I posted this answer (now deleted) to this question, which was deleted as "question asks for a router, this is a hardware not a software recommendation site". I'd like to ask for review, but I also think there are a couple of sensible discussion points.
In this question, the user may have been looking at their issue in a suboptimal way. They may not actually need a new router to do what they wanted (even though they assumed they would and asked for one), and it would be a disservice to not let them know if that could be the case. It would be perverse if we could recommend hardware but not tell them we think they could actually be looking at their issue wrongly and might want to look at it a different way.
A non-technical user might well think "my laptop is slow, what new laptop should I buy", where it's likely from their description it's their network speed or disk that's the issue, or the version of the OS they are running is known to have speed issues fixed in a later release, and they don't need a new laptop at all - I think an answer should be able to say if the user sounds like they may actually be looking in the wrong place, or for the wrong kind of solution.
Sometimes there are so many choices available, because the features needed by the OP can be met by generic hardware. In that case I feel it would be unfair to point to a specific product, but a list may be unreasonably long and unhelpful. Sometimes the best answer for buying hardware will be "look for these criteria in the spec, and anything that has them will meet your needs"_. So for example "I want a computer I can do X on" might be best answered as "any computer that has an Intel i3, i5 or i7 processor (of any generation) and 8GB or more of RAM will be more than enough for that". The best answer for the user can sometimes be to give them an idea how they can find a suitable model for themselves if they truly don't have other criteria. Can such answers be acceptable here?
Turning to the specific question, the user clearly believes they may need a new router of some kind, and yes, that's one option. Routers with native 3G/4G and support for specific VPN software might only come with premium models, or packaged with expensive features they don't need. But it's quite likely they don't need an expensive router (or perhaps any new router at all, depending on their situation), and that if they knew soft routers existed, they could look on a hardware compatibility list and choose a far cheaper hardware model which meets all their needs. It feels misleading for me to know this could well be useful to them, and not say so.
The answer itself couldn't recommend a specific router, because the features they want aren't built in to most routers unless expensive, but they are available very cheaply via a generic router with FOSS firmware. The router and 3G/4G hardware I would recommend - the actual hardware recommendations - would be "any generic router off the OpenWRT compatibility list that supports 3G/4G USB dongles, and any 3G/4G USB dongle supported by them" - and that answer is a hardware recommendation that would meet all their requirements and probably cost a lot less than other solutions. If OpenWrt is inappropriate for them, they would then say so, and the discussion would continue, but they (and future users with the same question) would at least have the knowledge to make a hardware choice that is best for them.
So I think it's a valid response to the OP. Can this be undeleted, or at least, the principle discussed?