PLA might be coming into their own.

B

britneyfan97

Mongoose
Quoting Shotgun-Toting Chipmunk quoting himself...
Quote:

Some thoughts:


Now for the PLA you can use the same tactic, but here's where the PLA get something nice: The EQ2050 costs 60pts, and you can use two for a single support slot (according to my playtest stats). Now you can essentially deny airspace over multiple parts of the board, and even overlap coverage in areas where you're most concerned (ie where your Type 99s are headed) Move 'em right and suddenly the Apache risks getting 8 AA missiles thrown at him during the player's ground turn, and four more as a reaction in the air phase. All for 120 points.
Click to expand...

I think this is probably going to be one of the PLA's biggest strengths right here... if the playtest stats make the final grade.
Everyone complains about overcosting, but here you have some really nice undercosting possibly. To make that USMC or EFTF player rethink their air reliant strategies.

Sorry, just trying to predict future trends is all.

I find myself liking the PLA more and more lately... that 23mm cannon on the FAV did a nice job scratching up the paint on an Abrams in one demo I ran. Need to snag myself a few more of those. :twisted:
 
Yeah, the PLA's big advantage is that they get a lot of nicetoys at a low-ish cost compared to the EFTF and USMC. The big problem is the composition of the basic squad, where you're paying a lot of points for the extra man and the Rocket launchers.
 
While I like this vehicle, and will repaint some for my MEA, I don't understand some of the reasoning here. So there are some overcosted stuff in the PLA. The basic infantry and the Type99. So instead of just errata the cost, you instead undercost other models to help them out? Why not just get to the root of the problem and fix it? Sounds like a typical American Political tactic to me!! Don't fix the problem, just address the symptoms.

That said it and the FAV are welcome additions for the PLA.

BTW: I just want to say, I'm NOT saying the vehicle is undercosted, nor the FAV, just stating reasoning that to do so, to balance the scales is not a good idea. Just wanted to add that bit before some fanboy bits thru his keyboard! :lol:
 
But, you are saying that, if you read what you wrote in the first paragraph. No, I think the problem is that you (and the rest of us) don't understand how MGP has determined the point costs of various units. This is (and was) true of 40K... the same sorts of units don't have the same costs across factions. GW told everyone that we shouldn't expect that units will be balanced across factions, only within a faction. So, Space Marine weapons and such costs a certain amount, while the same weapon or option costs something different in another faction.
So, it may seem to us that certain things are over or under-costed, clearly they fit into MGP's scheme somewhere, we just don't know how. Just because we're not happy with something in the game doesn't mean that it's a mistake.
The Old Soldier said:
While I like this vehicle, and will repaint some for my MEA, I don't understand some of the reasoning here. So there are some overcosted stuff in the PLA. The basic infantry and the Type99. So instead of just errata the cost, you instead undercost other models to help them out? Why not just get to the root of the problem and fix it? Sounds like a typical American Political tactic to me!! Don't fix the problem, just address the symptoms.

That said it and the FAV are welcome additions for the PLA.

BTW: I just want to say, I'm NOT saying the vehicle is undercosted, nor the FAV, just stating reasoning that to do so, to balance the scales is not a good idea. Just wanted to add that bit before some fanboy bits thru his keyboard! :lol:
Click to expand...
 
Okay, okay...as much as I am against the whole 'fan-boy' vs. 'whiner-supreme' arguments...and as much as I DO defend the companies whose products I buy (like MP), even when they release/do things I do not like...

I still have to say that the point costing in Battlefield Evolution, at the least from the PLA view-point, is absurd.
It is very hard to be a PLA player, when:

1) A Sergeant, 2 riflemen and a bazookaman cost 40 points more than a corporal, 1 rifleman and a bazookaman. How in the world does one extra rifleman cost 40 points? The Sergeant isn't worth THAT much more! (although I know the same thing happens with the USMC and their expensive Sergeant)

2) For 160 points, you get a Sergeant, 4 riflemen, and 2 bazookamen. On the other hand, playing with MEA militia, you can get a Leader, 4 riflemen, and 2 bazookamen for only 100 points. I do not think the lower range, +2 to DD and other little specials are worth 30 points EACH for the PLA bazookas. 30 points! In all other aspects, aside from CC, the PLA and the MEA are equal - Size 1, Move 5", Killed on a 4+, rifle range of 20", rifle damage at D6, command range of 6".
Where is the sense in the cost differences?

I do admit that each faction has their pros and cons. I do admit that the PLA MG team (3 guys) is 50 points less than the USMC MG team (4 guys), with similar MG power (although very different personnel stats).

However, it just makes it clear that the PLA are the underdogs in this whole thing, when it comes to points=power. The PLA are supposed to represent this oncoming horde of bodies, right? Well the MEA do a much better job at that. If the PLA squad was properly costed, even at 20 points less, which is still very wrong, it would make it a touch better. You can have 16 MEA vs 10 PLA for the same point cost (albeit with different weapons and tactics due to command radius/teams).

