Profile of BabaRoga

There are only 2 issues with 4v4

1. Automatch 4v4 never has 8 equally skilled players

Allies (read Soviet) are infinitely harder for less skilled player to use
Weak player on Axis side becomes threat with heavy tanks, weak player on allies side gradually becomes worse liability and harder to carry as match progresses.

2. It's a lot easier to abuse weaknesses or OP units in team games than 1v1

Both issues are to do with core army designs and that will never change.

Same goes for 2v2

If you want balanced (playable) 4v4 game, you have to find group of players with equal skill and play amongst eachother.
Its always been like that, even in COH1.
Play custom games with friends

Previous 6,500,000 posts about leaderboards have been proven ineffective. Any other ideas people?

text

I understood point of poll. I think you misunderstood what I said. For example, Soviets are designed completely different than Ostheer and depend largely on call-ins and choosing only 2 tier buildings t2 and t3 or t1 and t4, not all 4.
It would take massive redesign of units and costs to make attaching call-ins to tiers viable.
Needing 500 fuel to tier up and get IS2 for example makes it not viable unit nor strategy. Making other tanks means that game will be finished before you can pull one out and not making other tanks is just plain stupid as one cannot survive that long without armor.

Ostheer have well rounded default tier units, and attaching call-ins to tiers would work just fine as you suggested.

I understand what your issue with call-ins is and trust me, I have no love for call-in super heavies and ridiculous 'death from above' abilities that make unskilled player defeat well organized combined arms (if only for short time, still stupid IMO)

IMO I would leave call-ins as they are (CP unlockable), but as I said I would make super heavies more vulnerable vs standard tier units and come at much higher CP.

I think that way, there would be no loss to strategic and tactical diversity call-ins bring and same effect you desire. Without exposing Soviet poor default tier design (and some other factions)

I just cannot stand single tank taking fighting vs 2X AT guns, supported by tank destroyer and infantry. And wining. Thats not COH I like
I agree there definitely

The problem is that call-ins are cheaper to field and better than the stock units.

Forcing players to tech in order to be able to use call-ins is the best solution. And it wouldn't limit the strategic options, just less BS in-game.

I am not sure if you realize that in order to attach call-in units to buildings(especially expensive super heavies), the cost of unit will have to be reduced to make them viable option. to offset cost of tech.
At the same time any subsequent super tanks would be cheaper and therefore creating even larger balance issues.
I cannot see it work effectively without major rework of units, costs, balance testing, etc

Also I don't quite understand how 'having to tech to use specific unit' being only option is same as weighing up decision whether to tech-up or skip tech up and go for call-in and then tech up.
Or don't tech up at all and keep fighting with only call-in's. Or decide to risk it by stalling enemy and see what he's move is and then decide to counter it by spending resources.
Not to mention that some call-ins don't require fuel so you can chose to play for ammo instead of fighting it out over fuel, making enemy think they have upper hand, etc, etc.

To me there is massive tactical and strategic difference between 2 setups

I think I had -15 or -16 combined Sov/Ger

-12 with Soviets (small arms patch time) I finally had enough of G43/LMG spam and switched to Ost.
Next 3-4 games I got complete noob teamate so I ended up with losing streak even with OP Ost (at the time)

(all random 2v2 games)