What’s the point?
Because it is interesting? Relative loss ratios are an indication of relative combat effectiveness, amongst other things, although force ratios and loss ratios in air warfare behave very weird ways (and nothing like Lanchester predicted).
And because, as the original article indicated, this has entered a nation’s military lore as an achieved – and thus an achievable – result. By implication, it doesn’t allow for the possibility that, for example, the USAF in Vietnam was just as effective as in Korea, but better recording of results made them feel that they were doing worse. Both these things are worth knowing in the real world today, as well as hopefully allowing us to produce better games.