By EnsignExpendable
Disclaimer: this article contains only the historically justified reserves for buffing the T-28. I do not necessarily believe that any of these buffs are possible, likely, or necessary, either individually or put together. Buff My Tank segments are for entertainment purposes only.
The T-28 is one of the older tanks in this game, both by development time (most of the world was still on FT-17 clones in 1932), and by being in one of the first tech trees that were introduced. Through its long service in the Red Army, it was continuously modernized, but the T-28 in the game has remained the same (aside from losing its 85 mm gun). Let's see if we can apply some modernizations to the in-game tank.
Probably the most well known modification of the T-28 is the T-28E (ekranirovanniy, with screens). These tanks received additional armour plates, welded on to the existing armour. Instead of the in-game 30 in the front and 20 on the side, which even the weakest gun in the game has no problems with, the armour would grow to a respectable 80 in the front and 40 on the sides. This amount of armour actually matters, and will not be easily penetrated by tier 1 guns anymore.
Various T-28s were developed with increased speed. The T-29, which was a T-28 with a Christie suspension, could reach 57 kph. The T-29-4 could reach 72 kph. The T-29-5 could reach a blazing 81 kph.
In 1935, a hydromechanical transmission was developed for the T-28. Such a transmission would boost the agility of the tank (see the long-lost PzIV Hydro).
The tank was also modernized in 1935, into the T-28A. The T-28A could reach 68 kph (compare to the 45 kph the in-game T-28 is capable of) on the same suspension type.
I previously mentioned an 85 mm gun. Some of you, if you have been playing long enough, will remember the F-30 85 mm gun on the T-28. However, that is old news. The T-28 also saw tests of the F-39 95 mm gun. The ballistics of the gun were to be the same as the 95 mm divisional gun F-28. However, work on the 95 mm guns ceased in favour of 107 mm guns, and the F-39 didn't make it to mass production. This doesn't stop us in World of Tanks, however, so let's keep speculating. The F-39 gun was 39 calibers in length, which, although not a lot, got the shell to 650 m/s. It was estimated that the shell would penetrate 65 mm of armour angled at 60 degrees from a distance of 1000 meters. In similar estimates, the F-32 gets 43 mm of penetration under those conditions. Assuming the ratios hold, the penetration of the F-39 would be approximately 100 mm at 100 meters, against flat armour (given the in-game penetration of 67 mm for the F-32 gun). This is still lower than the ZiS-4, which is currently the top gun on the T-28, and still lower than the F-30 85 mm gun (that made its way to the KV-1). A F-39 gun with a lower much lower ROF, but much greater damage, wouldn't be overpowered for the T-28.
Here we go, an 80 mm armoured beast, flying around at 81 kph, with a 95 mm gun :) That ought to make the T-28 not suck.
Sources:
Popov et al, Builder of War Machines, Lenizdat, 1988, pp 38-52
Solyankin et al, Soviet Medium Tanks 1924-1941, Zeughaus, 2007, pp 32-41
No, just no 95mm for a tier 4 mobile medium.
ReplyDeletein the land of the derps a 95mm isnt op at all.
Deletealso mg turrets and main turret are so weak it can be pierced by explosive ammo.
Sounds like it would make a good high tier light.
ReplyDeleteNot really, seeing as how it's about the size of a house.
DeleteThat reminds me of the failpanther...
DeleteOne theory regarding the origin of the Finnish nickname for the thing (roughly "stagecoach") is that it reminded someone of said vehicles in period Westerns - and yes, those aren't exactly small critters.
DeleteT-28 doesn't suck, it was nerfed because it used to be massively OP.
ReplyDeleteRead the disclaimer please.
Delete(Not the Anonymous above)
DeleteIt's hard to write effective satire when so many believe the thing really does suck. It doesn't - and it's still OP.
.__.
DeleteThat must explain why I almost never see them anymore when I go seal-cub poaching in the low tiers.
Perhaps buff it with changing one radioman into a gunner?
ReplyDeleteThe "radio men" are machine gunners, making one a gunner won't help much.
DeleteBetter skills if someone plays it long enough. And in other tanks they usually make machine gunner into second gunner rather then second radio operator.
DeleteYou mean like the B1 hull-gun loader who for some bizarre reason has been turned into a radio operator while the *driver* of all people has a secondary loader role? Meanwhile for maximum inconsistency the deck-turret gunners of the Vickers Medium Mk. III are *both* radiomen (similar to the T-28) while in the Cruiser Mk. I one of them is a second gunner instead...
DeleteSometimes WG's design logic is beyond mortal comprehension. :/
Should do a buff my tank for IS 7 too but good article and good read.
