It was accurately predicted that 1.36 would dumb down the game as implemented in its current state. I remember very well those absolutely tense moments between your timers and your enemy's timers, whether it be on brigade movement, AO placement, capping CPs... all of it created an unbelievably electric atmosphere whenever both sides were matching wits with one another.
I feel like this encapsulates how I see the state of HC today. Cheerleading has always been a part of HC, but those oh-so-addictive electric moments that made the boring work (like cheerleading) worth it are pretty much gone.
Pre-1.36 was more of a "valleys and peaks" type system, where you would have good times with plenty of HC... then bad times with low HC/player turnout. The problem with 1.36 is that by removing the old valleys they've also removed the old peaks... you know, the high water marks of WWIIOL gameplay.
1.36 is still viable, but not in its current state imo. Garrisons should never have had the amount of supply that they do. They are garrisons for crying out loud. If you want to have more ebb and flow, if you want to have more peak moments of gameplay, then you need to risk having those valleys too.
In pre-1.36, if one side lost enough brigades then the other side could "softcap" territory at their discretion at certain parts of the map. At some point those lost brigades would come back from training and the line would stabilize. On a fundamental level, that is an example of ebb and flow. New CRS said that this was too much ebb and flow.
Well fine, but consider the following. Imagine the above situation again: a loss of brigades has lead to a "softcapping" opening. This situation is exactly the same as the one above in that there is a problem, a predicament, an issue because of the loss of movable brigades. Only this time instead of waiting 8-12 hours for those brigades to come back while the players are forced to watch the other side capture territory without being able to fight, now the players can spawn into those towns no longer occupied/covered with brigades and defend them with a small, token force (you know, a garrison).
Now will this company be able to hold against a full division with enough players committed to spawning that supply? Probably not. BUT casualties will be taken during that battle. And the next battle. And the next. And eventually those enemy brigades will run out of steam simply by coming into battle with enough of those smaller garrisons. And now instead of 40 towns lost as in pre-1.36, you are looking at 20 towns lost. Or 10. Or 5. The side that is receiving the punch isn't knocked out. In fact, their brigades are just about to come back, and now it's their turn to go on the attack against an exhausted and over extended enemy. But instead of the enemy having to retreat with empty brigades as they did in pre-1.36, they too get to spawn in with their garrison troops and stall the enemy's advance! Who knows, maybe this counter advance will itself advance too far, and a new opportunity will be presented!
In essence, the game ebbs and flows as a consequence of its previous ebbs and flows.
Did that "second" ebb and flow happen in the old system? Yes, but it often came far too late and was too unforgiving of mistakes because all of those towns that were undefended. The new system with garrisons could effectively put a damper on those movements that CRS considered to be too much.
Are these peaks going to be as high as the old system without garrisons? Honestly, no they won't be as exciting. But the valleys won't be as deep and excruciating either. That should have been the approach with 1.36. Instead, the current implementation has sucked the life out of the game for me. There is just no liveliness or sense of vitality anymore.
TL;DR In short, there is no more "flow" since 1.36, and the opposite of fluidity is stagnation. That's what you are creating when you stock up the garrisons with that much supply and leave the movable brigades to the wayside.
You can counter argue me all you want about why it needed to be done and whatever else, but I'm just making an observation that the move made to stabilize the game has in fact stagnated it. It's up to CRS what they want to do with that kind of situation.