Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Avimimus

A way to sell the Battle of France to a broader audience!

Recommended Posts

I personally think that just recreating the Battle of France justifies purchasing a sim. However, there are a couple of ways that sales could be increased.


I. Produce an alternate history campaign

 

Why is this justified?

 

This was one of the most unpredictable moments in history. If events had not played out exactly as they did it is likely the battle would have been much longer: The allied armies might not have been encircled if a Bf-108 carrying the German plans didn't crash in allied territory and thus provide a justification for last minute operations.

 

What if the Mechelen incident doesn't take place? Reinberger doesn't transport plans by aircraft (which was a capital offense at the time) and/or Hoenmanns's Bf 108 Taifun doesn't get lost and crash-land. As a result Manstein isn't able to push for his plans and Fall Gelb proceeds without the Ardennes alteration. No encircling of the Allies by Panzer group A takes place.

 

One can throw in a few more events if necessary: Perhaps, bad weather disrupts efforts to use gliders to capture choke points... causing defenders to be alerted by the premature arrival of conventional German troops. Perhaps plans for the paratrooper attacks fall into Allied hands. These chance events allow for the detonation of more bridges and/pr Fort Eben-Emael (and a few other points on the Albert canal) to hold out for a few more days. In any case, the Germans take more than four days to reach the Dyle line.

 

In any case, with most of the German forces committed to the North, and the situation far from stabilised for either side - German armour isn't as easily detached for strategic flanking movements... To the extent that German forces succeed in crossing the Meuse they have trouble quickly exploiting this advantage... There is no 'push for the sea'. Allied formations have a chance to establish themselves - there is more time for Allied commanders and troops to gain experience with maneuvering warfare and adapt their tactics - as well as redeploy the 7th army, launch counter attacks, and stabilise their supply situation.
 

In real life:

On May 9th the order to invade was given, and the breakout by Army Group A (through the Ardenness) was complete six days later, by day ten the Germans have reached the channel and cut off allied supplies.

 

By day 20 (May 28th) reformed tactics had been implemented by the French (in spite of having a largely conscript army). So delaying the German advance by even 10 days could have lengthened the Battle of France by weeks if not months.
 

 

II. Possibly extend the concept to aircraft?

 

Some people may not be that interested in Dutch or French aircraft (likely due to ignorance) or the Fairey Battle (likely due to good judgment). A lot of people just don't know about the Lioré et Olivier LeO 45 etc! Other people may not see the value in a short lived desperate battle.

 

So in addition to justifying adding more French aircraft ...I would suggest that having a bit of fun with alternate history in order to add the option of other aircraft for existing nations. This might increase sales. Doing so requires larger changes to history than just the Mechelen incident of course... but doing so would send a powerful visual signal that history is in a different timeline.

 

Examples:
- Perhaps including the Fw-187 or the He-100 as optional replacements for the German aircraft that would normally be in the missions (perhaps the competition played out differently).
- Including the Westland Whirlwind wouldn't be a stretch (perhaps the Rolls-Royce Peregrine actually works in this timeline)?
- More of a stretch perhaps would be increasing the speed of re-armament (more operational Fokker G.Is?) or speeding up aircraft development (Fokker D.XXIII? - Although that is getting harder to justify!).

 

In any case, adding a couple of attractive and unusual aircraft as an option for the alternate history campaign would certainly draw attention!

Edited by Avimimus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Avimimus

 

Thanks for your comments.

 

At this stage it is unlikely we will do a full Battle of France... although if we add a new map which shows Northern France, Belgium and Holland this might happen.

 

What we will likely add is the Hawk 75A... but not for TF 5.0, most likely for TF 6.0, assuming we go there.  It is a relatively easy conversion from the Tomahawk/Kittyhawk.

