Upvote:4
There are many aspects of a computer game - gameplay, graphics, storyline, mechanics, etc. and it is always necessary for a game to simplify or distort the history a little bit, otherwise it becomes unplayable, or very expensive/difficult to develop. For example, I quickly scanned the Wikipedia article you cited and found
Each unit that is produced increases the population count to a maximum of 200. Basic units such as settlers and infantry count as 1, but others, including most cavalry and mercenary infantry count as 2. More powerful units, especially artillery or mercenary cavalry, can count for a population as high as 7.
Do you really think that a superpower country can be defended by a population of less than 200, including troops and civilians? No doubt this is a simplification to make the game playable, and there is always such compromise in any commercial game.
What normally happens is a trade-off between accuracy, playability, feasibility and cost. The optimal amount of accuracy differs from player from player, for example some people are bothered that the musket fire animation does not look like an actual musket fire from the era, but other people don't even notice that part and are more bothered by how simple and inaccurate diplomacy between countries is, or how they can't have population larger than 200.
That's why any question regarding a commercial game's accuracy is hard to answer objectively, unless you are asking about a very specific aspect, for example, "Is the depiction of British Redcoats uniform in this game accurate"?