(Answered) ECM and ECCM

[NeonKnight]

Looking at the Diagram on page 101 (of the new PDF), while complicated is easy enough to understand how they overlap work, etc.

But what if the source of the ECM/ECCM field is within the opposite field? Is it fully shut down, or just in the zone?

I can see the argument going both ways:

1. Easiest and most realistic: Fully shut down as it's signal is being cancelled as soon as it is omitted.

2. More complicated but less realistic: Follow the rules as laid out on Page 101.

If if then follows option 1, what if the ECCM manages to overlap two ECM sources? As a thought experiment in our group we discussed how it would work out, and I postulated for ease and lest user bias to randomly determine which ECM source was properly tuned to counter, as obviously the ECM side would want the least beneficial ECM countered, while the ECCM side would want the most beneficial ECM field countered.

[NeonKnight]

Found this in the Errata:

2) Second paragraph, between the first and second sentences, insert the following:

“If the hex where the ECM is being generated is covered by ECCM, then the entire ECM field is nullified.”

Still, that is only a 1 for 1 and does not cover if there is 2 ECM field covered by 1 ECCM field, nor does it answer what happens to the ECCM generator.

[NeonKnight]

As this is potentially a REALLY Confusing question, I've mocked up a few example images.

In EXAMPLE 1, we have MECH A producing an ECM Field, and Mech 1 Produccing and ECCM Field.

As per the Eratta, it states that an ECCM that overlaps an hex where the ECM is being Generated, the entire ECM Field is nullified. Does this mean the entire ECCM is also nullified, or does the ECCM still cover the rest of it's hexes? I.E. do the two cancel each other out, or does ECCM trump ECM.

In Example 2, we see Mech A and Mech B are both generating an ECM Field, where Mech 1 is generating an ECCM field. What happens here? I can see multiple ways this plays out:

1. The ECCM does nothing as there are two ECM's to the 1 ECCM
2. The ECCM player chooses which of the Two ECM fields they wish to cancel - makes ECCM very powerful
3. The ECM players chooses which of the two ECM fields is canceled out - makes ECM very powerful
4. Randomly determine which of the two ECM fields is cancelled out - makes ECCM function closer to the Eratta

Sorry to make this so confusing, but really only makes sense here on a 1:1 ratio.

Also, the Eratta document (July 8 - 2019) does not appears to have been included in the newest Printing of TAC OPS.

[Xotl]

We're errataing out that errata about overlapping fields.  Does the remaining text solve the issue?

[NeonKnight]

We're errataing out that errata about overlapping fields.  Does the remaining text solve the issue?

If you mean this line of text is going to be removed:

“If the hex where the ECM is being generated is covered by ECCM, then the entire ECM field is nullified.”

Then, I would have to see how it gets worded to see if solving the issue.

I still like the Idea of the two field cancelling each other out (If the sources are in the field, i.e. my Example 1) as it fits to intent of the rules I think.

[Xotl]

There is no rewording.  Just that line of text is being axed; the rest of the passage remains as it was (with any other errata besides that).

[NeonKnight]

Hmm...Then I guess seeing as how the errata was just the single line added in, if now being taken out I guess part of the answer is, there is no effect.

I'll need to chew over the rest and make sure it answers my question.

[NeonKnight]

Looks like this can be answered for the time being.

With the New Tac Ops book, and the v3.06 errata no where to be found (Errata page only points to v3.03), and neither has the errata-ed rule I referred to above. I believe I have an idea of how this functions now.