And how are they going to do that without provoking a Royal Navy and RAF response, again?
The idea is that with an early enough PoD, possibly near Hitler's designation as Chancellor, where he realizes that he will not be able to seize continental power without Uk's opposition. So he gears the German military (including Navy and Air Force) towards a confrontation with the UK first, then go east.
Having Hitler to have this realization is, of course, unlikely. His true aspiration was the lebensraum to the east, mostly at the expense of the USSR, which noone in Europe was going to cry for. He also had no way to know that France and the UK would be willing to declare war over his attack against Poland, even if he suspected they could oppose it.
What about this other scenario? No occupied France.
From the start, Hitler had no territorial aspiration to the west. So what if he decides that occupying France is a fools errand? He could give Petáin's France all of its territory back, except for the Alsace-Lorraine, obviously, and keeping a few military observers to make sure the demilitarization is effective. Could such a benign outcome for France weaken UK's resolve to keep the war going? or might they conclude that it was meaningless?
I don't know, don't know enough about the personality of the British leaders, but the whole picture in December 1940 would be: the "whole" France independent, and at peace with Germany, Belgium and Holland "independent" too, as demilitarized satellites of Germany, Poland (the reason for the war) half occupied by Germany, but the other half by the USSR, and the UK only at war with Germany, a war where they can't do anything really to each other, having the channel in between. Under these circumstances, why would the British refuse to settle for the statu quo? for Poland, which is also occupied by the USSR?