively few are known. The Galactica is a model from the Galactica class of battlestar. The Pegasus is from the newer Mercury class of battlestar.
+Spacedock We also see a contemporary of the Artemis in the Form of the Defender Class Battlestar (As a Small Escort ship in the Rag-Tag Fleet and as a Massive Warship in Blood and Chrome)
Not bad. Have you ever considered doing one of these for the actual 1978 original Galactica? Perhaps comparing/contrasting it with the RDM version. I realize this is pretty close, but it would be pretty interesting. I mean, the ship was 500 years old, 150 fighters (Fully loaded), etc. It's a very different ship, you know?
Visual concerns aside, how would you guys feel about having a sci-fi series where ships would be oriented in all different directions, upon encountering one-another? I mean, how would you even maintain an "up and down" while in space, especially if there's FTL in the universe?
Some Sci-Fi's take this into account, first to come to mind being Ender's Game, which actually makes a point of this, that there is no real up or down in space, so its important to pick a specific point of reference to be your 'Down' so you can orient everything else against it.
Come up with an arbitrary system of "up" and "down"-most likely related to the plane of the ecliptic (did I spell it right) for navigation purposes. Although, you are right; chances are that warships encountering each other would be tilted every which way.
Star Trek Bridge Commander have full 3d combat and no specific "this-is-up" direction. While certainly realistic, I can see why most game did not come with this feature. In a large-scale battle, it's very messy.
Wish you would've done something on the Cylon Revenant in the game. It's like some 50/50 mix of Cylon and Colonial aesthetics. Looks *almost* like a Battlestar, but not quite, would love some backstory for it.
Why doesnt anyone remember the first series "Battlestar Galactica" ? It was originated in the 1977 era , and was a popular television show in the United States. It would be nice to see how the orginal fleet compares to the more modern version.
From watching the first look playthroughs that certain lets-players are doing, I've seen that the Artemis isn't really all that effective. Its Armor is barely thicker than the Adamant class frigate and it is significantly more expensive than the Adamant-class and at the same time two Adamants provide the same number of fighters as well as twice the number of missiles and significantly greater maneuverability.
1) Adamants have no flack and weak guns. 2) The main limitation is not cost, its fleet size. You can only ever have 7 ships. 7 Adamants have 7 squadrons of vipers and 7 missile tubes. 3 Artemis give you 6 vipers and 3 missile tubes, meaning you have 4 empty fleet spots to make up 1 squad of vipes and 4 missile tubes (use 4 Adamants and you have 10 squads of vipes, 3 more than a pure adamant team). Plus you get flack and battlestar artillery.
For me it's become the best complementary Battlestar. The Jupiter 2 is of course king, but this one, well suplemented by the supply ship holds steady in any battle.
just picked up Deadlock on Steam when it was on sale. So I dunno what happened, but it seems like the second I got my Artemis Battlestar, the Cylons fleet just suddenly got OP and aggressive. Was actually better off running 6 frigates instead of an Artemis and four frigates
So, I got a question. Aren't the ribs holding the flight pods a structural weakness when they aren't needed to retract? Wouldn't it be better to armor the holes and place more guns there?
natzo89 You are quite correct. If I was pressed to defend said design choice I'd say that they were worried that a stray shot/missile barrage could detonate the ammo and/or aviation fuel stored in said pods and therefore cause secondary explosions to rip through the ship completely destroying it. Losing a third of a ship which can still fight back (demonstrated by the Jupiter 2 gallactica in the second cylon war, its starboard flight pod being inoperable) is better than losing the whole frakking thing after all. I would counter this argument with 2 words: "armoured bulkheads"
What I'd like to know is, did Sinon invent this frakking thing or did someone else? I mean, he's the most renowned shipbuilder in the colonies, a genius engineer, designer of both the Adament and Jupiter, yet he's quoted here talking about it from an outside perspective. It's bugging me. Also, the whole "pocket battlestar" bit gets me because at 1000m this thing still dwarves the largest naval vessels our civilization has ever built. But it makes sense because provided you have the infrastructure in place (orbital shipyards) and resources there is no real limit to the size you can make a spacecraft, unlike water-borne naval vessels. It's also interesting to note that this thing has a lot more windows than later battlestars. It would appear that the CIC might actually have a view of space through these, unlike with the Jupiter. While a liability, enhanced situational awareness is always a bonus
So how many Guns does the ship have (I see 8 Dual Batteries but thats it) Granted we couldn't see most of the Weapons on the TOS Battlestar as it WAS IMMENSELY HUGE (Implied to be Much larger than any Star Destroyer). Here the Artemis is 1080 Meters long which seems to fit nicely with the Jupiter being 1438 Meters in Length.
