Unless you own one and have mastered the use of it, how on earth can you say one way or another? You're painting it with too broad a stroke, I'm afraid.
Of course I am.
PvP is very dedicated and its all about effective builds, there are inherit strengths and weakness on all ships but in PvP if you go around trying to play using a deliberate weakness of the design you never be as good at that as something it was designed to have that as a strength.
This is why we dont see Escorts trying to tank (only surviving) or Cruisers trying to outmaneuver.
You're implying here that without the hangers it does not do enough damage on its own - and I'm here to tell you that you're wrong.
I never said that, I said its not its primary means as its BO layout and number of weapons makes it the very worst choice at that, simply put its not designed to work like that and why you think people complained about the Odyssey Science hull getting Sensor Analysis? the very fact they added SA to Science Ships because they have less weapons and that is even with Subsystem targeting.
You really only have two options here ... either the Ody Science Hull is wrong or all science ships and Carriers are wrong.
And I am not diverting the subject here, your statement is you can do fine without SA on a Science Ship, yet Cryptic have put SA on Science Ships to cover the fact they have less weapons, are they wrong and Science ships OP?
The Atrox in the hands of a tac captain makes a pretty nice beam boat just on its own,
A worst beamboat that any other Cruiser or the Intrepid, and that begs the question ... why?
Can it be done is a different question that of should it be done, just because something can be done does not mean it should and Cruisers make much better beamboats as the Intrepid does a superior one because it have SA.
the science boff abilities give it some great crowd control (this is what I use it for) and the fact that I can field hangers of fighters/shuttles/w.h.y. makes an excellent KDF carrier-killer.
Right now? No, it does not because KDF have purple Flight Deck officers that means it can launch fighters about 400% times faster that you can, also it have about the same abilities ... well not really as they have more tactical BO abilities and that bring it back to the question.
If you remove fighters you are STILL in the worst beamboat option.
I'm saying this simply because that's what I use it for; I'm not basing it on conjecture I've gathered from the forums or wiki or other peoples opinions on the matter.
You want to fly the Atrox as a beamboat, be my guest but in no way that invalidates what I am saying.
As a beamboat its THE WORST CHOICE, we would have to look at Escorts to see a even worst choice because it would work so against theirs strengths nobody really considers the notion of a broadsider Defiant, now (in reference to the Defiant) can it be done? Yes. Should it be done? No.
Also I can throw the exact same accusations at you, I do not consider the Atrox as a beamboat valid because I dont see much of a killing power on it (and yes, I do own it), fighters help but if you have Stalkers then you only have two choices ... either have spike damage abilities to kill targets because sure as hell the Stalkers dont or congratulations, you are a support ship.
And what is so wrong at being a Support Ship? I have a Eng on a Intrepid ... fun but my DPS is lousy because neither the ship or my class is really greared towards it, I am not saying we should all be playing cookie-cutter builds but there is a price to pay when you go with odd combinations.