"БДШ" for T-34-85

[777mais777]

I offer after improvement of the T-34 (1939 year) to T-34-85, to add a smoke screen.

"...Means of statement of smoke screens...."
http://www.gamer.ru/world-of-tanks/legkie-i-srednie-tanki-sssr-kak-eto-bylo-trafik

"...On the top fodder sheet... Smoke candles..."
http://hobbyport.ru/armor/t_34_7705.htm

"...By all cars... Means of statement of smoke screens..."
http://www.xn----8sbnladcie3adxoacu.xn--p1ai/index/tank_t_34/0-37

[Dzierzan]

It's good that all your links are russian. <sarcasm>

Seriously, i don't think so that T-34 or T-34/85 need smoke screen. These tanks are already good, for what making them better? M4 Sherman has it and i think that this ability should stay for US tanks.

And say, why we should add it to T-34?

[Tankbuster]

So that we can make RedGuard happy?

[777mais777]

It's good that all your links are russian. <sarcasm>

Seriously, i don't think so that T-34 or T-34/85 need smoke screen. These tanks are already good, for what making them better? M4 Sherman has it and i think that this ability should stay for US tanks.

And say, why we should add it to T-34?

Americans do not have monopoly for a smoke screen.<sarcasm>
Seriously:
1.We have such trifle, as history.
2.Essential technological difference of the tank (except 85мм a gun and some changes the device of the tank).
3.When say that EF doesn't answer a reality-it offends, probably such details as this will destroy similar thoughts.
 

[SnappingTurtle]

It's always better to assume something is unnecessary until it is proven necessary in things like this. Soviets already have access to smoke mortar rounds as well as multiple methods for breaking/avoiding suppression, doctrinal and otherwise. Americans are the only ones with the ability to produce smoke from their tanks and I see no reason to change this. Historical accuracy is not a good enough reason. If you have a good reason for this change which is based on gameplay, present it.

[Pac-Fish]

Its more for balance than historical accuracy I guess 

@SnappingTurtle: I like your icon 

[Tankbuster]

Balance>Historical accuracy

[Dzierzan]

It's always better to assume something is unnecessary until it is proven necessary in things like this. Soviets already have access to smoke mortar rounds as well as multiple methods for breaking/avoiding suppression, doctrinal and otherwise. Americans are the only ones with the ability to produce smoke from their tanks and I see no reason to change this. Historical accuracy is not a good enough reason. If you have a good reason for this change which is based on gameplay, present it.

Agree.

@SnappingTurtle: I like your icon 

It's called avatar, not icon AFAIK but call it as you want .

[Max 'DonXavi' von B.]

@SnappingTurtle: I like your icon 

LOL +1

[GodlikeDennis]

It's always better to assume something is unnecessary until it is proven necessary in things like this. Soviets already have access to smoke mortar rounds as well as multiple methods for breaking/avoiding suppression, doctrinal and otherwise. Americans are the only ones with the ability to produce smoke from their tanks and I see no reason to change this. Historical accuracy is not a good enough reason. If you have a good reason for this change which is based on gameplay, present it.

Please think about your changes before you suggest this. Soviet tanks in the game are designed to be a little more reckless than US tanks.

[777mais777]

Balance>Historical accuracy

Certainly: Balance> History, but I think this introduction especially it will not be reflected in these criteria, and it will be probably possible even to put ">" -> "=".

[777mais777]

It's always better to assume something is unnecessary until it is proven necessary in things like this. Soviets already have access to smoke mortar rounds as well as multiple methods for breaking/avoiding suppression, doctrinal and otherwise. Americans are the only ones with the ability to produce smoke from their tanks and I see no reason to change this. Historical accuracy is not a good enough reason. If you have a good reason for this change which is based on gameplay, present it.

My offer:
Respected, let's take away from others all that there is at Americans-it on yours a gameplay.

I want to ask you:
1.Funny, in what then features of Americans, the USSR, Englishmen will be expressed...?
2.You asked yourselves a question, than EF it is better CoH pure?

[cephalos]

allright, it's again all about realism and rest of this stuff... 

@777Mais777 - why do you think t-34 needs smoke? Gameplay-wise, not historical "but they had" - if t-34 in your opinion is too weak, just write it down, without proposing things without saying why particular unit needs it. Sherman has smoke, but it's gameplay-wise, becasue it would be outclased by any Axis vehicle it faces. T-34 is more tough, faster, reliable than M4 Sherman. I don't see why it should get smoke canisters - it's fine as it is.

[Pac-Fish]

Unfortunetly, I dont understand more than 50% of what 777Mais777 is usually saying . I think he wants smoke. But the thing is, T-34 doesn't necessarily need it

[777mais777]

allright, it's again all about realism and rest of this stuff... 

@777Mais777 - why do you think t-34 needs smoke? Gameplay-wise, not historical "but they had" - if t-34 in your opinion is too weak, just write it down, without proposing things without saying why particular unit needs it. Sherman has smoke, but it's gameplay-wise, becasue it would be outclased by any Axis vehicle it faces. T-34 is more tough, faster, reliable than M4 Sherman. I don't see why it should get smoke canisters - it's fine as it is.

Respected cephalos you shouldn't and are not obliged,to add a smoke as Sherman, but as you have noticed Т-34 not perfection, to perfection it doesn't have not enough this small detail.