A survey of the playerbase

I have recenly finished my personal academic studies(for now). With that being said, I have planned a brief study of the playerbase and game community, mainly themed around the views on certain trees: Britain, Japan, China, Italy, France and Israel.
If you would not mind a few minutes to fill out a survey, please feel free to do the survey. I will use them in a brief study and perhaps publish my findings on the forum.
Much thanks.


Yes sir!

Do you think Britain is being underestimated by the playerbase you interact with? And how?

This one is a leading question. You are implying that the correct answer is “Yes” by adding “And how?” at the end.

Do you believe the claims of “solid shots hinder the killing potentials of British vehicles”? In reference to lower tiers.

This is also a leading question. It should be neutral like “Do you think solid shot is a significant advantage or disadvantage for British vehicles in lower tiers?” 1-large advantage, 2-moderate advantage, 3-neither advantage or disadvantage 4-moderate disadvantage 5-large disadvantage

  • And so on for every single “here’s a claim from one biased side not balanced or neutralized” for most of the rest of the survey. It’s gonna give you super biased results.

  • Even just the fact that you ask questions about negative things people complain about, and not also about things people are proud of or praise, is biasing all on its own, even if every single question was neutrally phrased.

  • As is the lack of the big 3 in this survey. What if everyone has a -20% negative slant just BY DEFAULT, for example, and then you conclude from this that “people think minor nations are really oppressed!” but only because you didn’t measure the Big 3, and if you had, you’d ALSO have gotten the same negativity there too?

Do you believe the claims of “British MBT are bad due to their poor mobility” or “British MBT(Challenger 2s) have bad armor layouts”?

Only like 10% of people play top tiers. Most players would have no idea or opinion on this (even if not leading), so you need to have “Don’t know” or “No opinion” options etc. for anything like that. Ideally for EVERYTHING, but at the very least, the ones that most people don’t even understand.

Also you didn’t give this to a random sample of people.


Do you believe the claims of “British MBT are bad due to their poor mobility” or “British MBT(Challenger 2s) have bad armor layouts”?
Yes I know Challenger 2 very well it one of my favorite tanks (when does i turned into masochist?) it sucks if not playing on its own style and it style are not easy to play with really not recommend people playing Brits if new at the game, they might hate the game. but i’ll do full survey maybe next day if i have time

It’s a survey, not a quiz.


Thanks for the points, yes, i do have certain limitations to how these questions are formed, namely collecting things off different forums and discussions.
The point of these are meant to imitate what people claims to be the problem of certain tanks or trees. Unfortunatly, it is hard to seperate one from the many. You are nevertheless right on the points that these are not neutral.
The main goal is to see how deeply players believed in styerotypes. For example, i donot believe solid shots are a problem, but if you or me say it on the forums, people would be saying these things.

You could say this even if it was phrased in your “neutral” way because it would imply there is already sentiment. To someone not involved with the question, they might think it alludes to a known thing.

it’s a survey not a quiz

Correct, which is why it shouldn’t imply correct answers. That’s my point

You could say this even if it was phrased in your “neutral” way because it would imply there is already sentiment.

I already addressed exactly this in my first comment. You should mix in things that people celebrate as well about the nation, and even things that people don’t mention at all, along with the known negatives. Then you can easily measure whether people just poo-poo anything/everything or are making assumptions like this, because they’d do the same for the traditionally positive examples.

You are right about these points. I might do another research about other issues or discussions when I finished real life bachlors, such as the recently discussed level 100 in low tier, or the issue of copypastes.

So, what is my reward now? What do i get. ^^

lol why??? It’s a survey!!!

You are right except for this quote. If people actually chose to view nations, trees and vehicles objectively, I will not have the desire to investigate this. I do this research because that many people hop on the boat without actually watching footage, or even better, playing these vehicles, and outright say they are bad.
Let’s say for a good example of this discussion, the C1 ariete with WAR kit, you seems to believe that it is not bad. It weighs 60 tons and has the armor that cannot stop 3BM22 at close ranges. Does this make it bad? No, it means that it has bad armor. It has a 8-12x optics while the TURMS has a 4-12x optic with the same FCS(TURMS), does this make it bad? No, it is just demonstrating the inconsistencies of gaijin. The ariete also has poor mobility, does this make it bad? No, not really, it is bad on itself.
Then why the community say it is bad? Well, firstly, when you compare them with other 11.3 MBTs, they are inferior in almost every aspect. In the situations where the player plays an ariete, it will lose to every MBT it faces. Sniping on Mozdok hull-down from F7 to C cap? A challenger 3 TD wipes the turret clean while the breech absorbs the entire round, retreats and repairs. Pushing the most southern flank on Breslau? An abrams arrives at the position first and simply annihilates it from the LFP, and takes out a 2S38 behind it because it double-penned its pathetic armor. But when you say it is not bad, it is not. Italian mains are another breed and the irrenditism helps them to get through it. It is objectively trash - performance wise, but it is subjectively bad - nothing is objectively bad. I have better KD in the ariete P than the leo 2a4(another topic, however).
Here is the problem: not everyone has an ariete, most of them plays top tier 200 games a day might only see it once per two hour and might not have even engaged it. The words of “ariete trash” then spreads across forums and game chats.

Why would you want to run a survey that gives invalid biased results? Just a total waste of time, if you can’t use the results to learn anything. Which you can’t, from a biased survey: the results just reflect your bias back at you.

If people start out hating Britain when they begin your survey, then you give them 100% neutral questions that do not themselves hint at anything bad about Britain, they will answer badly on their own, due to their initial hate they started with.

So you’d be measuring THEM, not just measuring yourself. Which is what you want.

You are right indeed. I have been a bit too “styerotypical” with these questions, as my argument is that certain trees are underestimated, and if these questions has told me the otherwise, I will be able to disprove my previous argument more effectively. I am not sure about other social sciences but the education I received taught me that relatively more objective views has to be formed from multiple lenses, hence I used these styerotypes to get people’s feedback that makes me thinking more critically about the topic.
It is also why I did not mention the good aspects of these nations, as players tends to agree more on what is good than what is bad. Let’s say Britain 10.3, most people say it is the best, some say Italy is better but most people goes to these two answers. But if I ask “what is the worst tree in the game at top tier?”, then any answer that is not Sweden or Russia will appear.
If I got my masters sorted, I will investigate about the case about copypastes, and I should be able to look into the studies more objectively. Weirdly enough, being a intpol student, I never did any interviews or surveys(I PLAY WARTHUNDER DUH).

Your suggestions would create bias, and they imply bias. You can create your own survey. A survey is a survey. There’s no such thing as neutral questions. Your suggestions are based in bias.

How so?

Honestly you two just calm down bruh

It would be like asking if people believe the claims about russian bias, then you saying you shouldn’t ask that biased question, suggesting they should ask about the strength of Russia in a neutral way, but that dismisses the fact that claims of Russian bias exist. In fact, you are biased to suggest it’s not a commonly spoken thing.

If he wants to ask if people believe the British suffer from solid shot like many claim, he’s asking regarding it developing into a meme. If people haven’t heard the claims presented, then they can say unsure or something. The question is entirely valid regardless. It’s not indicative of bias to suggest that people make the common claim. What you’re trying to do is akin to censorship.

I did forget about the “unsure” option bruh