Historical inaccuracy

Haven't you answered your own question?  If these historically unrealistic characters have no effect on gameplay then why be concerned about them?  They make no sense to me, but I forgot about them once I started to play, it's not like they're game-breaking, at least to me.  As for misrepresented minorities in BF1, I saw or heard a lot of complaining about that, despite the fact that without the hundreds of thousands of troops from French colonies in Africa being used on the western front the French army would have broken by 1915--those troops would certainly have been considered black by most Europeans of the time, as would the Indian troops brought in for a time by the British.  Of course 350,000 black American soldiers served in Europe in WWI although most were kept out of combat roles as they would be in WWII.  Why EA feels they need to have an Asian female sniper character in the British army in a WWII game escapes me, but so long as the game runs well and is fun to play then it isn't going to bother me.  I'd be more concerned about misrepresenting the capabilities of vehicles, e.g. one hit from the 88 on that Tiger should turn a Valentine tank into scrap metal.  But it's a game rather than a simulation, so it seems like a Valentine can take as much punishment as a Tiger which has armor twice as thick, oh well.