he's argument was that ohme's implication that JT or ELE synergising very well does not translate in the real game.
but all the things that he listed also have a good or even greater chance of failing in real game.
your question is as out of place as your mouth.
It is why we say the imbalance exist in 4v4.
As in 4v4, Axis has more chance to survive and bringing out heavy tanks.
I personally do not find that it is hard to play as axis in winning in infantry stage, then i can push out pz4 to support the line to wait until okw heavy tanks to roll out, then ultimately my call-ins for ele or tigers. (btw, i just can't find my right pace in playing OKW)
As Allies, I play both Soviets and US, it is just very hard to take down Axis heavy tanks if they hold up the first stage or unleash a successful comeback with blobs. While people complain about Allies blobbing, they just ignore the fact that axis can do blobbing as well with well supported MGs. Blobbing in the right time while the enemy main forces retreat and break the line of defense while they retreating and hold them off for their comeback is very common in 4v4.
The mechanism of 4v4 is just not quite the very same with 2v2 or 1v1 which i am sucks at. Being focus with complimenting your teammates action is essential to make the tradeoff more worth it IMO.
TLDR version: I think axis is still superior in late game.