M48 Errata

Just a quick update: today, I wrote in the Q&A session that M48 might get a buff. I was wrong, I misread one of the questions/answers. At this moment, no M48 buff is planned.

Sorry for that.

63 thoughts on “M48 Errata

    • No. Basically, it was something like a player asking about M48 buffs originally, then another player answering him that M48 has enough specialities (like the DPM, viewrange etc) and SerB agreed with this second player. I misread it as if that player 2 was actually asking for buffs.

      • Except that the t62A has much more dpm. And Viewrange is hardly a bonus because the crappy cammorating compensates negatively.

        • i agree with you, the m48 was nerfed to oblivion. even his predecessor the m46 is much better as this cancer ? if i want to move up to reloacte it takes hours to move. what gives me the mobility if I do not come from the place?
          thats not a lie that more and more russians are in the matches. and why? because every tank will be nerfed. so if u want that, so take out the over nations from the game. i wait for the announced “rebalance” of the us techtree. we know what u mean with rebalance… its totally the same as nerf.

      • dude, I’m pretty much enjoying SU-101and SU-100M was more than decent too… Zero depression sucks but when you adapt to the gameplay, SU-101 is an excellent tank. Just needs different play style than ISU and that might be the issue with many “camper” TDs…

        • I wonder what kind of play style do you adop when you face tanks that you cant penetrate in any way from the front?

          • What are you shooting at?
            The SU-100M1 has the same 175 many other tier 7 tanks get. Ok, it’s a TD but you get compensated with an awesome rate of fire. I like it. Tiers 8-10 get good penetration (219/258/290), capable of penetrating anything they face frontaly.

  1. Aw bummer….oh well, slap all camo perks on the crew, plus both view perks and binocs…..its a dangerous harassment sniper. :) Seems good as is.

      • Hahaha good one… Because slow speed, a huge weak spot and zero turret armour equates to balance… I forgot.

        Its the worst tier 10 medium.

  2. in reality, it was far better than the T-54, the tank it was designed to counter. It’s a generation behind the T-62…that the M60 was designed to counter…

    don’t expect the M48 to ever get buffed.

    • Yes, the M-60 was designed to counter T-62 with its 115mm gun, the T-62″A” however is not the T-62 the M60 was supposed to counter.

      Now that you’ve mentioned it, since the M-60 is in the game, maybe we should get the actual T-62, but alas its smooth bore gun will keep it away.

      I’d love to see the same people that whine about “russian bias”, whine about any kind of bias if WG was an American company run by Americans.

    • By what metric please enlighten us ? The m48 armed with the 90 mm gun was inferior to the t 54 in every way except hull armour . Being upgunned to the 105 in the 70s which gave it an advantage in firepower . Then again it has been argued that by then there existed new ammunition for the 100mm gun of the t55 to make little difference . Soviet tank development was mostly competing with british designs in the tank arms race .

      • I always want to push M48A4 as tier 10 premium for random battle players, it’s a 1960s program and similar to M60.

    • M48 drivers should be happy it even has a 105mm gun on it. Historically speaking it only ever got that upgrade in the late 1970s.

      • Wow, I know you don’t have the M48. You are too busy being an arsehole to even grind through the US medium branch. By that logic, the T-54 drivers should be grateful that they have engines which never existed and thicker hull armour than it should have.

        • The mobility of the t 55 is historic as per the game the 700 hp engine is an XP sink nothing more . And the 120 mm armour is from the 1st production t54 . And I am grinding the US medium line it is so much better than the soviet line until tier 9 where they reach parity .

    • It means that you as a lets say, developer, have an affinity to prefer one thing over another. You like one nation better so u try to make it “stronger than other”. You could say that you have a subjective mind when u should be objective.

  3. Pingback: Erata cu privire la M48 | WoTRomania

  4. So it stays the worst T10 med. Oh thank god, people might think i have decent stats becasue i only play OP tanks ..

      • I personally think 121 > FV4202 > M48. FV4202 is just as mobile as a M48 except it has better armor and much better accuracy. 121 is a skill tank – a player who knows how to overcome the lack of depression and take hull down shots will pwn on it.

    • Erratum 1) M48 will get accuracy on the move buff.
      Erratum 2) M48 will get RoF buff.

      More than 1 erratum = errata.

      Who got out smartassed today now eh?

  5. can someone explain why they wont introduce smooth bore guns into the game? is the penetration rly so much better and op than other barrels?

    • no WG wants to stick to WW2 and korean war era type of tanks and things like smoothbore guns and composite armor are too modern to fit in

    • Pen values of such guns easily reach the 500-700mm pen with normal APFSDS rounds .. Wouldn’t be nice to have those in game ..

  6. God damn… i got so excited too… They really need to reroll those nerfs… after 100 battles with my m48a1 patton, im struggling to maintain a 49% win rate doing around 2400 damage per game, with a 1530 efficiency…. I wish it would at least get a slight dpm boost

    • if you’re getting 49% with those damage stats on any tier 10, you’re doing it wrong.

    • It’s funny that they call it the M48 Patton. Only the M48A5 had the 105mm gun, which only entered service in the late 1970s, so for the sake of timeframe, it should have a 90mm gun lol

      • If you can have L7 gun on tier 9 (ProtoLeo and Centurion) then US knockoff on tier 10 is acceptable, especially as its “historically accurate” in the end.

      • The version we have in game is the M48A1E1. It is actually historical, but at the same time kind of redundant when the M60E1 (M60 with first A1-type turret) which was in the testing phase around the same time in 1960.

  7. Oh crap…. I already repurchased M 46 because of that previous info…. 5 milion creds less….

  8. This is clearly an author’s error and not a publishing error. Therefore, this topic should be labeled M48 corrigendum instead of M48 erratum (and because it only describes a single error it certainly shouldn’t be labeled M48 errata, which indicates plural).

  9. The difference in 10-20 meters view range doesn’t make up the significant draw backs it has. The spread in viewranges should be far greater at top tiers. Perhaps if a tank isn’t a light tank or have special optics/commander turret then Camo and view range should be inverse relationships.

  10. It’s, since nobody suspected it to be a bug. The tank is the worst tier 10 already. It needs desperately some buffs.