I still have not seen a single decent argument why the t-34 needs a buff. the best argument so far is that its not an 85 so it sucks. well i can say the p4 sucks just as much then. but the t-34 is fine save for its shitty vet 1 ability.
OK then, here you go:
The current Soviet tech tree is based on choices. For lategame, soviet players who tech have a choice between T3 and T4. T4 offers units that complement a more defensive playstyle, and it does this well, by giving soviet players access to SU85s and Katyushas. T3, on the other hand, is supposed to be used for a more mobile and offensive lategame. So far the tiers seem to be alright, right? The problem is that the T34/76 doesn't scale well into lategame. It is alright when it first enters the battlefield, and can hold its own vs. other medium tanks well enough.
However, both German factions have access to tanks with high frontal armor in their tech tree (KT and Panther) which do well vs. enemy armor. This allows German players to rely on their stock units lategame, because their stock units can deal with anything the allies throw at them. If a soviet player went T3 and the game progresses into lategame, they will struggle, because they are relying on a single medium tank for their entire lategame armor composition.
On the other hand, USF, which is the only other faction that is expected to rely on mediums in the lategame (I am considering a panther a heavy for obvious reasons), has access to a Tank Destroyer in the same tier that houses their medium. The result is a well balanced force that, while fragile, has the capability to deal with many different threats with good micro and tactics.
The T34/76 on the other hand, as Soviet T3s entire lategame potential, must rely on itself to combat enemy Super Heavy TDs and Lategame armor. There is no other armor synergy, and with the T34/76 itself not being particularly great at the AI role, thanks to its lack of pintle mg and its low ROF, soviet AT guns become quite exposed vs. Axis high DPS long range infantry units. Not only this, but Axis tanks generally benefit more in terms of survivability with vet. The P4 for example, gets over 230 armor at vet 2, while the T34 gains 0 penetration with veterancy. This leads to a frustrating game where Axis armor becomes harder to kill, while T34s die at the same rate, making vetting T34s very hard for less reward.
In conclusion, the shoddy scaling of Soviet T3 is why Soviet players use callins almost exclusively currently. They are the only way for Soviets to have any scaling armor whatsoever, and are better out of the gate than stock armor anyhow. T4 is fine, but is very defensive, which leads to an inability to kill German armor. This makes Soviet T4 a battle to hold onto every bit of land, as counterattacks lategame are very hard without good armor to support shoddily scaling conscripts.
You cannot look at the T34/76 in a vacuum, and compare it to the 110 fu Sherman or the 125 fu P4. The P4 is a transitional medium which is not the factions entire lategame. The Sherman is one piece of a combined arms lategame which the USF relies on. The T34 has the advantages of neither (scaling, supporting units, good performance vs. soft targets), but the disadvantages of both (low health, low armor, low penetration).
Now then, please tell me why I am wrong.