I suppose, they are connected to historical units deployment. Some people are very happy to restrict themselves to historical numbers of units and their quality (you know: strict number of one kind of tanks in divisions or exact number of AA battalions).
I feel different. For me historical reality are restrictions of war materials (recruits, money, natural resources) not exact numbers of divisions.
I would like to be able to change the course of history, e.g. win a IWW by Central Powers. I would like to be able to change what kind of units and when I recruit. In game terms: why should I build only xxx number of mountain divisions? Because staffs in IWW decided that? Well, I don't criticize their historical decisions, but in my computer war the situation can be different (and mostly is) and I could have different needs that in was in real war.
I'm pretty sure, that units numbers were connected to real war plans and abilities of countries to field units. But also abilities were connected to real war situation. If all that things are always different in games, why would player follow strict historical path?
Historically Allies in 1945 disbanded many AA units, because they no longer needed them and move troops to other needs. It was made because sky was mostly clear, but stay assured if German air force would be still a threat, Allies would not disband their AA units. I would like to have such freedom of choice in games, not be limited by designer's chosen numbers (historical). So I love that 200% option.I'm sure you know that every historical strategy game (when properly designed) is historical only to the very first move (by player or AI).
Very first move and very first battle (with always different casualties that historical) reroute a game into semi-historical variant. I am very happy of it, because I don't want to recreate real wars, but play my wars in historical context and restrictions (recruits, money, natural resources) with free will of me as GHQ commander of what to do, when and how. So I always use that 200% variant.
I would like to see an option (script) that remove limit of troops instead forcing limit of resources (war materials) and letting players / AI choose what to build. I can write script addidng troop numbers myself, but I would like to encourage Ageod of doing it. I've seen it in WON (at game start use options->scripts then you can choose a few semi-historical variants: France rule the waves
I know some players will not be happy seeing "ahistrorical" numbers of units, so I only opt for it as option. Some would use it, some not.
I hope it answers your question.
To break that wall of text
PS: Flexible military organizations.
Example 1 WW2 http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/usarmy/artillery.aspx
"However, this massive buildup of AAA units became largely redundant when another formerly poor relation of the US Army, the Army Air Corps, wrested command of the air from the Luftwaffe in 1943 and 1944. Many AAA battalions were disbanded to provide replacements in 1944, some were converted to artillery. A total of 258 battalions were inactivated or disbanded
between 1 January 1944 and 8 May 1945. Nevertheless, AAA remained a strong component of the army and achieved something of resurgence in late 1944 in Belgium, defending Antwerp from the threat of the V-1 "Buzzbomb." On 31 December 1944, there was still a total of 347 AAA battalions (with 257,000 men) active in the Army."
Example 2 Ancienthttp://www.ancient.eu/Septimius_Severus/
"To strengthen his rule in Italy, he also raised three new legions (I-III Parthica), based the second of these not far from Rome at Alba, and increased the city of Rome’s number of vigils, urban cohorts, and other units, greatly enlarging Rome’s overall garrison."
Meteoryt-like user. Strikes and disappears.