[ARC] Operational Manual: The Drifter Doomsday Challenge


The region of Pochven continues to create a lot of challenges. One of the biggest challenges within Pochven is fighting against the Drifters. Their Primary Strike Weapon or Doomsday is rightly feared but it can be overcome without suffering losses.

I am happy and proud to publish a operational manual that explains how to do this, including the science behind it.

Operational Manual: The Drifter Doomsday Challenge

With this information, others should now be able to develop and deploy their own answer to the Drifter challenge. I look forward to seeing the results and I’ll be happy to provide support or advice, if it is needed or requested.


ARC Fleet Commander


Thank you, Dutch; excellent work as always from ARC.


Amazing stuff DutchGunner


Quite a well researched and written manual. I do have a bit of constructive criticism.
During the last section, ECM is theorized to work on Drifters but only if applied in a narrow window requiring a re-lock of the target. My question is how effective Burst Jam equipment would be in that role.
I can readily see that such a technique would have some downsides for logistics lock on friendly targets, but it has the distinct advantages of not requiring a target lock or leaving the user vulnerable to being locked. If I recall, no ship specializes in using burst jam, but that in turn means any ship could use one.


I do cover other methods at the end of the manual. I am a bit confused with your criticism with regard to ECM. The manual states:

‘ARC has not done any testing on using ECM. However because of the way that ECM works, it will result in losses to the Doomsday because the Drifters will be able to target and attack the ship that is applying the ECM’

At no point does it state that ECM is theorized to work but only if it is applied in a a narrow window.

If you are referring to Tracking Disruption, I can expand upon that. There is still much that is unknown on the technology behind the Drifter Ships. When the Overshield is destroyed, it would seem that it has multiple effects:

  • An ECM burst is activated that breaks all locks on the Drifter ship;
  • Any ongoing negative remote effects such as Tracking Disruption is completely removed, even if the 10 second duration only just started when the overshield was destroyed.

Because of this, it is important to apply Tracking Disruption before the Doomsday actually fires. Otherwise it will not be affected and likely result in the loss of a ship.

With regard to your question on using Burst Jam equipment: ARC has not done any research on using ECM as it will result in ship losses to the Doomsday. So answering the question is going to be an educated quess from my side:
Using Burst Jam equipment will require a flawless timing to work. If the timing is perfect, it COULD theoreticly result in the Doomsday not being fired as there is no active target. I do not believe this is a valid method though as the timing will most likely be wrong and the Doomsday will fire normally and destroy the target ship.


(ARC Fleet Commander)

1 Like

My mistake, I must have misread. It’s been a stressful day. My constructive criticism was meant to focus on the constructive part.


Not a problem. I reviewed the part you mentioned, based on the constructive intent. I thought you might be referring to Tracking Disruption instead of ECM. As such my reply was an additional clarification to avoid any confusion.


(ARC Fleet Commander)

1 Like


Good read, and very helpful to have in the field. Just a few questions/observations, though…

Section 2.1, final sentence: ‘loosing’ a ship. :slight_smile:

Also section 2.1: the difference between Scout and Assault cruisers—you mention ‘any ship that has “Tyrannos” in its name is a Drifter ship’. Is there consistency? ie: ‘Bob Tyrannos is always a Scout cruiser, and Jacob Tyrannos is always an Assault cruiser’, or have the same names been seen with each capability, such that Wolfram Tyrannos could be either’?

If it is consistent, do you guys maintain a list of ‘who’ is which?

Next, this all looks to be descended from the ‘Wild Weasel’ approach developed for ARC and SERAPH by Alizabeth. Given that the cap transfers count as ‘remote assistance’ modules in terms of pissing the Drifters off, is there really a need for the Scimitar, or would the old Aegis Gloria Dei Basilisk fits work as reliably as they used to?

Basilisk, TES Aegis Gloria Dei

[Basilisk, TES Aegis Gloria Dei]

Damage Control II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Gistum C-Type 10MN Afterburner
Thukker Large Shield Extender
Pith X-Type EM Shield Hardener
Multispectrum Shield Hardener II
Multispectrum Shield Hardener II

Large Remote Capacitor Transmitter II
Large Murky Compact Remote Shield Booster
Large Murky Compact Remote Shield Booster
Large Murky Compact Remote Shield Booster
Large Murky Compact Remote Shield Booster
Large Murky Compact Remote Shield Booster

Medium Low Friction Nozzle Joints II
Medium Polycarbon Engine Housing II

Light Armor Maintenance Bot II x5

Mid-grade Halo Alpha
Mid-grade Halo Beta
Mid-grade Halo Gamma
Mid-grade Halo Delta
Mid-grade Halo Epsilon
Mid-grade Halo Omega
Zainou ‘Gnome’ Shield Management SM-705
Zor’s Custom Navigation Hyper-Link

Nanite Repair Paste x527


Hello Arrendis,

Thank you for the compliment. I consider it high praise, comming from you.
It is unfortunate that an error managed to slip through. It is a small blemish on the quality of the manual.

Based on the different Drifters that have been encountered so far, there is consistency between the Tyrannos naming and the ship being capable of firing a Doomsday or not. It should be possible to maintain a list of ‘who’ is which.
It is an active choice from ARC to not to do this. With our current approach of always checking, we limit the risk of missing a Drifter ship that is armed with a ‘primary strike weapon’ or Doomsday.

As mentioned in the manual, other shield and armor doctrines are also viable. It comes down to having the right combination of angular velocity and signature radius. The Basilisk fit you shared will work reliably even without the Halo and other implants.


(ARC Fleet Commander)


For anger management, does the remote repair amount matter or just the number of active modules? I’m thinking about min-spec ships; getting to an acceptably low (let’s say 5%) chance of being hit is easy, while ensuring aggro and being tanky enough to survive regular DPS from the battleships, a little harder.

For anger management, it’s about the actual amount of remote repair. As an example: if both a Guardian and a Nestor use 4 identical remote repair modules, the agression will be focussed on the Nestor as it provides a bigger amount of remote repairs.

1 Like

That sounds like an expensive lesson plan.

Most of this stuff was tested risking expensive losses, Mr. Amoii. Ultimately you’re right though that you probably wouldn’t want a Nestor on the field in most cases unless you can somehow boost its defense enough to survive. Even with a properly-angry Drifter whose attention is drawn away there’s always the chance it’ll decide, “oh, whatever” and shoot the thing it can hit.

Which, yeah. Probably Nestor-go-boom.

I can confirm DutchGunner’s account, and that it works independently of the actual amount repaired. If I’m flying a Guardian and want to draw and hold Drifter attention I’ll just perma-run every remote repair unit I have even if it’s not actually needed.

I am fortunate, insofar as my favorite ship is a Catalyst. The research here is quite remarkable, however.

To avoid any confusion, I was using the Nestor and Guardian as an example. The testing was done with Basilisks and Scimitars. By coordinating the amount of repairs provided, we’ve been able to direct the Doomsday to the ship we want it to be fired at.


This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.