If you think this is bad, you should have a look at some of Austria’s newspaper forums today. 
3 Likes
I’m trying to understand this take. Did they promise improved ATC as part of early access Hornet, like they they did ground radar? If they decided to charge more for ground radar, yeah, I would be pretty annoyed. I haven’t read any promises like that for ATC, but that doesn’t mean those promises weren’t made…
Thanks, I’ll check some out! Now to get some lively announcers and get them to broadcast them on ABC 
There has been no mention of paying for ATC or any of that. That is all hyperbole from the… loud people. The ATC specific to Case I (and so on) landings on a carrier are coming with the paid carrier purchase but i do not believe that there has been any official word on if that will trickle out to the other carriers or if it is tied to code with the new carrier. This does not affect the long term ‘to do’ item of improving the ATC in general.
Oh my. I just read a sampling of the angry posts elsewhere.
A part of me wants for ED to just make this single player only. That would fix everything
No, they promised the ATC at some point before the Nevada release. And a few times before that.
And no, of course nobody said that the ATC will be paid for, like the carrier one. All I see is that we have one and not the other.
Said who? That would be nice to hear.
There’s a quote from Wags stating that floating around somewhere.
Edit: There you go https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3915456&postcount=30
2 Likes
Good, thanks!
Nonono please don’t get me wrong!
Of course I didn’t mean here.
The rage all around.
Sorry…
This info MUST circulate far and wide!
1 Like
I’m only 90% sure I’m reading it correctly.
1 Like
It’s a pretty clear cut info for me…
It could also mean that there are no plans for upgraded ATC. 
Yeah I am not sure how we could interpret it otherwise. Unless Wags meant that they have no plans to rework the ATC at all, which would be quite a stretch.
1 Like
Hehehe yeah… For what I know Wags, he’s not the kind of person to pull a Wilson like that…
I quoted for truth there 
2 Likes
If they sell the improved ATC and deck crew for Carrier ops for a premium, and that makes it possible for them to migrate that work for the ground bases at a latter date for free, I’m up for it.
3 Likes
I noticed… now.
Sometimes I’m overly self-conscious, sometimes less. 
2 Likes
O/T: Adobe, Dolby and the Battle Over Your Software - Plagiarism Today
Adobe failed to maintain their license agreement with Dolby for certain software they sold, then expects Adobe users to make up for Adobe’s mistake. This affected both subscription service users and one-time purchase users. Generally speaking, if you bought a hard copy you are OK, but if you bought a subscription there might be some trouble.
For DCS to go subscription, I would be far more demanding than I already am for the game as a whole. The current game would be unacceptable for a subscription base and I wouldn’t feel I was getting my money’s worth, for reasons I’ll detail later.
There doesn’t need to be a fixed model here. A mixed subscription as well as hard purchase model could work. $100 for a year, $60 for 6 months, $70 for 3 months, and so on. Or buy a full, single complete module for $100 and have access to it and associated features for the life of that module (lets assume 3 years starting from the point it leaves early access). Said access would also include things like modernized Nimitz and naval operations for a full experience, but nothing like Combined Arms, etc. A subscription instead means you get access to everything. The basic core of the game would remain free.
This pretty much sums it up for me. Advanced chatter, LSO, ATC? I’m deaf, I’m going to be reading the text more than I’m going to be hearing and understanding the voice. You could have generic radio scramble sound for each message from the LSO and ATC and it’d be the same for me. The AI, on the other hand, has put a real damper on so much of my enjoyment, whether it’s cheat missiles or general stupidity in flying. To me, the LSO and ATC are just icing on the cake; the real paid part is being able to interact with the carrier in certain ways. This is especially true given my preferred multiplayer scenario where there usually aren’t enough players to justify having a special ATC, and if there were then we’d probably have someone doing ATC and LSO anyways – who could do it infinitely better than an AI system.
This is basically my problem with the subscription model and why it may not work out as well as we’d hope: ED is ridiculously slow at rolling out critical core gameplay updates. I’m sorry, but that’s the cold hard truth. Yes, we’re dealing with an incredibly complex subject, I know that from experience all too well. But I don’t want to pay $100 a year, then wait 11 months for the AI to lose their cheat missiles that have floundered around for 2 years now, then get only maybe a month at most to enjoy it before I have to pay another subscription fee again, only to find something else broken that takes another full year to fix. That is untenable and unacceptable. I won’t even go into how many modules are sold with the early access disclaimer that have missing features and broken functionality years after being introduced. No, as it relates, it has more to do with the core functionality of the game, which under the current model I accept because I’ve bought in and know it’s a matter of time before these issues are fixed and gameplay becomes acceptable. Under a subscription model, I expect that functionality from the start – the full experience. I expect there to be far more features in the singleplayer mode as well as multiplayer for my money. Demanding? Yes, very much so. Because we have people who may not be able to play for a month, or six months, or a year, and they’ve paid for a full subscription without getting anything out of it. So when they do play, they need to feel like their money has been well-spent and not a boring bug fest with cheating AI – very important if we’re assuming a singleplayer focus.
Thus, my general feeling that ED can’t meet the standards of a subscription service without radically changing their entire development philosophy. And I’m not even sure such would work with a complex simulation either.
I enjoy DCS very much, it’s been very entertaining since I tried it last summer; however, the only reason I did so was because ED finally changed some of their policies regarding DRM that had been in place since 2004. Had ED been more adaptive to customer concerns, they might’ve kept me as a customer completely between 2008-2018. Now if you think of the money I’ve spent in the past year alone, imagine how much I might’ve paid for that full decade prior. That is why the present situation with the carrier module must be treated carefully: alienating their small customer base can have far-reaching consequences.
Now, that doesn’t mean all the wailing and gnashing of teeth is justified; far from it. I think people are very much wrapped around the axle over what amounts to a piece of entertainment software. But there is some truth to the points these vocal users raise, and I find myself rather surprised that – given past history – ED finds themselves blindsided by it. When you use language like “optional” (from what I’ve read in 2015 and 2016 updates), people make certain assumptions.
3 Likes