 

Regarding French bombers... not likely in the near future.  Too few data resources for doing 3D cockpits, not enough performance data, etc.  If they appear it would likely be as only AI.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great idea Avimimus, there are many that would love to see the epic struggle of the French and others at this time.;)

 

However, let us get to the desert first then hopefully we can go forward, or backward, from there we can have this title finally realise the original dream.:drinks:

 

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.:biggrin:

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely! Thank you both for the nice replies.

 

I figured the team members will be very busy with 5.0. I also honestly think that exploring 1942-1943 in the desert, alongside possibly Malta or Italy would be the best direction to go afterwards. Modelling the Mediterranean is something which has been far too neglected (I can think of one major sim company that started, and then cancelled their plans around 2000... and that is about it)! But it is still fun to speculate about the viability of France!

 

If the Battle of France was modelled - I doubt people would make the Potez 63-11 anyway (which is the one I really want) :)

 

Philosophical question: If data on an aircraft is missing - is it ever acceptable to use guesswork to fill in the gaps? I often wonder about this (mainly in a WWI context), as too high a standard could lead to not modelling a historically important plane at all!

Edited by Avimimus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again Avimimus with what we have now and are to see in 5.0, as well as the Hawk Buzzsaw mentions, it can safely be said we are starting to aquire stuff for France,  the mission/campaign builders will not mind if a aircraft is exact as long as it is near enough to provide enough immersion down the line me thinks.  The bombers though it fairly safe to say could be a long way off, if at all, as again Buzzsaw acknowledges.:drinks:

 

The "Philosophical question ", might be a little more difficult to answer I think in this community who clamour for realism above all else both for Blitz and the GB series, have you seen some of the arguments that rage daily even about what could be assumed to be relatively mundane issues?

 

Is this a simulation or a arcade game, or both, difficult to answer as it allows a diversity of player styles to be realised, however, I think first and foremost all design teams want to provide the player with as much factual material as is humanly possible considering how old these aircraft actually are so any aircraft or vehicle has to be built from good information sources.

 

The question is more what the community would except I think above all else and we all have our own opinions on that one, the development teams are dammed if they do, dammed if they do not.

 

I think it fair to say that " guesswork" is out of the question, there would need to be some basis for any assumption they follow in the form of relevant documentation.

 

Great to be just a player eh and not have to make the decisions around here.:lol:

 

Sorry for rambling on again, I don't fly much these days so wander aimlessly around the forums taking it all in.

 

Take care.

 

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.:biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really dislike idea of alternate history campaign and don't really see it as a way to sell more copies. Alternative history is not something super popular and i don't really know much games that did it. Unless it's something crazy like zombies or wolfenstein but apart from this, i only saw operation sea lion dlc and maybe some bonus missions in RTS where you can play what if scenarios. But it's nothing popular and most people seem to prefer normal history. I would rather see normal battle of france than what if battle of france.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, InProgress said:

I really dislike idea of alternate history campaign and don't really see it as a way to sell more copies. Alternative history is not something super popular and i don't really know much games that did it. Unless it's something crazy like zombies or wolfenstein but apart from this, i only saw operation sea lion dlc and maybe some bonus missions in RTS where you can play what if scenarios. But it's nothing popular and most people seem to prefer normal history. I would rather see normal battle of france than what if battle of france.

Agreed - I believe those who like to play realistic aircraft also like historical accuracy. Alternate history would work better with a clear action setting and s story narrative like crimson skies or ace combat. Maybe even with cool prototypes rather than actual combat types.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s best to only deviate from history to the extent of “historical plausibility” (unless we get Battle of 1946, which I would sell my kidneys to preorder). For example, there were no D.520s near Amiens in May 1940 (to my knowledge, at least), or Fw-190s at the Battle of Stalingrad, but there easily could have been, if certain units were sent to different airfields than they actually were. 
 

IMO it’s a great way of getting more variety in terms of aircraft, while still maintaining accuracy to the main historical events. And, of course, you can simply choose not to use those aircraft on those maps.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, [Pb]Cybermat47 said:

And, of course, you can simply choose not to use those aircraft on those maps.