As much as it is MP's perogative on how to balance these factions, it would be nice if it at least made sense.
Sure, having the anti-air power will be nice...but what happens when your opponent is bird-less? I would much rather have a few more troops than a neat-looking air-killer.
 
ive harped on about this lots and nobody ever seems to take note,

PLA are overcosted by about 20%-25% for both the type 99 and the infantry squad, The fav is a bit over costed when you compare it to the shadow as it doesnt take as much damage, the APC is slightly over costed when compared to the Warior, and the comand squad is way over costed compared to brit command squad as in effect that bonus action the pla get is of less value in points than the EFTF one as the pla can use it on a 350 point tanks while the EFTF get to use it on a 425 point tanks in effect giving the extra command more value in effect.

my sugestion was to allow this

PLA infantry forces have buy one full squad get one squad half price and carry this over to their transport as well (works our as a 25% discount or less.

pla Tank forces get a buy one tank get one tank half points cost (upgrades stay at same value) this i feel would address the ballance and show the PLA as a hord force as its a bonus to double up on everything

ie in a tank force 3 tanks would be 875 points instead of 1050 points but the infantry in support would be at normal value.

just my point of view, they wouldnt need to change cards just ammend the army selection list.
 
Instead of house rules. . . we may have to wait until new stuff comes out and paints a bigger picture of the game.

I am not a fan of wargames that calculate their point costs in terms of unit strengths and abilities. Point costs always have to come from playtesting and a reflection of the tactics a fraction is made to use best.

We have not seen all the stuff the factions are going to get, so wait and see. If you feel underpowered, the make houserules. . . or loose with style.

It is only a game!
 
Mr Evil said:
just my point of view, they wouldnt need to change cards just ammend the army selection list.
Click to expand...

Nice work Evil, but remember with your suggested selection change the EFTFs ability to clearly win every engagement might just be challenged... :wink:

-V
 
Less theory, more application!!!

I just did an 850 point demo game of USMC vs PLA. Both had a shatter point of four models, although the PLA had more total models (nice little bonus there, for you theoretical types). In the end it was a close fight that the PLA lost. It was NOT due to range, or point cost, or anything like that. It was because of tactics and luck of the dice! (I couldn't roll a 6 to save my life and my opponent rolled them like he was getting paid for it :)) Tactically my opponent and I were both sending a transport full of troops to take a tower on a will that would provide field of fire over the entire board (nothing like Elevated Firing Positions to fight an Abrams. We got there about the same time, but he brought his Abrams in to support when he saw I had the same idea, and popped my transport before I could unload. What I should have done was sit back and pound his troops and transport before moving in. (my position would have allowed my IFV, Type 99, and infantry to all hit that position the moment he crested the hill while denying his Abrams any targets). Oh, and by the way, my Type 99 lasted the entire game and eliminated several enemy models :)

The problem with a straight up point cost comparison is that it doesn't factor in overall force composition and tactics. If you try to play the PLA like the USMC, you're going to lose every time, and complain that the points don't stack up right. For example, don't go tank hunting with the Type 99. Use careful maneuvering to go after infantry and smaller vehicles.
 
I think you're missing the point about why people aren't happy with the current points-vs.-capability ratio of the PLA. It isn't because you can't fight the PLA like the USMC...it's because you can't fight the PLA like the PLA.

IRL, Everyone accepts that the PLA has lower quality gear than their western counterparts, and their plan to compensate for that is with overwhelming numbers. As the PLA are costed now, you can't get the quantitative superiority to compensate for the qualitative superiority of the USMC or the EFTF. And the company line of "well, just run away from the enemy's tanks and concentrate on their infantry" gets old real fast.

In WW2 Sherman tank crews weren't told to just "run away" whenever they saw a Tiger. You sent 5 Shermans to take on a Tiger or a Panther, and figured on losing 4 of them to get the enemy tank. That's the sort of thing PLA players are looking to do in this game.
 
Have you considered that most people really don't know anything about the PLA? :)

IRL, the Chinese are actually slowly beginning to warm to the trends of "western warfare," scaling back size and improving technology. They are still behind technologically, and still have a lot more people. They won't ever be just like Western military powers. They'll most likely do what they did with communism ("Communism with Chinese characteristics."), which is take what they like and adapt it to their societal and cultural strengths. You'll still have a larger army, but don't expect swarming hordes a la the Korean War. They've moved beyond that.

Personally, I have yet to have a game where I've had a points-vs-capabilities problem. Adapt or die ;)
 
But chipmunk, aren't the PLA described as being technologically inferior, but with near-unlimited manpower? It's not what we don't know, it's what we're told by MP!

As said above, I have NO problem with the lower tech/weaponry of the PLA. In fact, I like the feeling of being the underdog. But I would rather be the underdog swarm that I'm supposed to be.

