Hello.
I’d like to clarify whether it’s possible to get a consultation or contact information to discuss obtaining permission to use a custom interface modification in the game.
As a pet project, I’m creating my own version of the well-known community utility WTRTI (which, as far as I know, is not prohibited for use).
In addition to supporting free, up-to-date aircraft data and data formats from localhost:8111, additional features are planned, related not only to displaying raw data but also to additional analysis and calculations based on it. Examples:
(implemented in several variants) remaining fuel in minutes and seconds at the current engine speed (this is also available in WTRTI, but has been disabled on some new aircraft)
(currently under research) Analysis of the allied player list at the start of a battle to display a BR range in the UI (currently, this requires manually clicking on players or memorizing the BRs of at least popular aircraft around your own ±1)
(looks implementable) Analyse battle chat to show last known enemy aircrafts (for clutch situation 1 vs enemy team for example). Players can do it manually now.
The game rules (Spezielle Regeln Für War Thunder) have a section on sportsmanship, according to which both the utility I’m developing and WTRTI are at least in a gray area. I can’t independently assess which features can be considered an unfair advantage and which are quality-of-life features. However, citing the requirement for explicit authorization from Gaijin Entertainment in some cases (see section 6.1.3), I assume such permission is possible. Or at least discuss it.
If such a dialogue is possible, I’m willing, for example, to prepare a final list of features for evaluation. Or conduct the discussion in another manner customary for the company.
The utility is planned for open distribution; there is no goal of selling any advantages to players. The source code is published on GitHub. I simply want to make the interface more user-friendly and informative for myself and those interested. I feel that by providing the utility as is, without the need to constantly maintain a high level of stability and fault tolerance, this can be achieved.
Thank you!
P.S. So far, the utility has only been run for testing in game test flights (right-click on the plane → Test Flight). Currently, the utility output is only produced in the console. I haven’t used it in public games.
From what I have gathered from the discussions I have seen it seems like information about your own aircraft and similar is fully accepted. However, as soon as you do any analysis based on enemy aircraft you are immediately going too far.
For example you could implement a warning system which tells you if an enemy is spotted and within 3km behind you. Technically none of this is privileged information (you can see it on your own map and it is accessible on localhost). However, it is explicitly disallowed.
Given this logic I would conclude that analysis of player BR based on your own team is fine, especially with the new update not even requiring you to memorize BR:s. However, as soon as you do any analysis based on battle chat or spotted planes you are going too far, even if it as simple as updating you BR range check (if your team only has 0.7 BR range).
Therefore I would suggest you only implement features reliant on your own aircraft or team. Something which would be as beneficial in singleplayer as in multiplayer (e.g how many bombs for a base or fuel analysis).
I am of not a moderator. More features could be allowed, much of this is a grey zone after all. Getting explicit permission is of course always best.
I’m not actually sure what form of ‘explicit authorization’ in specific rules is legit enough. From my point of view such confirmation would be great.
If we can have another form of communication with Gaijin to clear some aspects of the topic it would be great for me too.
I understand that such theme is complicated and it is about pretty small niche. So if we can have some form of dialogue, I’d be happy to share any additional info needed about my project and plans.
Thank you for the detailed answer.
I’ve read some similar topics too, and it looks like your notice is valid.
I don’t know how many players use such overlays and how many ones want to use them but prefer not to take risks.
I think, if we can achieve more clarity in this theme, it would be good for enthusiast community and my project personally. There is no such task to test limits of the gray zone, so yeah, probably some features must not be implemented. It would be great to know which of them is good and ‘not so good’ before I spent time. Also code is in public repository (and it’s easy to reverse engineer my application anyway), so ‘the internet never forgets’ factor can add unnecessary smell to my application. And I definitely do not want to create more work for game moderators.
First two are more or less ok, all the info is publicly available in the game (fuel, BR range).
The 3rd on, I am not sure how it would work in your opinion.
Still, please be aware that this post do not means your app (or any other) is accepted as valid and safe for use. We do not provide such “seal of approval” for 3rd party apps.
So looks like I can continue develop my app with such vector in mind.
I’d like to ask a bit more questions please.
Is it ok to create similar topic if (or when) other ‘less okay’ features would appear? Not for authorization, but for clarity as this one. And I’ll try to cut off more obvious cases of course.
If my app become suspicious (let’s say at least rules may change or I could implement too much analytic logic) would users get warning or something like this before get banned? So they (myself included) could stop using the app and continue play the game. And then toxic feature may be excluded from the app.
Is it ok to use datamines of the game files in such overlay app? For example max IAS and max G-force of aircraft are very useful so player can have percent numbers of how close his craft to the limits.
I think for UX the most convenient way is that app could get data from game files. But such activity could be in very sensitive zone.
Another way is integration with other public repository with such data.
Is any of this methods fine? Maybe even both?
P.S. About 3rd feature: I think game battle chat can be scanned for messages about destroyed aircraft. In-game there are info about both sides - defeated plane and plane which defeat (player names included). Very usefull info if player stay 1v1 or 1 v team (Air Realistic Battle mode).
Now player can check scoreboard. If enemy has frags, we can find his nickname by scrolling battle chat and identify which plane does he use. Sometimes I use such pattern while reloading or simple airborne without any markers.
I didn’t test yet is this info actually hosted on localhost. But if the feature itself is in less okay zone, I can just stop research at this point.