Nice link, thanks!
I have never even mentioned Sherman on this site
I just wanted to express opinion shared by
many armor enthusiasts. I am happy to see that you do not regard Sherman as a complete junk

.
I only think T- 34's ground defense of 11 is too low when compared to Pz IV f and KV-2
KV has already be mentioned to be a problem and I think devs will take care of it. T-34/85 should have the stats similar to Panzer IV H, and earlier versions slightly lower. Such changes may help T-34 a bit.
Diesel is also much harder to light up than gasoline. It needs right conditions of pressure which the motor provides. Throw a match on gasoline and boom.
A benefit for the T -34 in combat conditions.
Yep, but it on the other side the Russian tank had nice fuel and oil tanks inside the crew compartment.
And after being hit from a typical AT cannon, the temperature inside was high enough to create a small oven inside.
Not for a reason the research after war in Korea stated, that usually only one person from T-34 was able to survive after tank had been hit.
Setting a tank on fire is one factor. Being able to run away from a burning tank is another.
Moreover, T-34 was harder to start up in harder conditions, thanks to a diesel.
One thing can be certain, and that is the Slitherine devs will not turn the game into one where the majority of tank losses are due to AT fire, close combat, or simple breakdowns.
But you can model tank strength, mobility, range/fuel to reflect those technical problems.
As for AT (especially non self-propelled), it was already underused in PG and many people complained about the same thing in PzC.
Also, it is not too good thing when self-propelled AT fears to attack tanks and is used as a sweeping tool against artillery, AA and similar stuff ...and that was usually the role of tank!