going Osttruppen is not really a no-brainer choice but rather a selection that grants unique opportunnities but also disadvantages. It's not a permanent solution and can work out or backfire depending on what your opponent does and how you play it.
It can have pros and cons, that doesn't really make it a super strategical choice. Its like hitting on 12 in blackjack. You could bust, but you're going to do it anyway. I choose flamethrowers on Arnhem because of the buildings I miss out on getting a Pershing, but its still an immediate decision.
You appear to be using this word in a rather unusual manner. The core part of any definition of 'strategy' that you care to look up is the making of decisions to achieve particular ends. Choosing which set of commanders to play certainly qualifies.
The question of whether a particular problem is an easy one to solve or a difficult one is not directly pertinent to whether it falls into the purview of strategy.
Conventionally strategy means an operational level battle battle plan ex. Overlord. But we aren't talking about the invasion of Europe, we're talking about the choices you make inside of the match. For COH this means economy based decisions, whether preemptive or reactive with some calculated risk.
Theres two types of strategy in the game. The first is based on experience, this is the knowledge you take with you heading in to the match. Examples are playing the strongest faction, using the best commander, different early game plans for certain maps, always getting rocket artillery in response to massive infantry blobs, etc. These are the decisions you make without much thought. The other type of strategy is the type people mean when they say "strategic depth." These are the decisions that vary more from one game to another where you outwit the other guy by picking a certain doctrine or tech path. I'm talking about the latter.
he means it's a strategy he does not appreciate. hes just so used to saying whatever it takes to slag off coh2 quasi objectively.
The same can be said for COH1 to some extent. If I choose defensive doctrine campy MG play on Wrecked Train that is an experience based decision. The difference is the game is more balanced, has more fuel upgrades, and isn't dominated by the P2W commander of the month that dictates play, giving more free reign w/ the choices you make mid and late game. Your going pretty off-topic though.
I wasn't taking a piss at COH2, all I said was making an insta choice doctrine slightly weaker isn't really detracting that much from strategy. This is really off-topic and no need to discuss further.