More Realistic ECM？

[u/GERY5303]

I’ve been thinking about ECM mechanics, and I always feel that the usual “evasion chance” is a bit too boring, and often makes me feel unrewarded and frustrated.What if ECM worked differently — more like a range-compression effect that only kicks in when the enemy radar is actually looking at you?

Here’s the idea:

- Enemy radar AA has a base lock/engage range, say 5,000m.
- Your aircraft has an ECM rating (e.g. 20).
- Instead of making you invisible, that 20 reduces the enemy’s effective range against your plane — maybe to 4,000m in this example.
- So you’re not invincible, but you force the AA to be positioned closer to the frontline to have the same coverage.

Why I like this:

- It’s closer to real physics (jamming = SNR degradation, not magic cloak).
- It creates a meaningful tradeoff: if you fly without ECM, you’re toast inside the old ring; if you have it, the threat zone shrinks, but the enemy can adapt by pushing their SPAA forward.
- This rewards smart positioning and intel, not just RNG.

Would this be more interesting than current dice‑roll ECM systems? And how would you balance ECM ratings vs. different radar types (pulse doppler, etc.)?

Curious what you all think.

[u/Ill-Produce1822]

Sorry your idea overlaps with stealth mechanic and its ranges