Nope, the Vulture only has a Class 5 Distro
chances of cutter improvement?
- Thread starter Phoenix13
- Start date
Nope, the Vulture only has a Class 5 Distro
So what? It can still farm RES at top efficiency.
The point wasn't about how good the vulture is, but that using a RES as a metric is kinda silly, since the grinding requirement for that is met quite early when it comes to ship progression.
Tools adapt to users, not viceversa, and ships are just complex tools. In addition, all tools are continuously improving to better adapt to users.
Your 'adaptation' is nothing more than self-imposed conformism, masked as if it were a virtue rather than a flaw. If all people were like you, nothing will ever improve.
I'm not happy with the cutter's performance, so indeed, I sort of have a problem. It's a problem based on the idea that the Cutter hasn't received fair treatment compared to other similar ships. Given those other ship's capabilities, its maneuverability is much worse than it should be, for no other reason than a dev's whim.
Have fun building a table with a pair of scissors, then I will accept that statement.
And the fact it has more cargo, more shielding and superior jump range :/ yes its really a whim
I'm truly unable to see how your question directly relates to my statement, so I will just assume that you meant to state something along the lines of: "You are not using the right tool for the job".
And in that case, I will simply reply: Point me to where in the cutter's description do the words 'cargo', 'freighter' or 'trade/r' appear. With just one of them, I'll gladly accept the fact that the Cutter belongs to that role, instead of a more battle-oriented role.
It is.
And if you take your time to read every prior opinion on the subject, practically everyone who asks for improved maneuverability, would be happy with the cutter having worse maneuverability than a Conda.... But not THIS MUCH worse.
The 'that much worse' part is the whim.
And i'd be happy if the corvette had half the cargo but went twice as fast
, the point is it doesn't and has stats that match its overall internals and abilities as does the cutter. The best you can hope for is that the module updates in 2.1 will let you tweak it to not fly like a drifting dustbin, just like I hope I can make the python as fast as it used to be Also for the 1000000000000000th time, role descriptions are written as flavor text not to have any baring on reality, here comes the famous T7 flavor text again! "The Type 7 Transporter is Lakon Spaceway's medium size transport vessel. This is a new model, released in 3290. It's slow but moves a lot of tonnage for its size."
Yes this Medium (large) ship really does move alot of tonnage for its size! (the worst of anything in its category)
Last edited:
The thing is, that "battle-oriented" doesn't mean whichever form or application of combat you enjoy.
Look at that PvP video, it excelled.
If you want to go RES hunting...well, tough luck. That's not what it does best. And frankly, neither does the Anaconda or the Corvette.
People just want to rules lawyer (over a flavor text, I know) to get something to fit their own personal ideal of what it should be. I'm glad Frontier generally ignores all that.
Out of the four big ones, the cutter is:
- second fastest ship (FTL)
- fastest ship (normal space)
- has the most cargo capacity
Maneuverability is quite adequate for it's size. if flown correctly, you get pretty fast in/out the mailslot. Only the lateral thrusters are a wee bit weak, adding extra seconds to the docking/undocking time.
And if you're still unhappy, well, there are three other big ships (T9, Anaconda and Corvette) for you to choose from.
Which is precisely why people ask for improvements to the Type 7.
In-game ship/role descriptions are the only tangible clue given to us by devs about the meaning, or intent, or purpose of the several ships.
What would happen if the type 7 description were:
"This ship was a flawed attempt from Lakon to produce a medium freighter class. Several flaws in its design led to poor performance ratios for its size. Still, it is cheap option for traders who cant afford a better ship".
No one would have complained then, right?
Unfortunately, FD only let me enjoy only one single form of combat, which is dogfighting.
The Cutter is also much, much faster and has better internal compartements than those other similar ships. It also has more jump range, armour and shields than the Corvette. Maybe we could add manouverability and in exchange reduce speed and internal slots, and end up with ships that are exactly the same as we're at it?
As they are, Corvette, Cutter and Anaconda have 3 different sets of pros and cons, and allow for a lot more different uses between them. Much better than having 3 copycat ships with different appearance.
If people don't like the Cutter, use an Anaconda or Corvette instead. It's not like the Cutter is the only ship around.
Last edited:
Euh, objectively, both are in the same weight class, somehow one turns better than the other? That'd bring up thruster placement, but even there, there's strictly no point to be made. The Cutter's thrusters being so widely apart from the centre of mass would suggest it's yaw rate to be SIGNIFICANTLY superior.
If any reason or logic is used, it'd be renamed the "Panther Clipper" and we'd get the release of an actual warship called the Imperial Cutter.
No need to fly one to point out the flawed paperwork.
![[DOOK] Droogie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/124/124078.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
The Cutter and vette should be better than the Conda. They're much more expensive and harder to obtain.