Really, it's bad enough that the pointcost comparison between the PLA and all three other factions is just silly, and very, very wrong. But the fact that even within the single Infantry Squad, you have a huge problem. Namely the fact that Team 1 (leader, 2 riflemen, bazookaman), is 40 points higher than Team 3 (leader, rifleman, bazookaman). Nevermind how they stack up with other factions' infantry, they don't even stack up within their own squads!

And there is no way that "different tactical styles" is a valid excuse for such drastically poor pointcosting. The fact that the PLA are FORCED to fight differently, and then pay for it by costing MORE points...wah!? Where's the sense there?

And if you think that making up for it in later releases makes any sense either, you're just as nuts as me for buying into PLA in the first place :)

I highly doubt there will ever be any pointcost errata, no matter how much any of us would like it.
However, it would be very sweet of MP to offer a hypothetical 'fix.'
 
Folks at Evocommand have talked much on this subject. I'm in the something smells camp on this topic. Pietia has made some fantasic cards for the PLA, including the T-99. Download them sometime. You can find them in the Discussion Topic. www.evocommand.com

By the way many at evo have agreed with you on the point costing of the infantry. In the future there will be new PLA cards made. In the meantime I like to use them at 165 pts. Drop team two for 50pts. Drop Team Three for 55pts.

Looking at other cards including both MEA and EFTF and USMC it seems that the basic soldier of the PLA is 10pts. The 1st Leader seems to be a freebee, but each addition leader seems to run +5 points. Gunners are 30pts. Seems a good rule of thumb is this +5 per 10 range and +5 per +1 on the D10, even though it could be more once you get beyond +2, due to the increased bang for the + you get. (more like 10 per 15 per ect after the +2.) A MEA basic Gunner is 25pts. Using him as the basic. A PLA gunner is 25, -5 for 10" range, +10 for the +2 to DD. The Fedayeen would break down as 25pt +5 for range, +10 for DD bonus, Total 40pts. Seem like the +5 for Fearless was forgotten. So I would have had them at 45pts. That said.

Team 1: Sgt. 10pts. 2 riflemen 20pts. Gunner 30pts. Total 60pts.
Team 2. Corporal 15pts. Rifleman 10pts. LMG gunner 25 pts. 50 pts.
Team 3. Corporal 15pts. Rifleman 10pts. Gunner 30pts. Total 55pts.
Grand Total 165pts.

There is a whole thread discussing point cost at Evo. Feel free to use them or just to add your two bits on costing of models.
 
1) there is another soldier
2) you pay a premium for your leadership, just like in SST.

Before you break into fire teams, that unit leader is extremely critical. Lose him and you suddenly have 9 soldiers unable to take actions. Now, once you break into fire teams, that is mitigated, but individual fire teams are much easier to suppress.

That's another point: effective use of fire teams. Three fire teams really is a big deal. It allows you to spread your forces out, much the way Land Warrior enables USMC to stretch out. Certainly not to the same degree, but then USMC infantry can't take out tanks, either. You can move your squad as one unit to close in order to reduce the risk of long range shots suppressing anybody (assuming you aren't able to utilize cover at long distance), then break up into specialized roles. Use your MG team to provide suppressive fire while your LAW teams advance on enemy armour (either individually for flexibility, or as one large team to reduce the chance they are suppressed). Break off one LAW team to engage an enemy transport while the rest of the squad lays withering fire power upon a smaller enemy fire team. With the PLA infantry squad, you can spread out as much or as little as you like while maintaining concentrated firepower at any point along your battle line, something other armies lose the more the spread apart.
 
3 man fire teams are pointless, they cant supres the enemy, and they get supressed just from being breather on !!! its not as efective as you would hope, we describe it as a bit wishy washy, they dont whant to split as the fire teams have little effect, they dont wish to stick together as their are 2 many to make effective use of cover !!!
 
Pietia, just posted up the lastest PLA update on the evocommand website.

http://forum.evocommand.com/viewtopic.php?p=13641#13641


As for the tactic of using small fireteams. See this topic I wrote.


http://forum.evocommand.com/viewtopic.php?t=753
 
The Old Soldier said:
Pietia, just posted up the lastest PLA update on the evocommand website.

http://forum.evocommand.com/viewtopic.php?p=13641#13641
Click to expand...
hes done an amzing job !!!

Mongoose take note !!!!

Wanna sell the game prodiuce the cards befor the minis, see what minis people ask for as well !
 
The MG team can suppress just fine, like any other army's MG team. As for the other teams, well, you shouldn't be trying to use a LAW team to suppress infantry anyway! :)

Have you considered breaking off just one fire team? For example, break off the MG team and have them set up, then use the rest of the squad to flush the enemy toward the MG team, or go tank hunting, or whatever. Or when the EQ2050s come out, break off a LAW team and keep them with a EQ2050. Ought to keep any lurking Shadows honest :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MongooseMatt
Battlefield Evolution - a Quick Playtest Report
4 5 6
Replies
117
Views
44K
Rick
Rick
Back
Top