From: Ontario Canada
The loss of Moscow would have cut the North-South route of troop redeployment that was so important in winning at Stalingrad. It is quite possible that Moscow of 1941 could be exactly like Stalingrad of 1942 (instead of having their line retreat, they would be forced to stand at Moscow, resulting in possibly an even worse defeat then at Stalingrad).
However, this is just pure conjecture on all parts. The Germans never got to Moscow, so the situation could never come to pass. Many things happen that were not expected. Possibly the fall of Moscow could have raised Russian morale and hopes to drive out the Germans, or it could have possibly destroyed morale completely and led to another set of purges. Both of these are entirely possible.
Back to the important part of the thread, historically changing production...
Messerschmit did have a lot of political clout, as in the late 1930's when Germany was looking for a main fighter aircraft, Messerschmit beat out Heinkel, even though Heinkel had the better aircraft (faster, more manoverable, heavily armed, longer ranged). This was primarily due to politics. It is also why the Me109 remained in production. However, like the Spitfire, the Me109 remained in production primarily because it was a good aircraft, and capable of being improved.
It also takes a lot of time to change a production line from one version of aircraft to another. Stopping all Me109 production would have crippled the Luftwaffe during this period as replacements for lost Me109s could not be fulfilled, and FW 190 production would not be high enough to compensate until it was too late. The Luftwaffe would have lost air superiority in 1943 instead of 1944. As WIR stands it is too easy to change production from one type to another. The game sees the Me109E changing to Me109G/FW 190A as exactly the same, when in reality changing a factory to Me109G would result in a much shorter and less destructive transition time, as much of the equipment is similar, along with the production method.
The same thing goes for tanks. You could not switch over a factory producing Pz II's, to be producing Panthers. Everything in the factory would have to be gutted first, then totally new equipment installed.
This is also what bugs me about aircraft group transfers and loss of experience. Air Groups should lose more experience when switching to a totally unfamilair aircraft (i.e., Me109E to FW 190A) then switching to an upgrade (i.e., Me109E to Me109G).
However, historically the FW 190 did overtake the Me109 in production and useage. However, it was done over a long period of time, and the Me109 was never totally phased out. Does this mean that players cannot remove the Me109? If so, then the Russians should be limited in their use of aircraft as well. If they historically used a certain number of MiG 1's, then should not they be limited to using that number? Where is the fun in that? However, some people might see the game as more challenging in using what WAS historically available, and trying to win with that, while others might want to use every tool available in which to win (with the exception of cheating! :) ).
So, there should be a rule that ALL aircraft types are limited in numbers due to history, not just the Me109. Otherwize, why limit one side/type without limiting the others to the same restrictions?
Possibly this rule should be that the players are NOT allowed to touch a SINGLE bit of production (i.e., you cannot change what factories are producing) as well as not being able to change a single unit in any air group or tank regiment (only allowing the automatic computer upgrades for Air Groups, Tank Regiments, and Factories). Otherwize, limiting only portions to follow history would not be fair (in my mind, all or nothing!)