Can you? If you won't pick fw190A3 in Stalingrad they will still fly around as AI? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, InProgress said:

Can you? If you won't pick fw190A3 in Stalingrad they will still fly around as AI? 

No they don't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Battle of France would be so cool - historical and alternate history.

 

So many unique and new aircraft to fly. Yeah ok, Fusion would need to build them first .. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/26/2019 at 4:05 PM, Missionbug said:

The "Philosophical question ", might be a little more difficult to answer I think in this community who clamour for realism above all else both for Blitz and the GB series, have you seen some of the arguments that rage daily even about what could be assumed to be relatively mundane issues?

 

Is this a simulation or a arcade game, or both, difficult to answer as it allows a diversity of player styles to be realised, however, I think first and foremost all design teams want to provide the player with as much factual material as is humanly possible considering how old these aircraft actually are so any aircraft or vehicle has to be built from good information sources.

 

The question is more what the community would except I think above all else and we all have our own opinions on that one, the development teams are dammed if they do, dammed if they do not.

 

I think it fair to say that " guesswork" is out of the question, there would need to be some basis for any assumption they follow in the form of relevant documentation.

 

Yes, I largely agree! I tend to wonder about this mainly with WWI aircraft and AI aircraft...

 

For example, if one has a photograph showing part of the cockpit dash... but are missing references for some parts of the cockpit... is it permissible to replace an instrument with an instrument from another aircraft of the same period? What about replacing the rudder pedals/bar with rudder pedals based on another aircraft from the same manufacturer? What about if there are cockpit photos but no photos showing the back of the pilot's seat (or the area behind/underneath the seat)?

 

If these things do not impact performance (and they are clearly marked as 'best approximations') it wouldn't seem to be as great a sin as something that would impact the flight model... and in some cases it would seem to be a greater sin to not model a commonly present aircraft at all... so that is mainly what I was wondering about.

 

Of course accuracy is critical for the flight models and damage models - and I love the increasing fidelity of systems modelling in recent years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a little artistic licence has always to be accepted, my background has included heavy engineering, mainly trains and trucks, it amazes me how much people consider manufacturing drawings as almost gospel posted in the forums which are said to be company issued, pristine issue 'A', some I saw went up to 'M' and further.:lol:

 

In the machine shop and fabrication areas where I worked the amount of drawing revisions issued was mind blowing as the product went from prototype to what was essentially the done thing issued to customers, try finding all the departure from drawing and engineering change notes among the masses of paperwork and then include whatever the customer engineering teams did once in service.:huh:

 

Who knows just how many revisions the actual machines went through during their life time, and this is in the 1980/90's, imagine something from the WWI era aviation industry where nothing was really standardized and also the field modifications done in the light of combat experience, they could be legion, you can then understand that there is no such thing as a exact example as such, combat fitters would beg, steal and borrow anything that might help keep their aircraft in good condition when thousands of miles away from the manufacturers home factory and at the end of very precarious supply lines, many items were fabricated and machined with whatever facilities came to hand.

 

How many WWII cockpit photographs have you seen with instruments missing from the panel, just a hole where it might have been had it actually ever been included at all, maybe even ripped out by ground crew because it was more trouble than it was worth.;)

 

We can only guess in our modern age for many situations as many issued drawings and photographs back then from the manufacturer could be considered to have included some censorship as well so what exactly is the definitive reference when dealing with such old aircraft and during wartime.

 

The old adage is if it looks right it is, but then beauty is in the eye of the beholder as well, we should accept that the development teams here will have to juggle time for research with a deadline to give the player what they want, never has, or will be easy to make all happy, all you can do is satisfy yourself you tried your best to make it as near as available information allowed you to.

 

Strap in and enjoy what turns up, they all break as easily whether a exact replica or not when the cannon shells hit.:drinks:

 

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.:biggrin:

Edited by Missionbug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30+ plus years mired in engineering drawings. Mostly agree with Missionbug, but also appreciate that the devs make an extra effort to tame the riotous beast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...