Is 100% historical accuracy absolutely essential?

[WFGood]

Let me start out by saying that I do not normally post. Since 2003 I have only posted 80 or so times, and most of them have been here for SH4. I will state up front that I do enjoy this game. I have enjoyed playing it, even in its current state, and I will continue to do so. I do wonder about the tone and nature of many of the posts here though. This is not a personal attack on anyone but more of a general comment.
There are bugs in the program. It is an acknowledged fact, and the development team is working to correct it. Some of them probably should have been found and fixed prior to release, but they were not. Well, it is being taken care of now. Some of the bugs probably could not have been anticipated until the game met all the thousands of differently configured computers which are out there. I am more intruiged by some of the historical posts that keep popping up.
Is is necessary that the game be 100% historically accurate to be enjoyable? Does it matter that for example if Midway Atoll only had a maximum of 32 ships in port during the war and the game has 34? Is it critically important if certain aircraft are carrying inaccurate bomb loads? Does gameplay suffer if there are 20% more Fubukis and less of another? Doesn't the game still play just as well? It seems that there is a lot of complaint about things that are not really important and worse attacks on the development team for shoddy research, not caring, laziness, etc.
There are many choices in life that have to be made, trade-offs, cost-benefit analyses, etc that factor into decisions that are made. I think the game developers did an excellent example of researching the big picture of the submarine war in the Pacific Theater. Is it 100% accurate? No, and I don't think that it would be possible to do it in a reasonable amount of time. There are mountains of historical documents out there that contain contradictory information; so research probably is not the issue. If the decision is between having all classes of submarines in game or faithful recreations of bases that I will see for 5 minutes at the beginning of each patrol, then I vote for the subs every time. Yes, I would love to see Pearl Harbor strewn with wreckage on December 10, 1941, but what features would I be willing to sacrifice to have that? None. Should Hurricanes and Zeroes have large bomb loadouts? No, but if they merged several aircraft into one in order to save time, then I am fine with it. What is important is that there are enemy aircraft in game for which I have to watch. (I mentioned Hurricanes because it was the same circumstance in SH3 when it came out.)
I think things have gotten much better in the last week or so, but these types of posts just keep popping up. I have seen several today. There is nothing wrong with discussing the historical battles which are reenacted here in game, but it does not have to be prefaced with, "This game sux, and the developers were lazy and didn't do any research because they didn't even know that XYZ happened in exactly this way...." Maybe they did, and they felt that it was less important than some other aspect of the game. They made a choice, and even if I do not agree with it, I am not going to hold their feet to the fire for it.
This is a fun simulation, and it is just that. It will never exactly match the conditions in the war. The fear, real-life decisions, and exhaustion will never be there. You know that you will never be killed playing this game, and that makes a huge difference. When you have a crew and boat that needs to come home, you must take that into consideration before attacking. Simulated carrier landings are fun, but they in no way match the adrenaline and feelings of the real thing.
I will close by saying that I am in no way attacking anyone, I am just saying that perhaps people should look at the big picture once in a while. As President Theodore Roosevelt once stated, "It is not the critic who counts...."
(Don't worry, my time at home is almost done, and I will be back out soon; so you won't have to listen to me for a long while.)