Pages

Apr 17, 2013

Buff My Tank: T-34

By Ensign Expendable

Edit: Disclaimer! I don't think that any of these modifications to the in-game tank are probable, possible, or necessary. Buff My Tank segments are for entertainment purposes only. -EE

The T-34 used to be a solid tier 5 medium tank, but premium ammo for credits left it in the dust, behind the 105 mm howitzer M4 and PzIV crew. Let's see what historical resource exists to bring it up to speed, through the current power creep.

First, the gun. The ZiS-4 is really the only choice as the "top" gun on the tank, and the Chinese iteration admits as much. The alpha on it is pitiful, so the peek-and-poke (for massive damage) playstyle of other swift and unarmoured tanks (pretty much every French tank comes to mind) does not apply. The slower loading and harder hitting 76 mm guns increase alpha by a tiny amount, at an unacceptable cost to every other stat. Since many tanks in the game get guns that go anywhere from just being mentioned on paper to absolute fiction, why not give the T-34 a gun it actually was tested with, the 85 mm S-53. Sure, the reload rate would be slower than the same gun on the T-34-85, but a different playstyle would be viable. Or, maybe, the T-34 could get a derp gun of its own. A project for a 120 mm breach loading mortar using the F-34's recoil system existed.

Speaking of the gun, the Soviet developed a vertical stabilizer for the T-34 (STP-34), T-34-85 (STP-S-53), and M4A2 Sherman. If vertical stabilizers were based in history and not in balance, the T-34s would get one of those (as well as the M4 and T-26).

Diagram of a T-34-85 vertical stabilizer STP-S-53
Now that the gun is set, let's look at the armour. The T-34 has 45 mm of sloped armour in the front. More than enough against short 37 mm and 75 mm guns in 1941, but it lacks any sort of oomph when faced with opponents above tier 4. In 1941 and 1942, when the Germans started deploying APCR in larger amounts for their 50 mm guns, the Soviets increased the armour of the T-34 from 45 mm at 60 degrees to 60 mm at 60 degrees, by bolting or welding on additional 15 mm armour screens. However, since the use of APCR was much less widespread than expected, this modification was not widely adapted. When the idea of upgradeable hulls was floating around, SerB mentioned going from a 45 mm to a 60 mm hull as one of the upgrades.

T-34 with additional armour. From Amour Protection of Medium Tank T-34 1941-1945, Postnikov.
Now that the tank itself has been spruced up a little, let's spruce up the crew. The main drawbacks of the T-34 Model 1941, the lack of commander's cupola and the commander's dual role, were well known to the Soviets. In early 1942, a project to solve these problems was initiated, the T-34S. The T-34S was more or less the same as a T-34, except for a 3-man turret and a commander's cupola. This allowed the gunner to focus on gunning, the commander to focus on commanding, and the loader to curse whoever thought it was a good idea to stick another person in there. The T-34S was not accepted into mass production, but elements of its construction were used in subsequent Soviet tanks (the cupola and the 3 man turret). Another five-man crew tank, the "T-34 with commander's cupola" was tested, but also not accepted.

Images of the T-34 with commander's cupola and T-34S, from Soviet Medium Tanks 1941-1945, Solyankin et. al. To a casual observer, these tanks are indistinguishable from the T-34 Model 1942.
In game, the bonus to the gunner would lead to faster aim time and a more accurate gun. The commander would give larger view range. While the loader's cruel fate might reduce the ROF just a bit, a T-34S crew layout would turn the T-34 into a capable sniper. 


22 comments:

  1. Dont like it.
    You're talking about uparmoring and uparming the T-34, but those aren't its weak points.
    The 57mm is a nice gun, which suits the tank well and the armor is about as effective as other tier 5 medium armor is.

    The problems of the T-34 are:
    1. Derp gun, or better the lack of it.
    But developers said, they want to address the derp problem.
    2. mobility. It is way to slow and it is very, very sluggish. That is a horrible weakness, which destroys the tank for me.

    T-34 would be fine if it were more manouvrable, but it is way to sluggish.

    Cyberfries

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The agility of the tank wasn't really a problem in real life. I guess you could give the tank the ability to turn in place, but that kind of maneuver demanded ridiculous strength from the driver (~350 N of force on both levers, in two different directions). That's not very interesting to talk about in an article, though.

      Delete
    2. After I wrote this I felt like I should add something.

