有 SerB 的 Q&A 才精彩啊～ 前幾天的…抱歉，有空再說吧
- Q: “Is arty balance okay? They seem to be crawling out of woodwork again.”
A (SerB): “It’s fine. It’s good that there’s more of them.”
Q:「自走砲的平衡沒問題吧？它們似乎又重出江湖了」SerB:「沒問題。數量成長是好事」
- Q: “What’s up with supertesters, I see them driving around in random
battles with exclusive tanks and they suck!” A: (SerB) “If you have to
envy, do it silently.”
Q:「超測人員有什麼毛病嗎？看他們開超測車打隨機戰鬥，而且表現爛透了」SerB:「眼
紅就眼紅，也不用出來嚷嚷」
- Q: “If we had Panzer IV and T-34 in historical configurations, what tiers
would they fit?” A (SerB): “You see, that depends on the historical number
of hitpoints.”
Q:「四號和T-34如果套用史實數據，應該放在幾階？」SerB:「要看生命值的史實數據而
定。」
- Q: “It was said that the T110E4 has worse aimtime than E3 as a price for
having a turret. How come German WT’s have the same stats as the
non-turretted German TD’s?” A: “Just imagine that the Germans implemented
it better.” (SS: as in, it’s just a balance decision)
Q:「據說 110E4 的瞄準時間比 E3 差是因為有砲塔的緣故。那為啥德國有砲塔TD的瞄準
時間會跟沒砲塔的一樣？」A:「想成德國工藝較佳就行了」（SS:純粹是為了平衡）
- SerB states that the situation, where optics get destroyed by hitting driver
’s periscopes is correct
SerB 表示駕駛的潛望鏡被擊中而造成觀測裝置被毀並沒有錯
- IS and IS-3 have the same D-25 (D-2-5) reload times as KV-3 and KV-4,
despite IS series having one loader and KV series two historically, because
the second loader “eliminates the design drawback”
雖然裝填手人數較少，IS 和 IS-3 跟 KV-3、KV-4 用同一門 D-25 時裝填時間卻相同。
這是因為 KV 系列的第二裝填手「抵銷了設計上缺失」
- Individual Missions are time limited, but the limit is quite long. They
will come in seasons, around half a year ones.
個人任務有時限，但很長。一季大約半年。
- Evilly states that when it comes to difficult missions, “cumulative effect
is better than everyday grind” (admits that the previous very difficult
grinding missions – specifically the KV-220 one on RU server – were a
mistake)
Evilly 對困難的任務表示「做成累積進度的效果比逼你每天消磨要來的好」（承認之前
要每天都要磨進度的困難任務是錯誤設計，特別是俄服的 KV-220 任務）
- Evilly states that the Object 260 missions will be intentionally very
difficult
Evilly 表示 Object 260 的任務是故意做得非常難
http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/11/22/22-11-2014/