Amelia Earhart?

[rjohansen]

So I am watching the stream and suddenly the Amelia Earthart event pops up. However, now she survives...? Wasn't this supposed to be historical settings? Plus, the American can hire here later on? For what? A ministerial post for women rights? I know she was kind of a suffragette and advocate for women rights. Surely you can't mean a military leader, than would just be too absurd, but so is the first option.

I can't be the only one who thinks things like this is just silly and extremely unrealistic. Historical events, are just for flavor I thought, but can every outcome change now? Will Hindenburg make it or not, will we have airships in WW2 or not... That news on stream really shocked me at least.

 

[Mendeth]

Historical settings won't (as far as I know) mean the game will follow history exactly. Otherwise it'd be the standard thing of 1st September 1939: War in Europe. 7th December 1941: Pear Harbour. PDS have been moving away from that since HOI3.

The Devs have stated they're seeking to make an historical sandbox, so it's feasible that some events will have the chance to turn out differently than they did in history, albeit a low chance I imagine.

 

[Hans_Schnitzel]

The historical setting means that the AI will follow their historical national focii. In other words: Germany will invade Poland, then France, then USSR, etc. And the countries will react like they did in history.

 

[Daddl]

As they said when Germany refused to withdraw their military advisors from China: It can happen in historical mode, but it is very rare.

You will have no problem to mod the 1% chance of events to happen to 0% if you want a totally strict "historical" game (as no game can ever really be historical once you start).

 

[rjohansen]

You will have no problem to mod the 1% chance of events to happen to 0% if you want a totally strict "historical" game (as no game can ever really be historical once you start).

At least decisions like Amelia Earhart surviving and becoming a leader... Stuff like the Germans refusing to withdraw their military advisors I can understand a bit more, a certain (rare percentage chance) of stuff like this not going historically is ok. Same with Republicans winning in Spain. I do wan't the Nationalists to win more, but it is perfectly ok that there is a 1-10% chance that the Republicans win. (With historical settings)

But bizarre stuff like Amelia Earhart surviving and becoming a leader is just too silly for me.

 

[eddyill]

But bizarre stuff like Amelia Earhart surviving and becoming a leader is just too silly for me.

I would expect that if she survives america can get a national spirit called something like 'women in aviation' that provided a small boast to air morale or something similar.

 

[Alexoren]

The Hindenburg was referenced in one of the older WWWs. I believe it was hijacked and driven towards Britain only to get shot by anti air guns.

Also, I highly doubt it'll be a general position for Amelia Earhart like is being suggested. It'll more than likely be some sort of advisory position you can spend political power. Offer some buff for planes or something like that.

In one of the very first WWWs Poland handed over some of their western territory instead of taking on the Germans. The point of it being a historical sandbox is that it starts out and follows a vague direction that is historical, but can be changed.

Edit:
eddyill made a good point. She'll probably become a National Spirit to offer some mild buff.

 

[rjohansen]

I would expect that if she survives america can get a national spirit called something like 'women in aviation' that provided a small boast to air morale or something similar.

Sounds much better. I believed she could be a political leader of some sorts, or even worse, a general, which would have totally ruined the game for me.

 

[Kubusta]

Historical settings won't (as far as I know) mean the game will follow history exactly. Otherwise it'd be the standard thing of 1st September 1939: War in Europe. 7th December 1941: Pear Harbour. PDS have been moving away from that since HOI3.

The Devs have stated they're seeking to make an historical sandbox, so it's feasible that some events will have the chance to turn out differently than they did in history, albeit a low chance I imagine.

As Mendeth says, it would be super boring to have exact event and exact order of everything in every single game. Why would I play that then?

 

[panzerzombie]

Sounds much better. I believed she could be a political leader of some sorts, or even worse, a general, which would have totally ruined the game for me.

You are quite OCD about such things, aren´t you ?

 

[rjohansen]

You are quite OCD about such things, aren´t you ?

Perhaps a bit too much

In HOI3 I rename every single unit, every single Brg unit I build, no matter the country I play as, even if Soviet... I also try to use the real regiments in the real divisions etc.

 

[rjohansen]

As Mendeth says, it would be super boring to have exact event and exact order of everything in every single game. Why would I play that then?

Yeah sure, and I agree. But that is where the "human factor" comes into play. However, stuff like Amelia Earhart should be just "flavor" events in my opinion.

 

[panzerzombie]

Perhaps a bit too much

In HOI3 I rename every single unit, every single Brg unit I build, no matter the country I play as, even if Soviet... I also try to use the real regiments in the real divisions etc.

Well to each one his own vices , sounds like much work...

 

[hewhoispale]

At least decisions like Amelia Earhart surviving and becoming a leader... Stuff like the Germans refusing to withdraw their military advisors I can understand a bit more, a certain (rare percentage chance) of stuff like this not going historically is ok. Same with Republicans winning in Spain. I do wan't the Nationalists to win more, but it is perfectly ok that there is a 1-10% chance that the Republicans win. (With historical settings)

But bizarre stuff like Amelia Earhart surviving and becoming a leader is just too silly for me.