      First of all, I liked the effort and the ideas you put into making that post. What I didnt like was your solutions to the problem. Just wanted to make this clear. It is a nice article you did there.

      I think the T-34 is best compared to the british Crusader.
      Both are lightly armored, fast machines with fast firing, high penetration guns.

      At least, both should be.
      But despite its lower top speed, the Crusader is much more mobile and thus works better on the battlefield.
      That should be fixed.

      Cyberfries

      Delete
    3. Regarding the difficulty in turning, would the radio operator/hull machine gunner have helped the driver turn the levers?

      Delete
    4. I guess he could have helped, but I don't know how common such a thing would have been. In theory, he could push the right lever, while the driver pulled the left.

      Delete
  2. Hello SilentStalker,

    I'm glad you brought this tank into a highlight.It is still one of my favorite tanks,but it has too big weaknesses compared to it's counterparts.

    The aim time of the 57 mm is way too big. I fire at 1.94 seconds,the aim time is double at least.(I feel it that way...or the dispersion is awful when I fully aim and shoot)

    Accuracy on the move is horrible. I miss almost everything even at very very close range (and I know how to shoot,where to aim and so on). As Cyberfries said above,it is very very sluggish. I accelerate until the top speed of 54 or 55km/h in a lifetime. It turns slow and it can't circle anything. That 57 is very good on circling,but the T-34 has a bad reputation for doing that.

    I enjoyed it until the other tier 5 tanks appeared : Crusader,AT-2,Type T-34...and gold ammo came on the scene.Now it's almost a one shot for derps...I am damaged by the smallest gun on the battlefield,the 45 mm angled armor is pretty bad,worse than the M4 or M3 lee...

    WG should bring this tank back to life...it is said that the T-34 was the best medium tank of WW2.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This article was not written by me, it was written by Peter Samsonov, AKA Ensign Expendable.

      Delete
    2. I saw a post where someone thought that Archive Awareness was written by you as well. I guess you're just that famous! :)

      Delete
    3. You can say that again. 5 minutes ago, I went to WoT for two battles, the second was "OMG SILENTSTALKER" and then the faggot shot me in the back... fame indeed :)

      Delete
    4. Yeah,he just wanted an autograph..poor bastard.
      You are well-known and people like your articles. Straight to the point. Even if they are written or not written by you,the template is user-friendly. That's why I follow this blog and comment from time to time. :)

      Delete
    5. I don't know how it works on T-34, but on my T-50-2 I tend to hit enemies being ~200m away from me, while I'm rushing full 70-80 kph speed^^ But I guess that 300% crew may have sth to do with that :P

      Delete
  3. I love the 57mm T-34. Accuracy is the best in its class (no other tier V medium is as good as this), mobility is just on par with the other mediums (faster than PzIV, similar to M4 sherman), and the reload is super good. I can actually keep an enemy's turret ring destroyed with the amount of shots i can get into it (i kill other T-34s this way, because the turret ring sticks out, for instance). That was an interesting vehicle, but i think a T-34 with a 85mm gun placed on (no turret change) would make a tier 6 premium (pref. mm) better than it would a tier V tank. This game doesn't need any more derps either

    ReplyDelete
  4. As a T6 premium t-34svwould be fine imo...

    ReplyDelete
  5. T-34 doesn't really need buffs, we just need to put an end to the ludicrous HEAT derping.

    -Platypusbill

    ReplyDelete
  6. My thoughts exactly, T-34 is pretty ok as it is but M4/PzIV can almost one shot t-34 which is really annoying sometimes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, not really. As someone who spent last several hundred battles driving a Panzer IV derp (rarely with golden ammo though), I can tell you that out of the 3 main tier 5 tanks (Panzer IV, Sherman, T-34), the T-34 is (presumably thanks to its sloped armor) the most difficult to destroy by HE shells - they often do 0 damage (when shooting the turret, which has a large mantlet, that isn't very strong on paper, but tends to "eat" he and HEAT shells.

      Delete
    2. If you hit the hull, though, it will usually penetrate and do full damage.

      Delete
  7. There already is an 85mm T-34. Its called the Type-58.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Which is Chinese version of T-34-85. Article showed early T-34 with 85 mm gun.

      Delete
  8. I hope to see the armor buff. Seen alot of documentaries praising the T-34's sloped armor, and yet in WoT it rarely bounces anything. Even the B1 can penetrate it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And the same goes for the T-34/85, its armor at tier 6 is next to worthless.

      Delete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.