Discuss things? Sounds like you're passing them off as fact. Here is a quick recap of comments you made on this topic without having a single game in 4v4AT.
"in 4v4 you can do major fuckups and just stall with your mates because 3 people can still defend versus 4 people (attacking is always harder than defending), and no the same does not apply to 2v2 because defending 2v1 is harder than 3v4."
"thats why balancing for 4v4 is bad because its more about teamwork and not using units to their fullest potential."
"there is no strategy diverstiy in which way you cap and evreything is pretty static which encourages arty spamfests."
"meanwhile in 4v4 you have enough troops to cover most if not all of the frontline and sneaky sidecapping is kinda hard too which makes the game again static. maybe im totally wrong here but i never saw a 4v4 so dynamic as a 1v1 or 2v2, most often the control of the map did barely change"
"a massive spam fest to me and my premade friends. is it fun? yes do i like it to play "competetive"? no its just to much blobbing and to much arty"
This all coming from someone 'discussing' 4v4 with 0 games played.
Ill put a "i think" at the Start of every sentence. Ive learned to discuss this way, someone states something and the other can freely correct it, add something or agree with it without needIng to say "i think" everytime.
Oh btw I think there are many people here who dont even play the game on a regular Basis, can you tell them gently to stop comment on balancing issues too?(: