Profile of easierwithaturret

How do you use a stug then in an enviroment where your tankhunter can be lost to core infantry in a blink of an eye?

Either you can't read or you're intentionally missing the point. Twice now I've said that the Stug struggles against blobs because those blobs can't be countered properly. Either because the counter unit isn't up to the job (Ostwind) or previously effective counters (MG42) are swept aside by OP units (mortar, 2x M1919), which makes the blobs stronger than they would otherwise be.

Soviets don't have USF mortar and USF is not 100% of the time the team mate, so that argument makes completely no sense.

I never said anything about the US mortar always being there, what I clearly meant was that the MG42 struggles to perform as a counter to penals when it is there.

In a 2v2 game the presence of a teammate enables your team to have some AT to cover a soviet player during that vulnerable period after going penals. Of course it doesn't remove the need for the soviet player to get some AT capability but it does prevent a cheeky luchs from ending the game, thus substantially reducing the risk associated with a T1 start.

Think of it like socialism, why bring in something new and unique if you're just going to dumb it down to basic, ground level because these and these people aren't able to cope with it?

I don't think comparing two different political, economic and philosophical systems is an appropriate analogy to video game balance. Besides nobody (at least, nobody sensible) is arguing for across the board nerfs to WFA & brits, or removal of their interesting mechanics. What we are trying to say is that if there are a few units or features that are overpowered it makes more sense to bring them back to a more reasonable level.

More on topic: I don't think the powercreep has been contained to just WFA. The recent patch contained primarily buffs for Ostheer and Soviets, mostly buffs with some nerfs (net buff overall) to USF, no real change/slight nerf to Brits, and a nerf to OKW.

What would be easier:

buffing 3 Wehrmacht infantry units(grens/pios/pzgrens) and 2-3 tanks(pzIV/panther/tiger)

or nerfing UKF's sapper blobs, stock Tigers, cost-efficient steam rollers...

OKW's stock god unit, free flaks, super glue repairs...

and USF's terminator riflemen with their double LMGs and -45% received accuracy, etc...

?

Buffing 6 units at once (3 of which are key units used every game) is at least as much of a change as addressing US mortar, double LMGs and vet bonuses. As Vuther mentioned buffing OH will throw out the OHvsSU balance, which is in a pretty good place right now. It just makes more sense to focus the majority of effort on nerfing a small number of USF and UK units. We're especially fortunate in that OKW is also not doing that well right now so isn't likely to become OP after such changes. I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself because there are like four Ostheer buff threads at the moment, but we need to remember just how tenuous the balance situation is. It's better we nerf OP units and buff those that can't do their job (e.g. Ostwind) before we go on to core units that are already fulfilling their intended role.

One thing I agree on is repair speed, that has been an issue since WFA and is especially troublesome for high-HP tanks such as the tiger. The subject has already been discussed at length so no need to revisit it, hopefully one day EFA will have some way to get faster repairs other than vetted engineers.

The problem of the Ostheer as an entire faction is, that it lacks initiative. It doesn't matter how their infantry and vehicles perform in direct comparison, what matters is that the player has a way to take initiative and through superior play dictate the flow of the game. And Ostheer can't do that.

At risk of going on a tangent here, I don't agree with this. Just because Ostheer isn't usually the first to launch an offensive (execpt perhaps against emplacement-heavy UKF, but that matchup is pretty boring in general), doesn't mean it has no way of taking the initiative. Occupying key structures, locking down key resource points, establishing a strong position that dominates that map, all are ways Ostheer can seize the initiative. From there, they can use mobile units to lure the enemy to a favourable engagement, or long-range units to safely attrit them from distance. Defense is about ensuring engagements happen on favourable terms, then going on the offensive when conditions are more ideal. In my eyes, nearly every OH unit has a clearly defined role in aiding that objective e.g. MGs handle infantry, grens protect support weapons and Stug from flanking enemies, p4 provides essential mobile defense and counterattack capability.

Of course where it all falls down is when the enemy has units that completely invalidate that, such as a mortar that easily picks off static units, a blob of doom that sweeps aside MGs from the front, or a rocket launcher that deletes your crew-served weapons before you have any chance to react. Some of those have been fixed to the benefit of balance, some of those still need to be addressed.

I personally would nerf WFA and Brits instead. You don't fight power creep with buffs. You nerf new things so they would be in line with old basic ones.

Agreed, if we implemented all these changes it would make the faction OP. OH is a bit underwhelming currently but balance in this game rests on a knife edge and changing so many things at once (particularly with core units that are frequently used) would lead to another imbalanced situation as has occured many times in the past.