So it's okay for some historical events to not happen as they did historically, but it is completely inconceivable that Amelia Earhart survives? Disasters like the Hindenburg or her disappearance were no more fated than any other chance occurrence.
If she had survived, the government would have been absolutely insane not to utilize someone of her reputation for the war effort.

 

[rjohansen]

So it's okay for some historical events to not happen as they did historically, but it is completely inconceivable that Amelia Earhart survives? Disasters like the Hindenburg or her disappearance were no more fated than any other chance occurrence.
If she had survived, the government would have been absolutely insane not to utilize someone of her reputation for the war effort.

Some historical events, like the Spanish Civil War for instance, should not be "set in stone" in my opinion. However, with an historical setting, the nationalists should win most of the times. However, Amelia Earhart, Hindenburg etc. These events are "out of player" control what so ever.

What would be more meaningful is that there was en event triggered by some events. For instance, the Hindenburg tragedy caused the end of airships travel that had lasted for years, perhaps a simple boost to air research because of it, for a limited time. Same with other events, the aftermath of events should instead trigger a "custom" event that gives a penalty/boost of some sorts. Could apply to different innovations or achievements of that era - done outside of state control.

Concerning Amelia Earhart: what could she be used for? Other than propaganda? I don't think she should be a leader of any sorts, that would be totally unrealistic. Besides her flying career, she really did not do anything "relevant" of any sorts. An author for women magazines, plus she comes from a rich family that is all I can think of. She was the Kardashian of her time.

 

[rjohansen]

Well to each one his own vices , sounds like much work...

Sometimes. I don't do it always - sometimes I just use tools like "Army Organizer" etc to keep it simple. But I keep a spreadsheet on my other monitor to keep things organized.

 

[hewhoispale]

Some historical events, like the Spanish Civil War for instance, should not be "set in stone" in my opinion. However, with an historical setting, the nationalists should win most of the times. However, Amelia Earhart, Hindenburg etc. These events are "out of player" control what so ever.

What would be more meaningful is that there was en event triggered by some events. For instance, the Hindenburg tragedy caused the end of airships travel that had lasted for years, perhaps a simple boost to air research because of it, for a limited time. Same with other events, the aftermath of events should instead trigger a "custom" event that gives a penalty/boost of some sorts. Could apply to different innovations or achievements of that era - done outside of state control.

Concerning Amelia Earhart: what could she be used for? Other than propaganda? I don't think she should be a leader of any sorts, that would be totally unrealistic. Besides her flying career, she really did not do anything "relevant" of any sorts. An author for women magazines, plus she comes from a rich family that is all I can think of. She was the Kardashian of her time.

She's a civilian pilot, so she's not going to be a fighter ace, but she could easily fit as a civilian political leader or more abstracted as a national spirit of some type. Perhaps even do something with the WASP (Women Airforce Service Pilots) for somesuch.

 

[xtfoster]

The historical setting means that the AI will follow their historical national focii. In other words: Germany will invade Poland, then France, then USSR, etc. And the countries will react like they did in history.

Actually, that is only partially correct. Yes, the nations will try* to pick the historical national Foci, but no they won't** always react as in history.

* Some Foci have pre-requisites that might not be met, so a foci might be taken out of order.

** Since historical options don't affect event choices, the historical option probably won't always be taken when the 'response event' pops up for other nations.

 

[The_Meme_Man]

I could see her being used for propaganda in the USA. I mean, she cannot be a military leader because she has no training in the field. Just because you fly a plane doesn't mean you know how to lead an air wing. Hell, you can be good at leading an air wing without being good at actually flying. But we don't know what will go on with her, so we really shouldn't be making outright accusations. This is kinda why I want the Japan game to keep going, but we will probably all forget about Ms. Earhart by day-after-tomorrow. I could see her being useful for improving industry as industry in the USA during the war was primarily worked by the women since all the men were across the sea fighting. Have a woman celebrity barking about the importance of factory work during the war, and they will probably oblige. I highly doubt she will have any real military influence (though now that I think about it, male pilots would be pretty inspired, particularly young ones).


HOWEVER, I don't see a problem with her being an ace pilot, or at the very least there being a huge chance of the USA getting its first Ace quickly and that ace just being Earhart.....call-sign "Flying Chic".

 

[Mendeth]

She was the Kardashian of her time.

Comparing someone with the temperament and skills to fly solo across the Atlantic in the 1930s with someone who's fame stems, in part, from having TV cameras follow them around is quite unfair.

I do sort of understand your point that it is doubtful a surviving Earheart would have been that significant a 'leader' in HOI terms, however I disagree with you disparaging her achievements.