Just remember guys, if we keep this discussion going in this direction it derails the whole point of this thread. The only reason this hasn't is because we are having a discussion on the validity of his points and that sort of stuff.
Mech infantry is one of those units that falls in with heavy tanks, nuclear stuff and actual nukes. They are difficult to make, upgrade, and usually come far too late in most matches to make an impact in a war situation(IE the course and fate of the entire match is usually played out before mechanized can be researched or made, much less make it to the frontline). In the cases it doesn't, you usually do not have the resources to manufacture them, or to make the level 3 barracks they require, or to get them mobilized to the front, as they are slower than Motorized infantry in the same research timeframe until like level 3 or 4 mechanized infantry.
Mech infantry has it's purposes, but it is not nearly as versatile as motorized infantry. Against other, normal infantry, mechanized is amazing, but at the same time this makes them vulnerable to anti-tank weaponry, which is what you typically put infantry into a tank stack to counter, not to be eliminated by it along with the tanks it is escorting. The argument that you don't need to worry about anti-tank because you have an airforce or artillery doesn't mean you shouldn't worry about them. If your airforce and artillery are truly taking care of everything, why are you building mech infantry, or any infantry at all, for that matter? You would be building armored cars instead, which are much cheaper, faster, and don't need to pack a punch because the provinces are empty. But obviously if they have some resistance, having combat power is important, and is why armored cars are dropped in favor of light tanks to begin with.
And mechanized infantry isn't one of those units that should be escouting an armored push to act as infantry. It has greater strength than even medium tanks, you can have mechanized be their own push on a front and can defend captured provinces without the support of tanks. What complements mechanized infantry perfectly and has the exact same speed? Motorized infantry. Having a infantry armor class means that you can send motorized into a city to take out the anti tank guns stationed there, and move in the mechanized to counter infantry that tries to take back the city. It means they can operate independently of tactical bombers and interceptors(provided they get SP AA and maybe some SPG support. Speaking of that, AA is the best unit for rebellion suppression, so why ain't you using them? They are cheap, are faster than militia, and have a massive force projection on low morale provinces), and you can use your air force to protect more vulnerable assets such as medium tanks. There is a lot of strategy, there is no wrong strategies, but some will work less than others.
But yeah, usually armored components will easily outpace the building speed of your air bases. That is why you should never count on your air force always being there to assist your lackluster army. It is why I usually never bothered to build tactical bombers until recently. Air power may be OP in this game, but your aircraft have a range and if you do not have a well built army, your air power means nothing until you can advance the extent of your airbase network. It is why reliance on air is a bad idea. Artillery can be countered by aircraft and other artillery if not properly protected. Light tanks and even mech infantry will get countered by anti-tank guns or TD's. TD's are weak against infantry and aircraft when not supported. A mix of units(and especially unit armor types, as it splits up their damage potential and decreases it quite a bit) is always better than having homogenous stacks. Honestly, enough of the theory. While I do respect your choices, some of them are very odd choices that appear to be due to lack of combat experience. But what do I know? I'm just a head in a jar that has played out pros and cons on pretty much everything.
