T-28

[Akalonor]

The Russian T-28 was designed to be a Defense busting tank, it had Smoke launchers and 3 turrets, 2 MG, 1 Cannon
there was  a OT-28 a flamethrower version (Doctrinal call -in ??)
--Although the T-28 was rightly considered ineffective by 1941, it is worth remembering that when the Red Army was fielding the first T-28s in 1933, the French Army was still largely equipped with the FT-17, and the Reichswehr had no tanks at all. No army had a series-production medium tank comparable to the T-28 for several years.The T-28 had a number of advanced features for the time, including radio (in all tanks) and anti-aircraft machine-gun mounts. Just before the Second World War, many received armor upgrades, bringing its performance on par with the early Panzer IV, although its suspension and layout were outdated.--     





~Aka

[ford_prefect]

beautiful just beautiful I would love to see this thing in the Russian Army. (it would be great against Osth. smaller scout tanks) (Osth. is the name I gave to the Ostheer)       

[TheDancingJesus]

newbielink:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-28 [nonactive]

Notes that in the Winter War, many of these were disabled but repairable - maybe give this a self-repair ability to keep it viable in the later game, when the other first-tier tanks are pretty useless?

[Daiwiz]

Needs a pretty flamethrower 

[SoccerSpartan]

YES! love the idea, possibly have the flamethrower as an individual unit upgrade? Either way this should be added ingame

[Daiwiz]

Ye, the individual unit upgrade similar to the Flamethrowers for the Ingenery, but with Churchill Croc style range, damage, and ability to keep the main gun.

[Akalonor]

I can see why people have never recomended the T-35 , but why not T-28 says I but I'd like to see how they work in the multiple turrets, maybe just give it a wider machine gun arc.

[hgghg4]

I think why they haven't considered it is because the coding involved I am guessing is extremely difficult and 1 turret is bad enough, why complicate things and make 3. Just some food for thought

[Paciat]

It was a 10 year old tank.
In some ways I could be compared to a PzIV stubby but who  needs a T-28 when you have a T-34. Its like giving a M-3 Lee to the US.

[ford_prefect]

If the M3 came in a quicker way then the rest I'd use it

[Daiwiz]

The M3 was a very good tank, it was simply that the Sherman got produced so quickly. Off topic though.

[Akalonor]

The T-28 DID see combat in WWII nonetheless
Renaults were used by the Germans in low supply areas and that was the First "successful" tank to be made.
 The T-28 should be a starters medium tank, its armor was thin so it isn't a superstation but it is a good defense busting tank (Think of the uses at a  Lyon map) that was very successful. Perhaps letting it be buildable from the Wep. Sup. center , The fact is its not meant to challenge the T-34 just provide support.

Add a flamethrower to make it a OT-28 if you still think they don't need it. :p

[ford_prefect]

well not really I'm defending the T-28 (small tank) and he brought up the erm.....M3 thats is. (small tank) so Im in a sense defending small tanks and in a sense thus defending the T-28
Post Merge: March 09, 2010, 11:55:16 PM

The T-28 DID see combat in WWII nonetheless
Renaults were used by the Germans in low supply areas and that was the First "successful" tank to be made.
 The T-28 should be a starters medium tank, its armor was thin so it isn't a superstation but it is a good defense busting tank (Think of the uses at a  Lyon map) that was very successful. Perhaps letting it be buildable from the Wep. Sup. center , The fact is its not meant to challenge the T-34 just provide support.

Add a flamethrower to make it a OT-28 if you still think they don't need it. :p

hmm maybe some sort of upgrade for it though....like an upgrade for the support barracks 

[Daiwiz]

I vote for it being an individual upgrade like the Sniper artillery, even though I love the flames. Giving them a global upgrade would probably be a bit OP'd. Of course, if the Ostheer get a flamethrowing PzIII without individual upgrade, the Soviets could always get the OT-28 without having to upgrade.

[Paciat]

The M3 was a very good tank, it was simply that the Sherman got produced so quickly. Off topic though.

To fight japanese with no medium tanks or German armor in 1942. So was the T-28. "It was simply that the" T-34 "got produced so quickly".

well not really I'm defending the T-28 (small tank) and he brought up the erm.....M3 thats is. (small tank) so Im in a sense defending small tanks and in a sense thus defending the T-28

How is T-28 small? There is a reason I compared M-3 Lee and T-28. Same weith (later T-28 were even heavier), armor (T-28 - thicker) and caliber of the gun (M-3 gun was better but it was hull mounted).