Same could be said about T34 vs stug or P4 vs SU-85 or cromwell vs JP4 and so on...
Yet these long range TDs are dying to these tanks, which are hardcountered by TDs.
222 is able to outmanouver and destroy SU-76, it shouldn't happen, but its possible, just like any other non turreted TD vs any other AT capable vehicle. Difference is, unless you're assaulting ISU with Puma, there is no second even close comparison to 222 vs SU-76 regarding fuel cost differences, even if we take T34/76 vs JT into account.
Getting you unturreted units flanked, unsupported and destroyed is clearly a L2P issue...
"...222 is able to outmanouver and destroy SU-76,
it shouldn't happen..."
why it should not happen exactly? any reason or justification?
Is there any relevance in ability to flank and fuel cost difference?
The fuel cost difference is su-76-222=75-15=60 while the JT-T34/76=245-80=165 and thus greater, so I have to assume you made a mistake meant ratio.
Even then , the fuel cost ratio (although fuel cost ratio is actually irrelevant to ability to flank) su76/222=75/15=5 fuel cost ratio Kingtiger/AEC=260/50=5.2 thus higher.
Does flanking vehicles has anything to do with this thread topic that is the 222 performance?
Once more the suggested changes are available in a mod, it is to try it and give a better opinion on the matter...