Devs -- 3 PLA Weapon Q's

Expendable Grunt · Post by **Expendable Grunt** » 2007-08-17 11:43

Bit of searching didn't help much. I'm not saying these have to be done anytime soon (.7 sounds packed already, .8 maybe?)

Is PR's PLA faction going to replace the QBZ-95 sometime in the future? I heard the real life PLA was replacing it with something like the Type 02 or Type 03. Can't find anything on it though so I may be mistaken.

Also, will they replace the SA-7 with the HQ-9?

Also, the PLA units in the game use the PF-89; will we get the PF-98 eventually? The major difference in the game would be looks, and when the L-AT sights are fixed up, it would have a rangefinder, which could be useful.

Just wanted to know, devs.

LtSoucy · Post by **LtSoucy** » 2007-08-17 11:53

so are u saying u want NEW guns?

Post by **e-Gor** » 2007-08-17 11:53

QBZ-95 will be the PLA main assault rifle in PR for the forseeable future.

HQ-9 would be a more realistic AA system, but currently not exactly high priority. Need to fix the stinger and grail first...

I believe PF-89 is still accurate for use in the PLA? The PF-98 is a different style of weapon - probably suitable for the heavy AT role in PR, whereas the PF-89 is very much a LAT weapon, similar to the AT4. It's not currently planned, but might be nice to do at some point.

Post by **Rhino** » 2007-08-17 12:06

ye the PF-98 looks much more like a Static AT weapon or a H-AT weapon rather than a L-AT weapon which the PF-98 is.

It is not likely that we will replace any weapons any time soon that we make for a team, so things like the QBZ-95 and PF-89 ain't going any where any time soon.

LtSoucy · Post by **LtSoucy** » 2007-08-17 12:06

ok to much for me iam out

Expendable Grunt · Post by **Expendable Grunt** » 2007-08-17 12:16

WOAH, why did Soucy get banned???

@e-Gor, you're right on the PF-98
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/crewserved/type98.asp

Does sound more like a stationary / heavy AT. I saw it on wiki as a light AT weapon (I know I know it's wikipedia...my bad...) I guess they where refering to its weight not it's class.

Post by **Outlawz7** » 2007-08-17 12:23

heh, heavy AT with range finder would be nice, built-in SOFLAM ftw

Post by **Jaymz** » 2007-08-17 19:29

The company version Type 98 is fitted with an X4 telescope optical sight

company version? that the one we have? as in, should ours have 4x?

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2007-08-17 19:51

Expendable Grunt wrote:Is PR's PLA faction going to replace the QBZ-95 sometime in the future? I heard the real life PLA was replacing it with something like the Type 02 or Type 03. Can't find anything on it though so I may be mistaken.

The QBZ-95 is definetly in the PLA to stay. It is being supplimented in certain units by the QBZ-03 assault rifle. Typically better trained units, such as the Marines, Special Forces and Paratroopers carry QBZ-95s while not so well trained units carry QBZ-03s due to their similarity to the old Type-81 rifles.

Due to this the QBZ-03 may only be a transitional weapon for troops moving from the Type-81 to the new rifles, where as the QBZ-95 will become the standard eventually as older soldiers retire and everyone trains on the QBZ-95 (the fact that the PLA's new SAW and sniper rifle are also bullpups leads me to believe that they wish to standardize on the bullpup QBZ-95.)

However, that second paragraph is just speculation.

Expendable Grunt · Post by **Expendable Grunt** » 2007-08-17 20:17

What exactly is the stickler with bullpup weapons that people don't like? IMO they seem pretty good ideas, but I've never fired one. Are they testy?

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2007-08-17 20:29

Apparently the soldiers who were used to the Type-81 kept grounding the magazines and complaining about the position of the sights.