This is a long post. I have a tl;dr at the bottom, but be warned.
I feel like I can maybe shed a bit of light onto this problem, being that I am one of people that post routinely in that "Cutlass complaint thread". Cutlass was my first, and favorite ship. I'm not as bad as some of the people in that thread, but I may be worse than others.
You have to understand the marketing behind the Cutlass when it was originally sold, the Kickstarter. CIG was playing fast and loose with ship specs and the entire thing was CIG raking in money and flying by the seat of their pants. The amount of reception and money was staggering, and the overall passion for the project was astounding.
Halfway through the KS campaign, the Cutlass fighter is dropped in, part of the "Digital Pirate" package. Same price (
Ben was mistaken in the Cutlass Update/QA. Currently the Cutlass is 10$ less, but originally all 3 digital packs were $100 even. Cutlass had no physical package like the Freelancer or Hornet did) as the Digital Freelancer and Digital Colonel (Hornet) packages, but with a bit less UEC (but contained a tractor beam and docking collar for raiding right off the bat).
Let's take a look at the original KS description of the Cutlass:
Drake Interplanetary claims that the Cutlass is a low-cost, easy-to-maintain solution for local in-system militia units. The larger-than-average cargo hold, RIO seat and dedicated tractor mount are, the company literature insists, for facilitating search and rescue operations. While it’s true that Cutlasses are used throughout known space for such missions, their prime task and immediate association is with high space piracy. Cutlasses, often operating in groups, menace distant transit lanes to prey on hapless merchants. A single Cutlass can ravage a mid-sized transport and a pack operating as a clan can easily take down larger prey. STOL adaptations allow these interceptors to operate off of modified transports or pocket destroyers; the most common warships that make up pirate caravans.
So right there is the base of the Cutlass. "Cheap" (I prefer the term "cost effective" personally) Militia Fighter with a cargo hold. Cool, check, check, and check. Thread over, right?
Wellllllll not quite. A lot of people, myself included, assumed the Cutlass was a fighter first, and a cargo platform second. Or third. This
seemed to be backed up by numerous developer comments that seemed cut and dry. I'm sure someone has quoted the Chris Roberts "Cutlass is meant to be a dogfighter with unparalleled maneuverability, not so much focused on cargo" quote at you if you've even mildly read the big 1,000 page thread about it.
This, alongside other quotes in a similar vein from CIG people, made people assume the Cutlass would handle overall slightly to majorly better than other ships in her weight class, which at the time was (and still is) the Hornet and Freelancer.
The initial KS stats, outdated and janky as they were, supported this interpretation as well: Freelancer and Hornet had 8xTR2 maneuvering thrusters, whereas the Cutlass had 16. Some other comments from CIG emphasized the Cutlasses overall lower quality components, example being Ben describing the Cutlass as a "Glass cannon, or Rogue" in the first big livestream. The overall and popular interpretation was the Cutlass was nimble and had a modest cargo hold
(large for a fighter, small compared to Freelancer or Connie. Initially Cutlass and Avenger had identical cargo capacity). But was balanced by lower armor and overall durability, and less weapons than it's main "competitor" the Hornet, being they were the only combat ships at the time.
And that's what a lot of people were hoping, and expecting for for, for the longest time. The commercial REALLY emphasized what everyone assumed was what the Cutlass could do: dance around opponents and rely on mitigation via dodging and weaving vs straight up brawls like a Hornet.
And then it gets put into Arena Commander. And oh boy what a shit show that was. Turret was broken, half the thrusters simply didn't operate, the top speed was an appalling and shocking 160 m/s. It was obviously quite rushed, the guy at CIG who's job it is to you know make engines work in IFCS said he literally did not touch the Cutlass before it was thrown into Arena Commander alongside the Gladius.
A bunch of people, including plenty of non-Cutlass owners, were really confused why the Cutlass frankly handled like shit. It slid around all over the place, it had wonky bugs where thrusters would misfire and you'd drift in a different direction, it hogged up all the memory when it spawned or died. To put it bluntly it looked and felt really, really rushed.
So the Cutlass got a token buff up to 180 m/s, where it sits today, and some very minor changes to the IFCS thrusters to make it more stable. However, many people were confused and angered at why the Cutlass had such a low top speed and slow acceleration for having twin Hornet/300i sized thrusters.
And CIG basically said it was working as intended, so THEN a bunch of people got really mad over a perceived "bait and switch" between the still "official" lore and descriptions all backers were told to pledge on, and the very lackluster handling in game.
And now a good chunk of the QOCQER thread (aka the Cutlass Complaint Thread Dramabomb) feel the Cutlass is lacking in several departments, gives up too much combat viability to the "hybrid tax", is overscaled and bloated, and several other issues. Basically turning the "Fighter with a cargo hold" into a "Freighter than can fight". The fact that this new QA/Update is the first official word on the Cutlass in over a year did not help the issue at all, and just inflamed passions about being constantly "ignored", which got people angry, which made CIG never post any Cutlass updates, which got people more angry, etc etc etc.
I personally am worried about the "not supposed to stand up 1:1 with a Freelancer", because that is probably the most common cargo hauler in the game at the moment. If I, as a pirate player, need to bring 2 Cutlasses to raid 1 Freelancer, what's the point of a Cutlass? Obviously a Freelancer is more than capable of holding it's own, and can carry more cargo to boot. I see posts in
this very thread saying the only use a Cutlass has is a light loot transport, which is part of the problem indeed.
I'm not trying to get on a soapbox or preach to anyone, or start a debate, just offering some background and a view from the other side of the table. I'm probably going to scrap my Cutlass because it's not what I envsioned, and everything indicates that a group of Gladius/Sabres/Hornets escorting a Caterpillar or Freelancer will do everything better anyway.
I'm looking forward to the Buccaneer if CIG decides to go for it, seems like it's what I wanted in the first place.
TL;DR A bunch of people in "that Cutlass thread" feel the Cutlass role has shifted from originally being primarily a fighter with a smaller cargo hold, to now being a multi-crew boarding and loot hauling fighting freighter. And is now being very overshone by other ships both in the fighting and loot carrying departments, and as such will be used for neither. Others disagree, and now it's a hyperbole fest of the "whiny crybaby Cutlass owners not getting a OP murderboat QQ" vs "CIG lied and did a total bait and switch and Ben Lesnick is the devil incarnate".
I just want my Cutlass to be fun to fly and effective at it's job, something I feel that it needs to be a competent and viable combat threat to perform. Being half fighter and half freighter means you suck at doing both.
