My posts also do not involve buffing weaker things by 100% so they hardcounter units that are their own hardcounters by design by increasing every single possible stat for units that need minor tweaks to be fully viable(this thread is prime example), my posts also do not scream for completely and utterly patching up every single possible flaw or disadvantage the armies I play have, I have my own bias, but in comparison to people like you, aaa or mycalliope, I might just as well be called one of the most objective posters around here.
How it would remove soviet T1?
222 is a vehicle, soviet T1 is hardcountered by vehicles, old kubel utterly destroyed any T1 builds unless you pidgeonholed yourself into specific doctrine. Need any more arguments? Common sense took a week off and went to Bahamas? Do you want an argument why would it remove brits as well or will you make a call and pull your own common sense off from vacations and force it to work?
Only aaa is close to the level of insanity to some buff axis suggestions level.
Increase 222 coax accuracy at long range by 50% and cost to 20fu, there, unit fixed. You have long range early game light. In case you wondered, M20 already deals 50% of 222 dps at long range and that is excluding actual 2cm kwk. There, fixed early game, cheap jack of all trades unit without utterly breaking early game dynamics for the whole game.
Way too many people post random suggestions without even considering the effects it would have on global balance and other armies.
Some people are obsessed with it and want to make it light tank level unit.
Its NOT and will NOT be one. Lights are ost WEAKNESS not STRENGTH.
Thanks for the reply. You made some good points about the changes I proposed.
When someone makes a suggestion, they are often likely to miscalculate or misjudge something. They can miss knock-on effects that would spoil gameplay. Your example about the effect of my suggestions on Brits is a decent example.
This is a natural part of a group dialogue. I think most people here are open to counter-suggestions. For example:
A) Let's add the Pak to Ost T1
You) That would result in negative consequences 1,2,3
A) Ah, I see. Well how about adding the pak but then adding something to the US Lt tier
You) That could work but then D, E, F
A) Oh right. It's probably not workable then.
Instead what you do is get angry that they would even make an imperfect suggestion and write:
"Another scrub suggestion from a terrible axis fanboy. L2p, idiot."
In your reply above you wrote "Common sense took a week off and went to Bahamas?" This tone is unpleasant as I'm sure you know. If you want an argument or flame war, sure, use it, be sarcastic and condescending. But why? Why do you want that? Why do you want the conflict and why do you want so much conflict?
Everyone's going to make flawed posts. You too. The question is how to respond to it. With understanding or with vitriol and hate?
But please do posts some replays of your epic anti-calliope missions. 
Fortune
sins_Bulgakov
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
