So, the wheels of history are virtually inevitiable. Studies show each event was virtually pre-ordained, and couldn't have possibly (in any realistic sense) played out in any other way. After-the-fact analysis proves it so.
Nope. Didn't say that.
Not even close.
What I said, and what the post said, and what all my posts have said ... if you read them ... is that there were certain real world factors (military-logistic, economic, political and what have you) that constrained the acts of the participants in WW2 to act in certain ways with a high degree of probability ... and which would, inevitably, have had consequences, negative ones mostly, if they had been ignored.
So, the Germans were constrained to act in certain ways and there were inevitable consequences if they had not.
That's well understood by most people.
Let's take a couple of examples that most people (here, at least) seem to accept as underpinning their choices ... insofar as the designers have chosen to incorporate them in their soon to be (hopefully) released patch ...
* AI limited to producing fleets only of historical size
* German casualties for Amphibious operations increased and cost of Amph points increased
Looking at the first, the Germans came up with their Naval Rearmament program, the Z Plan, in 1937 ... massive fleet build. Many BBs, CAs, CLs, DDs, 2+ CVs, 400+ Submarines ... to be complete by 1949/50.
Why did they not get further than they did? What prevented them? Or made it less likely?
Real World Constraints.
See, the German Economy in 1937 was a Command Economy, in many ways like that of Stalinist Russia. Goering was in charge of all resource allocation.
The resources available, especially factory space, skilled workers, and, most importantly, steel, were available in finite amounts ... and they had almost all already been allocated. To the Wehrmacht's Panzers, Artillery and etc. and the the Luftwaffe's fighters, bombers and transports.
To build more ships would, inevitably, have led to building less ... much, much, much less ... tanks, guns, planes and the like.
You simply cannot have it both ways.
Still, yes, the Nazis *tried* ... they allocated an adequate Budget to build all the needed vessels.
What they didn't allocate ... couldn't, because there wasn't any excess to allocate ... were workers, factories, and, more importantly, resources.
Now, historically, as it turned out, even capturing Poland, France, Belgium, Holland etc. didn't really change that. Sure, more factories, more skilled workers ... but, really, no more steel or oil or anything else on the scale that was needed to fuel and supply them. And, of course, the workers in said factories weren't exactly willing to produce military stuff for the Germans that worked all that well.
A lot of the resources they used before they were conquered were imported. And then moment they were conquered, all those resources, unless in internal stockpiles, went "poof" as the RN blockaded them and stopped all further trade.
Now, ToF models this relatively poorly in some ways ... hence the need for limits on AI choices to build German ships ... because PPs are so generic. In reality, either the cost of producing German vessels and amphibs should be increased massively for human players or the same limits should apply to them as to the AI, because PPs don't adequately represent the reality on the ground.
If this is unacceptable, then it should be that you are as ready to accept unrealistic results for the allies as well as for the Germans ...
Then there's German Amphibious Operations ... aka Sealion ... which, basically, every single serious examination agrees was impossible and would have been a disastrous failure for the Germans, and, indeed, agree that German planning was of the "this is complete wish fulfilment fantasy" level. The few scenarios (massively outweighed by those who see it as a fantasy) that treat it as a possibility, if you examine them closely, assume the Germans magically get ashore somehow and then magically supply themselves by ignoring the existence of the RAF and RN.
Since the AI seems to handle things Naval so badly, then, again, there should be some constraint that makes German amphibious operations extremely difficult ... increased cost of Amph points for a start, increased casualties from Amphibious operations, increased supply costs for Panzers by Sea ... and, actually, this is really not even close to how tough it would have been in reality ... for a start, the presence of even a single naval unit (not Fleet with many units, a single *unit*) belonging to the allies in the Channel Zone should automatically interdict all supply and reinforcement, and, probably, prevent any passage by German units, unless first destroyed by ... something ...
Which would require a much bigger than historical Luftwaffe and a much bigger than historical Kriegsmarine ... which would mean a much smaller than historical Wehrmacht ... the resources available constrained German options here, as in so many other areas.
Well, I'm throwing the B.S. flag.
It's kinda like being attacked by a 2 year old throwing a tantrum.
Ignoring reality because you, personally, don't believe it to be reality? Yep.
Look, no-one, least of all me, is telling you that you have to play a closely historical scenario ... I think its fine that you want a gamist one, if that suits you ... but it doesn't suit me, so how about the courtesy of allowing those of us who actually want something close to historical constraints applied in ways that don't suit you, personally, to have the option of such.
Possibly, I guess, the designers could make adding historical constraints to the AI side the "balance" factor for "Hard" and "Very Hard" advantage in the game system, or simply add "Historical" as the level beyond "Very Hard" ... which would keep you and the gamer folk happy, and allow those of us who want historicity to have the option.
No need to be so defensive, since you're not being told you have to play it that way.
Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)