Yet, that’s exactly how it works and guess what - people like that.
Not every vehicle can be played as well on every map, but on every map any vehicle can be played decently to a certain extent. Matchups like “ugh it’s [insert map name] i can basically quit to hangar” are nearly non existant.
That’s cool and all, but it’s not always up to you. If the situation you get thrown in isn’t favourable, you need to make do with what you have. And if you take away all tools for a player to deal with a bad situation, the whole game gets reduced down to luck.
And guess what, M26 is considered one of the worst vehicles at entire 6.7 BR and players beg for it to be reduced down to 6.3. Jumbo at least can track and barell the enemy, Pershing can’t even do that because of how long it’s reload is.
With maxed crew it takes whole 17 seconds to fix a barell, by the time you arrive to flank the enemy and have another shell loaded a good chance is you won’t make it in time and be the one to die instead, even if you did everything correctly. And no, “not everyone has a max crew” is not an argument, since you physically can’t know the crew level of your enemy so you must assume it is maxed.
Also this analogy is quite terrible, as in Jumbo vs IS-1 it’s at least both tanks struggling to pen each other, while in M26 vs Tiger 2h, one party can just lolpen another anywhere, while the other has to snipe the cupola.
Thankfully, this game is actually not designed do terribly, so the poor M26 can actually shoot the cupola of Tiger 2h and kill it’s entire turret crew which gives it a fighting chance and makes the encounter somewhat fair. It’s not a shot easy enough to make Tiger 2h irrelevant, but likely enough to be reliable if aimed properly.
Except that’s exactly what you propose? What you intend to do will essentially make the game all about what enemy you meet rather than what you actually do, since many tanks will have a fair share of vehicles which would essentially be hard counters to them.