2-3 squads are enough to chase it away.
So if a player has invested 1.020 manpower , 24 pop and 300 ammunition in AT infatry it can chase away a singe tank. And that is unbalance because?
A units that just takes damage without inflicting damage by itself makes no sense.
But that is hardly the case Churchill inflict enough damage to take out PzIV 1vs1.
It could have 5000 Hp as long as it isn't a threat it gets ignored when it comes to picking targets. So the Firefly gets destroyed first nevertheless. A damage sponge which isn't a problem for a least one type of unit isn't worth it at all. As I said free vet for german AT. I'm all in for more diverse builds. If it would be a threat to infantry there would be a reaosn to pick it, although the Comet seems to be stronger allround. Isn't it boring to see the Comet always?
If one's FF is in range of AT assets he is probably doing something wrong.
The Comets performance is irrelevant since it does not fight the Comet.
The question one has to ask is "is the unit cost efficient"? and the answer is yes.
A late game tank with the damage output of a Cromwell? Oh wow I'm really impressed. Must have unit.
There is a huge difference between no damage and firepower of medium tank.
An IS-2 has a similar surviability. Less health but more armor and speed. For just two more population it is completely out of the league of a Churchill and a thread to every single unit on the battlefield.
Do I really need to point the differences?, ok will just point out the obvious:
Stock vs Doctrinal
Limited to 1
Around 1.5 the fuel cost
No matter how one want to look at it, Churchill is a cost efficient unit.
edited to correct 3 PG cost.