Gary

Sadly it was recently confirmed that the ATC improvements are not a priority for the Dynamic Campaign - so basically still years away. Regards, Gary

Thank you for the update. Appreciated. Gary

This has been teased for a while now and I'm really looking forward to trying it out. Do you have any release roadmap - even if subject to change of course? Regards, Gary

Please speak for yourself rather than everyone. Whilst the information sources for the F35A might be your number one priority, it most definately in NOT mine. You suggest no-one cares about the World Map or ATC which I can catogorically say is NOT true. The ATC improvements are my personal number one priority so please don't speak for me. Everyone will have their own personal priorities and whilst some will surely align with yours, not everyones will. Regards, Gary

This looks really promising!

This is right up my street too! - thank you for your efforts, for those of us who enjoy the added immersion ATC procedures bring this is very much appreciated. On the basis I suspect users might need to tinker with VA profiles, voice training and alike, plus the self training you rightly point out required to use this properly (and that others might want to add Voxfox compatability etc) I think the sooner you can a version released the sooner all the above can start. I'm frankly quite desperate to get my hands on this...lol Regards and thanks again, Gary

Any idea when the new "ATC" enabled version will be available please? Regards, Gary

Only modification I know of presently to improve things is the "mute" button! On a more serious note I've seen a couple of individuals out there who are working on generic improvements but nothing solid available just yet. We await in hope though! Regards, Gary

I think most forum users here will know of a certain sim that does do all this very well already. Personally, my enjoyment of DCS would be significently greater if it also had this level of ATC interaction. I know ED keep saying its a lot of work and not so easy to do (and I don't doubt this for a second) but as with most massive tasks in life, taking bite sized small steps towards an end goal would have surely resulted in something better than what we currently have already. Anyway, ED have confirmed ATC is not a priority. Given the fact that priority tasks take years to complete, I've resigned myself to the realisation that 3rd party and DLC content creators are the only likely source of ATC improvements I will see in the coming years. Regards, Gary

The DLC makers do a fantastic job as I have said previously. Really very good. But.... Taking advantage of these requires me to fly the airframe they choose and to undertake the mission they have built. I want to be able to fly any airframe of my choosing and the mission I want....even if that is just a flight from point A to point B practicing navigation, timing, or whatever. Having some form of semi realistic ATC whilst doing so is my wish. I also think it has been recognised that core ATC functionality is mainly for SP (the vast majority of players) and that MP has other options which probably appeal more. Regards, Gary

You mean paid content?

cfag, Whilst I largely agree with your post above regarding EA, I disagree with the line "there is a high likelihood that it won't improve much 6 months after initial release" The flagship modules (presently F18, F16 & Apache) do benefit from, I'd argue, significent continued improvements long after the initial 6 months - but I get and agree with the point you are trying to get across in the main. It would also seem logical to me that "some" infrastructure improvements, or additions, are definately worth ED investing in. Simply because these additions would likely result in an increase in player numbers and interest and therefore module sales too. (Dynamic Campaign being the obvious example)

I totally get the arguement (observation) regarding monetizing the time and effort required to improve the ATC and I had mentioned that I suspect this is a very likely cause for the lack of progress. As I said, if ATC was a paid module I've no doubt whatsoever we would already have it available. What gets my goat is being told its WIP (for over 10 years now) when clearly its not. Yeah maybe one of the team has done a little research, spent a couple of hours giving it some thought, maybe sketched out all the issues and whats needed on the back of a fag packet but to suggest this represents WIP is disingenuous at best. It would have been far better for me personally if ED had just rolled out Kate, Nick or Wags years ago to say - "look, ATC is not a priority for us and therefore not part of our development roadmap presently" And just to cover the comparison debate. Absolutely comparisons will be drawn. Its silly to think any software which essentially do the same thing (such as flight simulation) won't draw comparisons - about the only significent factor is age (it wouldnt be fair to compare the DCS Apache to Microsoft Gunship for example given the passing of time and tech progress) Yet despite all I now know, I still find myself looking forward to every Friday update in the hope of some ATC news!! - I literally must be mad. Regards, Gary

Didn't see this through before so doubt very much your request will happen. I'm sure the original intention was good but for whatever reason it got abandoned.

As you say, it is also comms and also broken. Assuming the AI code was working properly then the wingman and other existing comms would probably suffice as is. At least for me.