+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: Cutlass versus Roc (/showthread.php?tid=73461)
Pages:
1
2
Cutlass versus Roc - jakub963 - 01-25-2012
I was looking at bombers available to civilians.
Cutlass, while lovely ship with design very well done, is larger pretty much from any angle (being almost twice the size from front/back), with same powercore and regeneration, same b/b count, less cargo, less agility and less firepower. Granted it have one more turret but everybody should know that Roc's turret can actually shoot sideways even in mouse flight which is something that Cutlass cant do.
Is there any reason for this..?
Cutlass versus Roc - RParade - 01-25-2012
' Wrote:I was looking at bombers available to civilians.
Cutlass, while lovely ship with design very well done, is larger pretty much from any angle (being almost twice the size from front/back), with same powercore and regeneration, same b/b count, less cargo, less agility and less firepower. Granted it have one more turret but everybody should know that Roc's turret can actually shoot sideways even in mouse flight which is something that Cutlass cant do.
Is there any reason for this..?
It was probably intentionally made this way to deter Outcasts from using the Cutlass instead of the Falcata (which they should be using). Also to deter other official factions from using a Civilian Bomber when they should be using their own.
With that said, the Cutlass is fine. It doesn't need a buff.
Cutlass versus Roc - kikatsu - 01-25-2012
It opens up options to mercs, freelancers, and other people. The stats are just about the same but you get radically different looks. It is just a nice bit of variety. You could say that the Cutlass trades some performance for super sexy style.
Cutlass versus Roc - jakub963 - 01-25-2012
' Wrote:Also to deter other official factions from using a Civilian Bomber when they should be using their own.
With that said, the Cutlass is fine. It doesn't need a buff.
I am not saying that Cutlass is bad... Just saying that Roc have everything that Cutlass have and more... If you look at the civ bombers Cutlass is the weakest which doesnt really fit BW theme (That being having a little more firepower in exchange for agility and size)...
Cutlass versus Roc - Tachyon - 01-25-2012
In combat my Cutlass always felt the same as the Roc, dunno about stats. All I can tell you is, that it reminds me heavily of Bombers like the Broadsword or the Cupholder - Let's say they just aren't the best of bombers.
Cutlass versus Roc - Kyte_ - 01-25-2012
The Cutlass is very sexy... and I don't think it requires a buff either. Not that I wouldn't mind one... heh. But it's still as is a very sexy and smart ship outta the box. Just mind yer backside in that sucker.
Love n' Lustre,
Kyte
Cutlass versus Roc - Ebon - 01-25-2012
IMO Cutlass should have more powercore, as its bigger and less agile. In the end, if you would make a test roc vs cutlass, its all about the pilots skills.
Cutlass versus Roc - ... kur nubėgo? - 01-25-2012
Fallowing the BW line tradition it should get a bit lesser mass. I guess that would make it a bit diffrent from what Roc has to offer.
Cutlass versus Roc - Jansen - 01-25-2012
Why does nobody even think about the Waran? It has feelings too you know :mellow:
I'd always prefer the Waran over both of those, it simply has more firepower and the better looks.
Cutlass versus Roc - VoluptaBox - 01-26-2012
The Waran looks like a nose <.<
To me, at least, it's a very very ugly bomber. Still like it more than the others, tho. Ugly with style :cool: