Show the Type 99 some love

[shotgun-toting chipmunk]

The "simply pound them at range" tactic is true...if you're playing with little to no terrain and the PLA player is unwilling to engage you.

With the large amount of soldiers in the PLA squads, they are hard to suppress. They can take a few casualties on the way and still be alright. Once they get within range (assuming you're playing on a table where they didn't already start in range), you can leave them as is or split them into multiple fire teams. I've found the third fire team is almost an even trade-off for the EFTF and USMC 12" command radius. Throw in the fact that each squad has anti-armour capability integrated into it, right down to the individual fire-teams (well, except Team 2), and you find the points tend to be just fine as-is so long as you play smart.

 

[Mr Evil]

now compare them to the MEA who can do the same but better, and 3/4 the cost practicly.

also read the maths above evan if i figured in 20 points to squad cost for the flexability to split the fireteams it still comes to 150 points worth !!

all i ask is people do the maths, use the mea as a good base, ie buy a mea squad of 7 men with 2 rpgs in theri then add the cost of the pla fire team with the MG to make all 10 men and see the differance in points !!! its like adding up 2+2 and gettin 10 !!!! pla points value doesnt equite to modle costs or effectivness in the game, especialy when you take weapon ranges in as a fator, if they had armour as the brits and usmc have then they would be worth the points....just

 

[Cailet]

I'm not going to jump on the 'PLA suck' bandwagon because I haven't played much with them and I'm not exactly a 'pro' player anyway. However, I tend to find they die very easily. Especially with the short range of all their weapons (other than the solitary machine gun which generally finds it's own firepower coming back double when you take a long-shot).

On the other hand, if you do get close enough their assault can be startlingly effective (Ok so I shattered from the reaction fire when I pulled it, still worth it for the number of dead MEA).

It doesn't help that Low-Roller in fact tends to roll quite HIGH against me...

 

[Daddy Dragon]

I play USMC while my 12 year old son plays PLA. He and I have played 4 complete games against one another and he has lost everytime. He has run numerous additional test engagements solo, using MEA & USMC. The PLA can't seem to beat anything except the MEA (which will likely even out a bit once we get our Wave 2 stuff).

I have to admit that he's fairly bummed out based on the performance of his PLA units thus far. He's asked to change over to EFTF, but decided to wait and see if the Wave 2 stuff might alter the balance of power enough to make PLA more viable for him. Have to admire his resolve. He really wants to make his army work. His tactics are sound, and I consider him to be be exceptionally lucky with dice (to the point where I've had to implement point buy systems for RPGs because he rolls so much better than everyone else). He manages to make my M1's work for the supper, but once he loses numerical superiority with his tanks and his infantry starts taking casualties, his army hemorrhages quickly.

Regards,
Larry

 

[Paladin]

I think the PLA have a record of around 2-5-1 here. I've only played them once in the above list and managed to win. My Type-99 died in round two (round 1 missed with a 4) from a Challenger II. I had to play smart with my remaining infantry and only beat the Brits by baiting them and catching a fire team out of cover. If I'd have lost 1 more model I'd have lost. Made the match "fairly" balanced. Though I had to "try a lot harder" to win than the EFTF did.

 

[shotgun-toting chipmunk]

The RPG has longer range but not nearly as powerful as the PF-89. As for the points difference after upmanning the MEA squad, you may have the same numbers but you a)don't have anything to compare to the QBB95, and b)lack the ability to split into fire teams, leaving your troops horribly bunched together and at risk of losing multiple troops to things like LAWs, grenade launchers, etc. The PLA have the capability to negate that possibility by splitting into fire teams and spreading their forces out. Oh, and don't forget c) by splitting into multiple fire teams, you suffer less from loss of the unit leader, as the other fire teams can still operate normally. If the MEA unit leader is killed, everybody's milling around for a while until things get sorted out regardless.

So, a 50 point difference to get both a squad MG with heavier suppressive capabilities, a more robust command structure, and the ability to spread out more and avoid multiple casualties from individual heavy weapons. Sounds about right to me.

 

[emperorpenguin]

I see Chipmunk's logic, the PLA are also better in assault too, but why have they no armour? Even a 6+ would be good

 

[Hiromoon]

Armor -> Expensive

 

[emperorpenguin]

Armor -> Expensive

not that expensive judging by the 5+ of the EFTF and USMC.

But what I'm wondering is: Is there any info to say one way or the other if China equips its troops with body armour?

 

[Hiromoon]

Compare the size of the PLA to the individual militaries of the countries that make up the EU and the military of the US.

Now, come up with a sceme to supply the far larger PLA with body armor given the rate decent body armor can be made. Then explain to Mr. Evil why his shipment of Type 99s had to be delayed.


And everything I've been seeing as of late have pointed to the PLA not getting body armor for troops. The only stuff I HAVE seen are for special tactical units and riot troops. They may have soemthing on thebooks for further down the road, but they don't even have a Land Warrior like program up and running at the moment.

 

[BuShips]

Guys, the PLA do indeed have body armor. It's the body just in front of them. :roll: :wink:

 

[Hiromoon]

Hey, that's right! They can use the squad infront of them as cover! Or at least obscured....

Regular Troops

Their version of SWAT

emperorpenguin's best troops ever!

 

[byram]

Their version of SWAT

*Homer Simpson voice* D'OH */Homer Simpson voice*

 

[Tredrick]

Their version of SWAT

*Homer Simpson voice* D'OH */Homer Simpson voice*

I think that is their stomp dancing team.

The thing with the Chinese is their modernization programs get them to the point where technology was when they started their 20 year modernization program 20 years ago.

 

[emperorpenguin]

emperorpenguin's best troops ever! ]

Why?

 

[Hiromoon]

Body armor and billy clubs.

 

[emperorpenguin]

Body armor and billy clubs.

why are they my best troops though? Because I asked if there was any info on Chinese body armour?

 

[Rob_A]

Those 'SWAT' guys look like they are doing some kind of traditional Rugby dance.

 

[BuShips]

Body armor and billy clubs.

why are they my best troops though? Because I asked if there was any info on Chinese body armour?

And I gave you the answer. It's more Chinese. I'm pulling your leg, of course :wink: . And yes Hiromoon, the rear units should be able to find Obscurement behind the frontal units. Maybe the PLA player should be allowed to be the only player that doesn't remove his dead units of infantry or tracks so that he can use them as terrain. In a recent Rulesmasters comment Matt was "tempted" to see the validity of dead tanks as terrain. I really like that idea, but using dead soldiers might be seen as pushing a point too far :twisted:. Still, the PLA has lots of bodies (i.e. "Human Wave" and all)... :lol:

 

[Paladin]

In a recent Rulesmasters comment Matt was "tempted" to see the validity of dead tanks as terrain.

Why wouldn't you use them as terrain/cover?
They don't suddenly become ethereal after they die.