Profile of Bad_Vader

Not this again
Risk vs. Reward. Having your tech building out on the field provides the OKW player with certain advantages and with those advantages there in lies the risk of them getting destroyed. You don't want that to happen? Then put them in your HQ sector.

Also I don't know where you get your "Day by day, OKW is losing its fanbase as it has lost its appeal" for a long while the average allied player was in a much more disadvantageous position than an average axis player(your not a pro, that much I can guarantee so I'll talk about average player experience) and that didn't seem to diminish the people searching as allies(usually 3 axis players searching for every 1 allied player) so while you might like to spout your BS it would be much more appreciated if people know about your situation.

TLDR;
L2P until otherwise proven wrong (show your playercard )
replays would also help a lot.

RIP Partysans. You will be missed

the problem was the RNG but you can re-design it with regular timers, which would make it predictable and manageable like starting at a certain minute inside the game or at a certain VP counter number. Similar to the BF4 map Gulf of Oman.

Blizzard actually follows a predicable manner during a match which was based on the game time. The first blizzard happens around 9-11 minutes(I can't remember the precise time)and happens again after X minutes so the timing is not really the problem, its the lull moments majority of players perceive it to be because infantry die faster outside of cover. This is the reason why I would prefer Blizzard to be its own subtype of maps instead of making it an event during winter maps. Players can't actually sit around the fire twiddling their thumbs all game long if the Blizzard is forever during the match.

Cold Tech was just implemented poorly(very, very, very poorly)
It could have been improved Like:
1. Instead of blizzard being a timed event during winter maps, certain maps could instead be on a permanent blizzard settings.
> Blizzard in itself would turn from an event into a battlefield condition, something the players would have to take into consideration instead of just camping until the blizzard ends.

2. Infantry gain cold immunity through vet and/or upgrades.
>the longer the game goes the less focus the players have on each individual unit so giving the option to provide cold immunity can lessen the focus of the player on the cold.

3. Certain units gain LoS increase(in Blizzard maps) through vet and/or upgrades.
Blizzard will decrease the LoS of all units thereby making scouting harder for certain factions. An upgrade/vet bonus to certain units can help mitigate this.

4. Units move faster in deep snow through vet/upgrades.
>Deep snow is annoying in the sense that infantry get slowed down a lot. So giving the option to remove this hindrance is nice.

5. Deep snow is ONLY placed in tactical locations and not cover the whole map with it.
>Deep snow should force players to make choices and not just no brainer decisions.

6. Deep snow doesn't recover.
>once its gone its gone for good.

7. Deep snow can camouflage infantry.
>To increase its usability and not just make deep snow into a hindrance.

These are the things off the top of my head that could improve cold tech.

Mud tech follows in a similar manner, it should be use tactically and force players to make decision and not just have all the roads littered with them.

EDIT:
8. Disabling Offmap support because of making blizzard always on would kill certain commanders(CAS, Luftwaffe, etc.) so a better way to show that they are hampered would be to increase their cost or increase their delay in blizzard maps.
>This would further emphasize the notion that blizzard maps would play differently from summer/winter maps since your offmap support will be hampered by the blizzard.

Top tier arranged 4v4 teams would probably be in favor of allies and
should the allies use and abuse the vicker bug. Axis won't stand a chance late game.