You talk about the tank that had the best death/kill Ratio of all tank designs from WW2.
A war doesn't work like a Call of Duty match. It's possible for a tank to have a 10/1 K/D and still be an overall failure. Ease of production and repair, reliability, ease of training and operation, cost per tank, fuel efficiency - all of those are extremely important. What did the Reich do? They deployed *huge* tanks in a situation where the enemy had air superiority, making them excellent targets. Produced gas-guzzling monsters when fuel was scarce. Manufactured massive steel behemoths that were absolutely unsuited to all-important urban combat. Diversified production into a myriad of variant on different chassis in a situation where their industry was ravaged by shortages, sabotage by slave laborers and poor management.
More specifically regarding the Tiger, they spent all that expensive steel on a heavy tank that didn't even use sloped armour, something the lowly T-34, and even some earlier designs, already had. Not only that, the Tiger was deployed to Russia despite being poorly suited to deep mud and snow, both terrain types that, surprise surprise, are pretty damn common in Russia.
The Germans had worse tanks than the enemy both during the invasion of France and during Operation Barbarossa, and I'd argue that the only truly great tank they've produced was the late-war Panther, but even then the very design was probably unsuited for the Reich's strategic situation.