FD.___.0 CRAB DRONES
FD.___.01 PREAMBLE Crab Drones ( which is the Federation term for them because they can "walk sideways" and reach around and grab things in the rear with their "pincers" ) are drones that use a speically modified A.T.G. control computer which can receive transmissions from the launch vessel and move in directions contra to the standard drone guidance proceedures.
..... The drones can be fired facing any direction and move under instruction from the launch vessel in any direction ( within drone manouver limitations ) out to a distance from the vessel where-upon the drone shall move as a regular drone. The upshoot of this is to allow drones to spray out and wrap around the target, allowing weak rear shields to be struck by those drones.
Crab drones when in flight are receiving a continual stream of information from the launching vessel to direct them in directions other than directly towards their target and it is this continual stream of information that allows the drones to move as though targeting some kind of waypoint.

Crab drones only occour in Klingon simulators although it is unclear as to whether they we developed from proposed Kzinti drones that were found to be unworkable and thus used in a disinformation plan.


FD.___.1 Purchase
FD.___.11 Each crab drone is controlled by a highly advance form of ATG which is mounted in the drone exactly like the ATG control unit.
A crab drone control unit can opperate exactly as an ATG unit when signalled to do so.
Each Crab Drone control unit costs 1 BPV except where replacing an existing ATG unit ( such as type III, VII or VIII drones ) where it shall cost 0.5 BPV.
The warp seeking control system of type VI and IX drones can be replaced with crab drone control units for 0.5 BPV each. Note however that type VI & IX crab drones can not be launched by a MW warhead even if the bus drone had a crab drone control unit.

FD.___.2 Flight
FD.___.21 The Crab drone can launched facing in any diretion. Thus it ignores the FA restriction of FD1.21 .
FD.___.22 A crab drone can move in any direction within the control zone whilst opperating as a crab drone. Thus it can ignore F2.2 but it will still move under certain limitations.
• It can only turn if it's turn mode is fullfilled.
• It can not sideslip if it's sideslip mode is not fullfilled.
• It can not HET more often than the drone can HET.
• It can not ellect not to move.
• It can not move backwards.
• It can not change its speed ( even if it did have some kind of varriable speed divice ).

FD.___.23 Note however that if under the control of the launching vessel the drone can be moved into the same hex as the target unit and ordered not to strike the target unit and the drone shall move into the same hex as the target but not be considered near enough to actually strike it.

FD.___.3 Limitations
FD.___.31 Only the launching unit may control a crab drone and fighters and shuttle do not have the sophisticated communications equipment needed to control a crab drone as a crab drone ( although it will opperate normally as an ATG drone ).
FD.___.32 Each vessel that launches a crab drone can control that drone under the crab drone control freedoms listed above whilstever the drone is within a certain distance from the vessel. If the drone leaves that radius it reverts to a regular drone even if the drone does re-enter the zone of control of the launching vessel. The definition for determining if the drone is outside of the zone of control of the launching ship is during the resolve seeking weapons step of each impulse ( if needed ).
FD.___.33 Each vessel can control a crab drone out to a range that is mostly dependant on it's Aegis-linked sensor system. This means that each vessel is able to control a crab drone under the crab drone freedoms out to a range as listed in the table below.

Unit	Range ( in hexes)
X Ships ( or X-bases )	15
All Bases	10
Ship with Full or Limited Aegis	6
Ships without Aegis	3
PFs	2

FD.___.34 A crab drone can be order to opperate as a regular ATG drone and as such will opperate at a regular ATG drone from that point on.

FD.___.4 Historical Outcome
FD.___.41 Whilst considered to be a deadly weapon, the Klingons found in their simulators that crab drones that were used to strike rear shields were in fact easier to destroy because they 1) spent more time within the ADD feild ( especially when launched by ship that had no Aegis ) 2) became availible to be fired upon by rear phasers and 3) were able to be destroyed by T-bombs far more easily.
However when used as a delaying device to put speed 32 drones behind the simulated Kzinti ship, the temptation to hold nothing back for the latter drones was indeed a strong offensive capability. But this invarriably left a crippled Kzinti ship whether the Klingon was destroyed or not.

