M10 booker……

Why? Why do we need another Abrams(baby) added?

With all the cool & unique IFV’s(or others) or light vehicles with cool add ons or attachments that could have been used - we get another Abrams suggestion?

Why would someone look at the booker which is compared to the Abrams and say “hmmm…… I think we need another one of these tanks”

Considering it will probably be top tier with the sep 2. Two glass cannons with nothing additional or special to add to the tree.

Could possibly be a little fun though if implemented correctly. The griffin lll would be cooler though.

FYI: I’m sure the booker is a good tank in the real world, this is only for WT purposes


Write your congress critter that you want the program cancelled so that it won’t be added to your video game.


Was it suggested?

1 Like

It’s probably a good vehicle in the real world.

Yep, multiple times

Well considering the M10 is actually going into service and the Griffin III is still just in the Demo phase I’d say it makes sense the M10 would end up in the tree sooner. Also it doesn’t provide anything the M3A3 doesn’t already do. The 50mm is still going to be shooting the same places the 25mm does. The Bioker makes considerable more sense as the follow on from the HSTVL or M1128

The difference is a 50mm gun vs 25mm. We have plenty of Abrams already. We have the best IFV’s in the world- so we should add them. The Abrams is arguably the worst tank in game- they never get implemented correctly.

Granted I’m being dramatic about the booker because I’m extremely unhappy with the sep 2 so I’m kinda pissed we are getting another Abrams. I’m over them(Abrams). I pretend they don’t exist

1 Like

It’s a 105mm, it’s not even in proper service if you did some time looking it up and it won’t be up with an M1A2 Sep II. It is essentially comparable to the M24 Chaffee or M41 Bulldog. Which is why i nickname it the “Chaffee II”.

The booker is basically a smaller version of the Abrams with a different hull design. Why would a lighter Abrams with no additional armaments be a good selection for USA?

Our high tier tanks already act as a giant mobile weak spots on tracks(light tank) and largely contributes to USA losing every game.

Why would someone look at the booker which is compared to the Abrams and say “hmmm…… I think we need another one of these tanks”

It’s a light tank designed for supporting Airborne troops. It has a 105mm that shoots the same ammo as the M1128, is expected to receive the Iron Fist APS (same on the Black Night) when it enters full-rate production in ‘25-26, has an acoustic sensor to tell you direction of fire, better optics, I’d say there’s some uniqueness in it. It’s also entering service which means it’s very likely going to be added. I do agree though that there needs to be more IFV’s, Missile Carriers, etc. that needs to be added.

The only thing in common with the Abrams is that it has almost the same FCS; the turret and hull are very different.

1 Like

Ok then the M24 is just a lighter version of the M4 Sherman and the M41 Bulldog is just a lighter and faster M47/48 Patton tank. I fail to see how this is a bad selection. Us has a lot of Brawlers but fewer support vehicles.

Because the game itself is fundamentally quite boring and shallow and WarThunder has to mask this buy throwing in shiny trinkets for the simple masses.

It’s obvious after 12 years that Gaijin have no ideas when it comes to map making or arranging the in-game activities so making new model to hide the fact works well.
A new tank being used in a role it was never used in in real life, typical War Thunder.

Im waiting for the Hercules AC-130 gunship, nice addition that would be ,I’ll use it as a Strike fighter :)

1 Like

This describes my frustration perfectly. This is not what we needed


This is not needed, I would have liked a unique prototype/concept tank or IFV. The American tanks(high tier) I’ve decided are just implemented wrong in game and we should stay away unless-


Thumper(I believe was the name)

The prototype Bradley’s - really anything. Even a newer Bradley.

So many other directions this should have went before another USA basic tank was added(WT). Idk, it seems to me the M10 booker is a pointless and basic addition to the US MILITARY anyways(real world).

105mm gun is in the range of being overkill for infantry combat and under kill for armored combat.It feels like a giant waste of tax dollars and years behind modern combat. Idk though, I’m no expert.

Finally the US military got their replacement for the M551 Sheridan. And adequate replacement for something that wasn’t exactly satisfactory.

1 Like

I don’t understand your frustration, it’s not like it being passed to the developers means we’ll see it in the next update, it’s just that, a suggestion. Besides, I think it would be fine to be added, it will likely play similar to vehicles like the CV90105, and frankly, the US really needs more tech tree light tanks and support vehicles.

1 Like

The M10 isn’t a replacement for the M551. It has no airdrop capabilities and its specifically not an anti-tank system. Its a nebulous, don’tcallitalighttank, “assault gun” for supporting infantry.

True true….

My gun its a light tank that you might be getting please do not whine

Well technically the M8 AGS was, but that wasn’t procured so they picked up the M1128 to cover for that due to budget constraints. M1128 today being retired.

The M1128 filled the role of direct fire infantry support, which is the same role the Sheridan filled and M8 would have aswell.

M10 with the MPF program is comming in to fulfill the same role as the vehicles that functionally replaced the Sheridan. A later M8 testbed competed against the M10 in this program.

So while technically not, functionally speaking it is fullfilling the same roles. Being able to take on armored vehicles should the need arise in the same way a M551 could.