Profile of Aerohank

The fuel cost it takes for a soviet to rush out a T-70 is exactly the same as the fuel cost it takes for the osteer to get a StugIII out if he skipped T2. And this is when soviets rush it, so no molotovs, no AT nades, and build T1 over the more useful T2 (T2 combines better with T3).

Outside of the industry commander, I don't really see why the T70s window of opportunity should be made any smaller than it already is.

Title should read: Simple hot fix to balance the game, except for the tiger ace.

Indeed, some things like 'increased rifle grenade range' are not even hinted at in the description.

These take into account heavy assumptions about map design.

The objectives stay the same regardless of map design, the effectiveness, or difficulty of execution, of each play style depend on map design. For example, it's easy to tear apart a defensive player on Moscow Outskirts, while Road to Kharkov lends itself perfectly for a defensive player to hold roughly half the map.

Well, it's not the same having 5 cons squads fighting with a reinforce cost of 20 mp/model than with 30 mp/model.

The mp bleed will be higher, thus you will be encouraged to make some resistant or defensive units instead of just spamming cheap but weak infantry.

But it is just an idea. Take it or leave it.
I just think that in CoH2 early game is way more profitable to spam cheap infantry than to try to play with some tactics and combined arms, and that is too boring.

I don't agree. Spamming cheap infantry vs combined arms is not more profitable by default. Spamming cheap infantry gives you the advantage of early map control, allowing you strike from multiple angles and quickly overwhelm a player who is spreading his combined arms too thin. The trade of comes in the later stages of the game. When the opponents army starts growing and pushing out in a solid formation, the infantry spammer will not have units that can effectively hold the front line and he will start bleeding a lot of MP.

A combined arms army suffers from a lack of early map control. You will often see that inexperienced players are not aware of this and they will often grossly over extend themselves trying to cap territory, using MG squads or snipers as stand-alone squads. Another error you will often see is that players put lone MG squads in buildings defending fuel/cut offs, and then send the rest of their infantry to fight the opponents (much bigger) spammed infantry force. In an effort to cap the opponents fuel or what not.

Using combined arms is all about getting a late game victory. Spamming infantry is all about getting early victories in order to enter the late game with a solid advantage to snowball the opponent despite having a weaker unit composition. The objectives for both players should be:
Spamming player: Play aggressive, cap both fuels, ignore strong defensive positions, overwhelm isolated squads, trick defending player to over-extend by attacking and harassing from all sides, enter the late game with a solid unit/income advantage, crush combined army player with bigger army.
Combined arms player: Play conservatively, hold 1 fuel, maneuver support weapons to defend against incoming attacks, do not over extend, do a little harassment with pio/engineers, enter the late game on even footing, push out with superior composition.