They were planning to drop tactical warheads on btln sized formations.
Of course if we really talk about planning in the early 70s to mid 80s, we've got to acknowledge (in just this order of "application"):
1) Nike Hercules taken off the AD grid and targeting formations on the surface crossing the border with up to 400 missiles
2) about 250 Pershing 1A and II launched against WarPac rear areas and C2 nodes in the GDR, Poland and the Czech republics
3) dozens of MADM and SADM placed adhoc by US troops in the border area in strategic chokepoints
4) tactic-strategic nuclear strikes concurrently by up to 1,000 strike aircraft against anything above battalion size
5) SRBM (Lance/Sergeant) against substrategic area targets
6) several thousand tactical nuclear strikes by division- and brigade-level artillery units
Using tactical nuclear strikes to clear heavily defended areas before advancing into the breach with more or less protected troops? In NATO planning since about 1958.
Not that I would rate the other NATO units less capable personally but equipment, numbers and cohesion favored the US troops.
Depends on when exactly we're talking about. In the mid 70s to early 80s USAREUR being equipped only with M60, M48 and M113 would have been about the one least capable equipment-wise in any conventional exchange.
There the WarPac Forces wouldn't have met US troops
2 AD, Garlstedt (Osterholz-Scharmbeck), from 1978. 3rd Bde forward, rest REFORGER.