Author Topic: Which is worse? Standard Terror Mission or Terror Ship Crashed?  (Read 5676 times)

Offline spoidex

  • Sergeant
  • **
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Which is worse? Standard Terror Mission or Terror Ship Crashed?
« on: September 20, 2017, 03:49:35 am »
Okay, I'm on Veteran but I'm only playing for the Combat and not any other achievements (heavily tweaked game in radar resources and bases/interceptors) to allow Alien contact at all times, but staying on FMP rulesets and research trees).  Thanks to OpenXcom I can enjoy my very first ever PC game again, that hooked me forever during Operation Desert Storm I.

I'm also using the Osprey Mod so my egress at start is a long tube w/o the ability to get any soldiers out or to throw some smoke or other defense in front of my HWP egress.

So I decided to down my next Terror Craft instead of just letting it land for a normal Terror Mission.

With the craft blown open, the Cyberdiscs have managed to already have the door of the Osprey in crossfire from positions that are so far away that I can't even get out the door or they can already sap my HWP.  The Fog of War tiles are at least 10-15 away and up a hill on that side of the craft plus the Cyberdiscs are on level 2.

I guess that could happen just as well in a normal Terror Mission, but with normal Terror maps there is usually not enough space between the Xcom craft and the nearest buildings to have more than one or two enemies directly in front of the egress.

So is it better to just take standard Terror missions than blow a terror ship cadre all over the starting map turn with the chance to already be surrounded.

And one more thing that I just don't remember happening with the Skyranger, I have had several kill shots through the front windows of the Osprey on the nearest trooper, the ones stuck in the back of that 2 wide tube.  Is that a function of the Osprey mod or would it also happen in an FMP Skyranger?  If that's the case I may have to decrease my troop load just to stay forward of the windows.

Offline 7Saturn

  • Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
    • View Profile
Re: Which is worse? Standard Terror Mission or Terror Ship Crashed?
« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2017, 11:45:05 am »
Actual terror missions have one big drawback: Every killed civilian will give you minus points. OK, you get plus points for saved ones. But usually you don't really affect that part of the outcome (unless you lift off right after landing, which will be even better than not reacting at all). So you can end up with almost no points for your efforts, as all civilians were killed with no fault of your own. This can't happen on terror ship missions and to add to that: More loot. The ship itself holds a lot to be sold. =) And even if you don't give a damn about any loot and just can't afford to lose you soldiers at this particular time, terror ship mission is better: Just let it lay there to rot and forget about it. You can't really do that with terror missions, as not reacting will give you a hunkin big amount of minus points. A shot down UFO has already contributed a few points by shooting it down. It won't do any harm to let it vanish on its own. So if I actually have the choice to shoot down the terror ship or let it start a terror mission, I'll take shooting it down every time. I even do that on the first month, when I can. Two Interceptors with 2 fully loaded Avalanche launchers can do the trick.

Offline The Reaver of Darkness

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1510
    • View Profile
Re: Which is worse? Standard Terror Mission or Terror Ship Crashed?
« Reply #2 on: September 21, 2017, 12:12:33 pm »
Cyberdiscs are notorious for their high reactions, toughness, and tremendous damage and good accuracy. You can deal with them camping your craft exit in at least two ways:
1.) move tough and/or expendable units into their line of fire to drain their time units, then move in the ones that have the power to kill
2.) drop smoke in front of the craft before you step out, and use the smoke as cover until you come at them head on and get mutual surprise

Generally speaking, a crashed terror ship is easier to assault and gives you more points than a successful terror mission, however there are exceptions such as the situation you described with cyberdiscs getting in a rough ambush point, or getting lucky in a terror site and saving a lot more civilians than you lose. I will always take the crash if there are no other considerations, but shooting down the terror ship can be the hard part--though they go down pretty easy with avalanches in vanilla.

Offline 7Saturn

  • Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
    • View Profile
Re: Which is worse? Standard Terror Mission or Terror Ship Crashed?
« Reply #3 on: September 21, 2017, 12:52:25 pm »
Well, once you have plasma beams, they all fall after contact. It's more a problem of reaching them in the first place. In the early game you simply don't have anything, that could run 4800 knots an hour. So you will only catch them close to landing, which leaves only a small time frame, where you have a chance in the early game.. When playing without save scumming, that becomes the real problem. With save scumming you will have an idea of when they will appear and camp you the interceptors at their landing zone.

Offline alsec

  • Squaddie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
    • alsec.co.il
Re: Which is worse? Standard Terror Mission or Terror Ship Crashed?
« Reply #4 on: May 28, 2018, 04:24:08 pm »
Crash. Definitely.

Offline The Reaver of Darkness

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1510
    • View Profile
Re: Which is worse? Standard Terror Mission or Terror Ship Crashed?
« Reply #5 on: June 02, 2018, 01:03:46 am »
So you will only catch them close to landing, which leaves only a small time frame, where you have a chance in the early game..
Not really. They often buzz around low to the ground at reduced speed for several hours, just like other UFOs do.

Offline 7Saturn

  • Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
    • View Profile
Re: Which is worse? Standard Terror Mission or Terror Ship Crashed?
« Reply #6 on: June 02, 2018, 10:30:42 am »
That might feel long enough with Avangers. Without, especially without a Hyperwave decoder too, things tend to be a little rushy. Any yes, of course I also achieved to crash them with Avalanche rockets (2 interceptors may to the trick). But still, that doesn't leave you a big window of opportunity, mostly to reach them in time in the first place.

Offline The Reaver of Darkness

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1510
    • View Profile
Re: Which is worse? Standard Terror Mission or Terror Ship Crashed?
« Reply #7 on: June 02, 2018, 02:04:50 pm »
It's not common you can manage to shoot one down with interceptors, but it's pretty common with a firestorm. It's only slightly slower than their top speed, so you need merely spot the craft flying slow and the firestorm can likely reach it.

Offline 7Saturn

  • Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
    • View Profile
Re: Which is worse? Standard Terror Mission or Terror Ship Crashed?
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2018, 08:59:37 pm »
The main reason I don't use those is, that their range is rather limited. I usually skip Firestorms and Lightnings altogether. Just not worth the effort, considering, that 2-3 weeks later you already can produce Avengers. And on the bright side: With plasma beam, it's only a question of getting there in time. Once you reach them, they're toast. =) With Avalanche, this is not so certain, especially in Ironman mode.

Offline The Reaver of Darkness

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1510
    • View Profile
Re: Which is worse? Standard Terror Mission or Terror Ship Crashed?
« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2018, 11:46:59 pm »
I agree. The Firestorm is actually nice to equip multiple bases with because it's a lot cheaper than the Avenger, but as the Avenger can go around the world pretty quickly, you don't really need to do that. And the Lightning is complete garbage in my book because it can't fit any tanks. Even if I didn't get the Avenger right away, I still wouldn't want the Lightning. I'd rather keep one or two extra Skyrangers for quick response.