Perhaps ultimately it was the findings of the Klingon simulators coupled with the fact that in a fleet battle any ship launching crab drones would need to survive long enough for the drones to get out of its zone of control and thus be unable to pass the drones to another ship to control ( during the critical first three impulses or so (Note also that the longer the Carb Drones are in flight the longer the enemy fleet would have to sideslip their effects into nothingness)).

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, February 05, 2005 - 12:34 am: Edit

There would seem to be an inherent contradiction here (perhaps more than one?!?)

First, IIRC ATG is limited to a max range of 8 hexes of the target. if the drone attempts to "switch" to ATG targeting, and there is no target with inrange, does the drone not go "innert"?

secondly, the intent of drones is to acheive a 0 range intercept with a target...yet you are programing drones to avoid an intercept.

does not seem like a function that existing drones would be capable of fulfilling. (It having been noted many times before that "drones are not that smart".

finally, I think your philosophy is flawed:

The intent is to maximize damage, not minimize damage by messing with the ability of drones to find their targets.

I try to have an open mind about new systems and things... but I am not seeing a significant advantage in using this type of drone over the existing types.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, February 05, 2005 - 05:53 am: Edit

---

Quote:

First, IIRC ATG is limited to a max range of 8 hexes of the target. if the drone attempts to "switch" to ATG targeting, and there is no target with inrange, does the drone not go "innert"?

---

---

Quote:

secondly, the intent of drones is to acheive a 0 range intercept with a target...yet you are programing drones to avoid an intercept.

---

---

Quote:

does not seem like a function that existing drones would be capable of fulfilling. (It having been noted many times before that "drones are not that smart".

---

---

Quote:

finally, I think your philosophy is flawed:

The intent is to maximize damage, not minimize damage by messing with the ability of drones to find their targets.

I try to have an open mind about new systems and things... but I am not seeing a significant advantage in using this type of drone over the existing types.

---

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, February 05, 2005 - 06:02 am: Edit

As to not seeking your target at R0.

If you don't seek your target at R0 and the target leaves the hex then; the drone can switch to regular guidance ( or even ATG as the target will be at most at R1 ) and HET in the hex it is in and then move as though tailing the target vessel.
Alternately if the ship didn't move out of the hex then on the impulse after the the two unit entered the same hex as each other, the drone could be order to HET ( still not order to hit the target ) and then on the next impulse switch to normal drone guidance or ATG and strike the target ship on pratically any shield ( assuming it didn't leave the hex ).
This basically gives the drone an ability not entirely unlike the close combat manouvering of fighters.


I might have to have a think about how swordfish, starfish and MW drone interact with the crab drone control unit.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Saturday, February 05, 2005 - 03:05 pm: Edit

A good addition is that a drone is under looser conditions.

It is not required to close, but can't choose to *increase* distance.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, February 06, 2005 - 01:41 am: Edit

A treading-water drone, is something Kzinti players have wanted for a long time.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Sunday, January 15, 2006 - 08:56 pm: Edit

Since SVC referred to this rule, perhaps we should take another look at it...

Is this a "simulator only" option or is it intended for "real history" of the SFB universe?

The distinction basicly (imo) is to incorporate it into the full rules set, or limit it to the "Mad Scientists Workshop" section of Stellar Shadows Journal.

If it is a simulator only option you pretty much limit it to a foot note reference to other things like the Positronic Flywheel and super intelligent computers.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, January 16, 2006 - 12:15 am: Edit

Well when used in an umbrella formation (fired directly to rear, until control limit and then they break as per F2.2 to swing around an line up behind you); you are effectively building the infamous Kzinti "pop-up" drone and that might not be able to be put in the "real rules" because it's on the Auto-reject list (IIRC).

By George M. Ebersole (George) on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 03:10 am: Edit

I don't suppose there's a seahorse version of this?

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 08:01 am: Edit

I'ld certainly be willing to see rule generated for that crossmatch when* the second gets published but since the steve reserve the right to make slight but critical alterations to proposal it's prbably better to leave until that point.


* Yeah, technically it's an if not a when.