I'm so happy to get more TRS content. I've been missing it ever since Caprica. God I miss Caprica, such a great series. I might even like that specific season more than any specific season of BSG, tho I do love BSG more of course but Caprica's level of world building was just magnificent and honestly a marvel in creative writing. What what I would give for Caprica S2 :'(
+Striker163 the Caprican Viper wasn't the Mk I but rather an ancient design used by the Caprican Airforce. In the Miniseries we see an original Series style Viper in the row of Mk II's in the Museum aboard Galactica and now its confirmed to be the Mk I (We also see Pictures of what is now revealed to be the Artemis Battlestar in action, The pictures were taken from TOS Episodes)
The MkI Viper was essentially the fighter from the original series, albeit no laser guns. This is why the MKII looks so much like the original ship but modernized.
+Mark Hayes yes. She is either Cain's Mother or her Aunt. Its possible the "Mother" we see in Razor Flashbacks is Helena Cain's Step Mother (Assuming that the Father divorced the Mother or Remarried after the Real Mothers potential Death) That or Helena Cain and her Sister Lucy are living with a Foster Family. There is also a Woman named Helena Agathon (Helo's Grandmother?????)
While the game looks amazing. There is alot of Artistic License which introduces some inaccuracies. But I don't Care cuz It LOOKS FRAKKING AWESOME. I'm Surprised to see many of my Fan Ideas being made into Reality. Maybe its because this game is also being made by fans.
That's weird how they changed the name of the class for the game. They used to be called "Columbia Class" Battlestars in the original series. I do love the updated look though .
I wonder if something like this happened in real life too. I'm no expert on military naval history, but maybe there were instances of classes being renamed. It doesn't seem like too much of an outlandish concept.
MrMartechi for example multiple ships are built at the same time and first one suffers several major delays. As classes are often called after first vessel, this situation may change the name. Or when someone on top decide to commemorate something.
well, actaully right now. the new british Carrier is the Queen Elisabeth Class, but the Queen Elisabeths where also a Class of Battleships in ww1/ww2, for example the Warspite was a QE Class
they probably were required to maintain a degree of separation between the TOS and RDM versions of the setting. using different class names and a different history would enable that separation. (that, and "columbia" appears as a Jupiter class ship in Blood and Chrome, so you'd want to avoid name overlap)
I'd Say the Artemis is slightly more Powerful than the Valkyrie Class (The Valkyrie was even more cost effective than the Artemis but wouldn't be introduced for another 2 to 4 years) The Artemis is a Beauty (I'd Remove the black Bridge thing though and just make it a darker Shade of the Ships Grey Color) Even with Perfection I complain lol.
i hope that Battlestar Galactica does not get messed up like Star Wars and Star Trek have been screwed up - Star Wars and Star Trek now SUX - hmmmmmm and hmmmmmmm and hmmmmm i think that the Artemis and Galactica are the same age
Amusing that in the new Galactica series Richard Hatch was the only person to pronounce the word "tylium" correctly. Even the guy in this vid gets it wrong.
this is not the "pocket battlestar" the orion class is the pocket battlestar according to the wiki, the artemis class was the first battlestar design used by the colonies during the cylon war
I always find it funny when people elaborate on fictional characters and spaceships as if they are real. The Artemis Class Battlestar is actually made of wood and plastic with tiny lightbulbs.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Actually it's made of 0's and 1's in a computer programme, it's part of a game, there was no physical model. So nice try at the "I am superior" snark, shame you couldn't even get that right. You need to work on that...
@@mlawson7341 Uh huh? And it wasn't called an Artemis Class on the original series clown shoes, which is what you said. Artemis Class is specifically an invention for this game. Your flailing is cute though. Just take the L. You earned it.
Not going to lie, I dislike how assymetric a battlestar's weapons emplacements are. If 4 enemy basestars maneuvered in a tetrahedron around it, it wouldn't be able to bring its main guns on enough of them. The same argument applies to quite a few of the naval battle in space genre (Especially Space Battleship Yamato) and I wish it would be addressed by more serious Scifi.
