Terror star in a fleet

Lunch bag letdown

from GalCiv2 Forums

1: I tried to include the terror star in a fleet, but the game keeps crashing. Can Stardock comment on this please. Can the terror star be made part of a fleet to protect it? Otherwise, how can you possibly protect it?

2: I found the The terror star to be a dissapointment. It moves so low, that its value and expence are in question! It is more benificial to use transports to invade, at least you get the planet and even a free Tech for the victory. Using the terror star you wait for ever for it to get to the enemy planet, tyhen after a very short flash of light, its all over, the planets and sun are gone. Lunch bag letdown!

3,919 views 4 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I don't foresee myself ever building a terror star, but i can offer the following plausible solution.

plan in advance where you want to strike, then design constructors to have the range and speed to arrived to that destination within a turn, also have the max logistics capabilities researched. ALso, count how many total constructors that is need to build a terror star from start to finish.

Instead of building a terror star from a destination afar, have the constructors all arrived in a fleet fomration to the destination, then start building the terror star in one turn, of course, guard those fleet(s) of constructor with other ships. I think this is the only way to resolve your movement problem.

Is is better to have a death star than to have a terror star.
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
yeah i just use a fleet of constructors, but i was kinda hoping for a bit more glitzy solar system destruction, like an event movie, or one of those pics each time it happens.
SoundPackager - Customize the Windows sound scheme
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I built terror stars for the first time yesterday. I admit I built them simply because I could. My impression was, it was really awesome to see the devistation, but very little more.

I will comment, related to the OP, that I was playing a game where all planets within a certain range got converted to 9+ quality planets, so invading all of my opponent's planets would have been quite an undertaking. So I destroyed 4 star systems (all with 4 or more populated planets, each) and invaded the rest. In that specific setting, I saw it as a viable strategy, but not otherwise. I do have to say that I probably won't build them again any time soon unless I encounter a similar challenge.

With all of that having been said, I do have to say that, if you haven't destroyed a star system with a Terror Star, try it. Just once. It is awesome!

Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I don't foresee myself ever building a terror star, but i can offer the following plausible solution.plan in advance where you want to strike, then design constructors to have the range and speed to arrived to that destination within a turn, also have the max logistics capabilities researched. ALso, count how many total constructors that is need to build a terror star from start to finish.Instead of building a terror star from a destination afar, have the constructors all arrived in a fleet fomration to the destination, then start building the terror star in one turn, of course, guard those fleet(s) of constructor with other ships. I think this is the only way to resolve your movement problem. Is is better to have a death star than to have a terror star.
End of quote



Basically, I used part of this strategy, but it isn't like you would imagine. You only need a small number of constructors, once all the tech is researched, but then the thing needs a 10 turn power up period. Then, unless you are already in system, it still takes 10 turns or so to get even from one sector to the next.

I will offer this strategy, have your ships blanket the area with fleets, taking out any other ships first. Set up some sensor ships with decent range, and keep a fleet handy to deal with any "rebel fleets" coming in to destroy your Technological terror.

As my previous post, they are a "nice touch" but (IMHO) little more.