ReplyDeleteIt's on my list. Not soon, but it's there.
DeleteThey could add it the additional welded armour, the T-29 Christie suspension and 85mm F-30 and make such a tank a Tier V premium light tank :D
ReplyDeleteThis tank doesnt really need buff, its easily the best tier 4 if its not spotted. In good hands, its quite OP. And im not whining, i enjoy playing this tank :)
ReplyDelete-Waltsuh
God damnit this tank would be a real killer you could apply modernization upgrades to it in the game, no wonder this beast murdered PzIV's on the Eastern Front easily despite being such an old machine.
ReplyDeleteMy suggestion is drop T-28 to tier 3 and give it its historical weight, nerf it accordingly and make its top gun the 76 mm L-10, then make 2 new tier 4, a slow but well armored T-28E with the 85mm F-30 as top gun wich should be similar to the Matilda and a T-29 with characteristics similar to the current T-28 and 57mm Zis-4 wich should play pretty mutch like the current T-28.
ReplyDeleteAnd IF wargaming really likes to please its comunity a somewhat unistorical yet plausible and somewhat logical evolution, T-29-5 with armour from T-28E and 85mm F-30 at tier 6 while regular T-29 is pushed to tier 5. But since wargaming likes to keep things "historical" lol, we will never see something like that from them.
A T-29 would make a logical crossover to the BT series, but I doubt they're going to put a crossover tank that low on the tech tree.
Deletewell, they did it on the german tree.. i don't see why they couldn't do it on the russian one :)
Deletemaybe they can put this t-29 as a tier 5 for the 2nd line for Russian med tanks?
ReplyDeleteIt's not anywhere powerful enough for a tier 5 role. It might be faster, but it has less armour, and never got a better gun than a short barreled 76 mm. Maybe a T-29 with an F-30 or F-39 could be a tier 5 premium, but I don't see it being viable as a regular tank.
Deletewoops I wrote wrong i was meant to say the T-28E to be tier 5 and couldnt they bring back the 85mm it then?(dunno if t-28s actually had 85mm guns). the 80 and 40 armor seems it might work?
Deletewell, acording to the Q&A i read in this blog not long ago, the devs stated that the problem with the 2nd line was on the higher tiers, not on the low ones... it could be interesting to see what ideas they have so far, considering the old "full tree" back in '11 had the second line starting from tier 6
DeleteHope to see ideas for buffing jagdpanzer IV this tank could actually use it(if only the reverse speed was better:D). Buffing t-28 would make it tier 5 as its good tank as it is. Still nice info...
ReplyDeleteSorry, JPz IV cannot be buffed through historical means, the only thing acceptable in WOT would be to give it the Konich.
DeleteIMO the JagdIV's basic problem is that its historical main selling point over the trusty StuG series, the 7,5cm L/70 gun (IRL only tried on the StuG experimentally in a rigid mounting AFAIK), is for obvious reasons lacking in the game.
DeleteNow that you mention it the Konisch *would* probably be a good stopgap solution though...
Requesting a buff my tank panther
ReplyDeleteBuff my Panther is in the works :)
DeleteI'd like one as a T5 premium with the F-30 back.
ReplyDeleteIF WG were to implement applique armour for tanks (like the skirt armor on the German Pz III and IV), wouldnt it only be okay if the T-28 also got such an armor upgrade at the expense of its speed?
ReplyDeleteAnyway, a post on applique armour and its chance to get implemented would be really nice at this point, especially since spaced armor and similar stuff was very effective against HEAT charges, which atm ruin gameplay a bit.
I tried the T-28, I didn't like it, it has no armor, its guns are bad (compared to other tanks of same tier), and it's huge. The only good thing about it is its speed. After researching all the modules, I used free experience to research the KV-1 ASAP because I couldn't take it anymore.
ReplyDeleteDo I think it needs a buff? Yes, but all I'd like is a better gun.
Making it "an 80 mm armoured beast, flying around at 81 kph, with a 95 mm gun" is overkill. Might make a good higher tier tank though.
Historically this thing didnt have any good long barreled guns. If you want historical armor buffs you must accept historical small 76mm guns which had very low penetration. And armor buffs would mean serious drop of speeds. That thing used to be fast but when they uparmored it, it lost its speed.
ReplyDeleteactually there were prototypes of the T-28 using 57mm anti tank gun, 85mm AA gun, as well as the turret of the t-34-76 and t-34-85.
ReplyDeletethe t-28 was bad way back when, and that was when it had the 85mm. now its useless. there are smaller, faster, better armed and armored tanks at tier 4.
they should bring back the 85mm 110pen gun for a tier 4 tank, thats pretty good, which compensates for the t-28 having crappy 30mm armor.