In Deadlock, this could arguably never happen unless the commander is a total buffoon. The Artemis is more than 2x as fast, if not 3x with Boost Thrusters, than a Basestar. The Basestars also have extremely weak cannons that cannot target flanking attacks. An Artemis outguns a Basestar 10:1, so it could manuever and pick off Basestars one at a time from a distance using strike & retreat tactics The above assumes, of of course, that the colonial battlegroup can fight off the Basestars airwings first.
i saw that..but thats arguable.. The 600m figure comes from comparing the 3 launch tubes under each pod against a Galactica tube.. but before that i saw some people running numbers and they got 1100 to 1200m long ship.. 600m seems utterly small .. also we can see them in Razor in a fleet shot in the scorpia yards ..2 Valkires are in the left and they dont seem 1/3 of a Mercury (at bottom right side) at all .. they seem to be way over half the lenght of the Peggy.. wich is consisten with 1000 to 1200m However in that very shot there is what it seems a Galactica type (Jupiter class?) battlestar in the top right and it seems bigger than the Mercury (wich is much bigger 1440m vs 1800m).. wich means one of two things 1- CGI screwup (wich would awork against the bigger Valkyre) 2- Its a different class .. this is actually more probable since there are no more Jupiter class ships save for Galactica.. and in the fall of the colonies we see a very similar Galactica type split in two..wich cant be the same class.. so its quite probable that this is a newer class of Battlestar.. much bigger than the old Jupiter/Galactica class but very similar visually ..presumibly launched after the end of the first Cylon war .. waay back then i think someone said that had we saw BattleStar Atlantia (flagship of the fleet and where admiral Nagala died) she would been arround 2000m long very big.. wich seems consistent with this unknown class.. probably a Galactica re-escaled to 2000m and with cosmetic aditions
Was so happy that I got the Artemis in game when I put to a fleet it perform so poorly that the adamants that I used were better in comparison. Two adaments versus 2 talons and 2 nemesis. Adaments win.
I know I am months late asking this but when in ether series was it mentioned that Galactica was the first ever Battlestar? in the origional series she was one of twelve Battlestars constructed 500 years earlier but was (as far as I remember) never said or implied to be the first In the 2000s series she was 50 years old, the oldest Battlestar still in service and the only ship of her class still in service but I remember nothing about her being the first Battlestar.if I missed something mentioning this I would love to know when/where. it was mentioned.
Really? i bought two and they never died, sometimes i would have a mission where every ship was destroyed and my two artemis battlestars would sweep the rest of the enemy, the only reason i removed them from my main fleet was to put two jupiters in instead
GushChew I agree, every one of my fleets has at least one Artemis in it. When I finally get access to the Jupiter class that takes its place as the flagship and I add a second Artemis for good measure
Irreplaceable from start to finish of the game. Ended up using 2 of them to support my main offensive ships. FLAK, 2 viper slots, 1 munition slot, makes them unrivaled in fleet building cost to the end.
0:29 That is, story-wise, the stupidest thing Iv ever heard. So... the Artemis is both the first class of Battlestar, but additionally was known as a "pocket battlestar", despite no other version existing at the time. Thats like calling the Saturn V Rocket a "pocket Rocket" because in the future we'll have bigger, better rockets... *glares judgementally*
'Cost to effectiveness ratio'!? It's terrible ! A bloke called EnterElysium, found he could build 3 Adamant class ships for the cost of 1 Artemis. This gave him 3 wings of Vipers, better manouvering, and hit and run capability against larger ships. When he used the Artemis it died in 3 minutes! It's flak was completely useless, it couldn't use primary armament without de-activating defensive systems; and Artemis is to slow to run-away!
Please excuse me if I'm a bit dubious of the tactical analyses of someone who unironically pulled off the infamous 'Lee Adama' maneuver, with predictable results.
LOL, i saw the same vid you are talking about. EE has a big problem of never delving in the lore into any game he plays. I was considering subscribing when he did his BSG:DL videos, but the man is laughably bad. Aside from the fact he is playing on easy difficulty and barely making it through each battle, he doesn't stop and read every time he is presented with new information. If he took even a minute to just read up, or even just skim the source material, he would be an infinetly better youtuber. Until then, he is just a much more annoying Jingles.
You can only have seven ships in your fleet, so do you want to waste two extra ships for one more wing of vipers, two more ordinance, and way less guns? The Artemis is better than the adamant in every way but cost, and thats not really an issue if you keep all the colonies happy
This is the guy who said that guns are useless in this game..... Also what you are saying with the adamats would be true if you had unlimited number of ships in your fleet and resources were the only limit. But you can only have 7 ships and 8000 points. If you make a fleet of 7 adamats, it will be only 5250 points and it will lose against the fleets with 8000 points.
