Pershing is a medium tank too, I don't care what ze ghermans said it was, this is a game.
Now tell me, why shouldn't it be limited? It can drive up to anything, kill it, including 1 shot wipes on AT guns, and blitz away with health left.
Why are you insisting so hard that KT is so bad that you should be allowed to have more than 1 but churchill is so broken that 1 should be the limit?
What is the cost of the KT with the OKW resource penalty?
What is the cost of the churchill?
When you do the math you will see that the KT costs almost double the fuel and for the sake of argument YES you should on be able to have one KT if it means limiting the churchill BS.
Unlike the churchill, it is almost impossible for an OKW player to field 2 KT's even in 4 v 4's, or at least it happens so rarely I have probably one done it once myself and seen it a couple of times.
vs
I regularly see mass churchhills in 3 v 3 and 4 v 4 and it is almost impossible to fucking counter. So no this isn't a "lets nurffff the allied tanks into oblivion" its about putting an insanely good tank in the same place as its axis equivalents.
Oh and a panther has 800HP and 320 armor and costs more fuel than a 1600Hp 250 armor churchill which has a gun that slaughters infantry and grenades anti tank guns for cheaper. You are literally getting twice the tank for less fuel and slightly more manpower in addition to the cheapest most effective infantry in the game. Plus, thanks to the churchhill being almost impossible to kill, vetting it is as easy as letting it taking hits, driving it away, and repairing it worry free. Once it hits vet 2 or 3 god help you.
As for the comet panther debate, the panther will win vs the comet in a one on one contest, but the comet is also the fastest tank in the game and has a lethal anti everything gun with an awesome smoke ability thats non doctrinal. So they are pretty much even in my opinion.