Quote:
Originally Posted by ivank
There has been a mixed debate within the team whether or not to go 100% historicaly accurate or not. Ships like the Tirpitiz, which spent most of the war in a harbour, would be boring. I wanted to know what the players would like.
100% accurate: stuck in base, no missions.
-or-
Semi-accurate: given missions that might have happen.
|
I think you might have slightly misunderstood me so I'll clarify my opinion here. I do not want 100% accuracy either, that would be too boring (and besides, we're modding a game and not making a movie, if you want 100% accuracy that's the only way to go). I just want the campaign to be strategically historical. Being given missions like the real ships got. Not exactly the same and maybe a bit more of them, but missions like the ones given in reality.
Also I don't distinguish between the Tirpitz/Bismarck/Lützow/Gneisenau/Scharnhorst/any other battleship/battlecruiser. I'd go for only one BB career, which you can play using any of the above ships and be assigned generic missions of the kind that were given to battleships.
Like in september 1939 you are given an order to patrol the south atlantic, supply ships will be there and there, sink x tons of enemy merchant shipping etc. I don't necessarily want these missions to be historical, if only they fit into the historical context. So that you won't operate from Brest after februari 1942 etc as that didn't happen in RL either. And no what-if-scenario's like 'what if the Germans didn't retreat their fleet to Norway and kept on going on sorties in the south/mid atlantic' or 'Attack the D-Day invasion fleet'.
Any readers please post your opinion here, do you want a perhaps more exciting campaign containing lots of what-if-scenarios or do you stick with history?