Profile of nee

Another thing I forgot to mention: Veterancy

As of date, USF vet levels don't really help much with units' ability to perform their needed roles, especially when it comes to infantry dealing with tanks. The most common modifiers are accuracy and rate of fire (and the vast majority, vet1 just unlocks an ability).
None of the veterancy abilities really help against anti-vehicles, just generic rate of fire/ accuracy improvements. If special abilities were given however, that are dependent on the weapons being used that might actually introduce versatility among your units.
An example would be an ability called "Optimal Range" that given to squads then they are equipped with bazookas; like the LMG-only Defensive Stance, this greatly improves penetration capability of bazookas: the downside is that overall range of the unit is reduced. Naturally, this can be complemented by squads being outfitted with BARs and other weapons.

I think multiple things that would otherwise make the USF fun is lacking.

Abilities: Not a lot of them are uninspiring per se, but also many of the good ones are found in unis that you wouldn't use very often, or in many situations, which spoils the versatility theme they are supposed to have.
Take for example the Stuart's abilities, they are pretty good, even if they cost munitions that make fielding them a risk. If more USF tanks had similar abilities that are offensively based like the PzGr 39 stun round or abilities that aim to do critical hit damage. The Jackson is meant to be the heavy hitter vehicle so we can expect its special ability to be just do more damage and penetration, but most of the typical line up of units meant to support it lack such abilities: the closest are riflemen's horrible AT rifle greande ,which not only does not home and has a much lower chance of critical, but can be messed up by the vehicle being too close so the action is cancelled. The Stuart's abilities fit the complementary role, but it's light armour makes it highly un-ideal for tank engagements, at least when you compare the sort of role the StuG has compared to the Panzer4, and both to the Panther and Ostwind, etc. So it is not just the mere lack of durability for USF units- their abilities also make them poor components of a working team.
This, I think, is one of the reasons why USF players shift the brden of work more often to infantry which can at least be versatile in the sense that you can upgrade with with any proportion of bazookas or BAR/LMGs. The problem with THAT however is that since they were nerfed, there was no opposing buff or other changes that made USF vehicles more relevant in their stead. This nerf attempt then backfires: since there are no better alternatives, the only REAL solution for USF players is to rely on blobs even more.
Most of the more useful special abilities available to the USF player are in the hands of infantry and their upgrades/ doctrinal unlocks; most of the more relevant vehicle abilities are found in light vehicles requiring their use and increased micro as the game scales into the later stages where Panzers start rolling out. As a whole the USF faction is not versatile outside a very few select units (infantry), and the rest are very specialized while also being fragile.

Units: Since abilities don't make the necessary units very useful in their roles, it is only natural for the community to want more units to fill the gaps they perceive. This is why people want things like Pershing: it allows them to use units in a manner they find more appropriate for any tactical player. The Sherman is the closest to a meatshield tanker unit, but it sucks against whatever the Germans can throw as an equal; to make things worse, the only doctrinal unit that is better is the Easy Eight, and that is only sporting the 76mm gun, not better armour like those of the Tiger. But even new units wouldn't necessarily solve the problem, and part of that reason is because the way USF is designed, any new units worth their weight would simply make certain others obsolete (not to say that never happens in the other factions: any armour-based Soviet doctrine pretty much replaces the T-34/76), which may not always be the best idea. The Easy Eight for instance replaces the need for the regular Sherman, even if the E8 is slightly (or marginally) less effective against infantry, but of course choosing a commander just for one of its units isn't always a good idea.

Commanders: one of the most obvious routes to a solution is to imply create more USF commanders. WFA in general has no new commanders since June 24th, since then new Ostheer/ Soviet commanders were created. Abilities and units could really help with the USF situation.

Couldn't we just make Mustaches a 10 muni upgrade for all Soviet units.

Suppressed by MG34s??

STICK YOUR HEAD UP FOR A FREE SHAVE!

I hold hope for a hetzer, if USF get a wolverine when they have Jackson, I want hetzer, it would probably be a little better than jagdpanzer iv since it has an mg to semi-deal with infantry.

And by logic of realism has much weaker armour except at the front. This makes it as durable as a Jackson but with even less range than the typical tank destroyer unit in this game.

In reality the Hetzer was a light tank destroyer with a highly sloped armour design, this makes it as much a glass cannon unit as the Jackson, but with less range than even the gun of the Jagdpanzer4. Rear and side armour was only enough to stop AP bullets, anything bigger can kill this thing. If one is to seriously consider this as a unit in the game, it must have high resistant to penetration but very low health when hit so that a few successful hits can kill it. Gun range was good but only as much as a StuG, and its size makes it an ideal camouflage ambush vehicle rather than dependent on long range. In this case it doesn't fill a niche besides a fragile version of the StuG, which is debatable even in terms of cost.

All this is irrelevant anyways since the commander is fake and not specific for which Axis faction.

I can't imagine how this would work with Ostheer: Panzergrenadiers can already get panzershrecks, so what's the point of giving Grenadiers the same ability as a doctrinal slot, even if it is alongside LMG?
The Hetzer has no place for neither Ostheer or OKW, so there's no way this is legit. Th StuG and JagdP4 are hardier versions of the Hetzer, so unless this is some fantasy super tank destroyer lol this isn't going to be the reason why you'd choose this *fake* commander.

In any case, I'd think a true tank hunter doctrine would include the JagdPanther. You might as well get a doctrine called "super tanks" and have their penultimate call-in Panzer 38ts.

Relic said they weren't going to cease support for the existing factions. Just because OKW and USF are out doesn't mean the old factions are going to be completely abandoned.

I have the real feeling that i order to focus more attention on OKW and USF, they'll need to spend less time on the RU and Ostheer. Which leads to abandoning the latter.

This is the company that made a doctrine based around Conscripts with PTRS's. The worst AT weapon in the game on the worst scaling infantry in the game.

And payable DLC, no less. Even the free Defensive Tactics is preferable to this.