Amazing, you decided to ignore every single real world application of King Tigers and focus on kill counts. Since they said, in a vacuum and with no strategic context, that they are “good” (whatever that means) then how dare anyone say otherwise, right? As for Tiger mobility, the KT had none. Just read on the Ardennes offensive and how it inhibited strategic movement by cluttering roads and supply networks. The Tiger 1 was much better in that regard, though again not compatible with schwerpunkt tactics, overengineered and hard to maintain.
As for the King Tiger needing better treatment because it’s a legendary tank, just look at how bad the T34/76 is in game. No further explanation needed.
You must not have watched either video because the first one is much more comprehensive than simply looking at kill counts and the second one doesn't even list them.
The Ardennes is an awful example because the Germans actually planned to steal feul in order to keep moving which was an idea doomed for failure. In addition the roads being blocked by the Tigers was much more a simple reality of driving on narrow roads through thick forest than anything else.
Once again I'll mention that Steven Zaloga (another tank expert who has written numerous books on tanks) said that the Tigers had good offroad performance on Operation Think Tank.
Lastly, don't ever put words in my mouth! Never did I ever say that the Tiger should be buffed simply because it is legendary, all I said was that it was so.
On topic: I feel like the best way to fix the King Tiger would be a moving accuracy buff. The Churchill has good moving accuracy because its terrible mobility forces it to fire on the move most of the time, the King Tiger should get similar treatment because not only is it slow but unlike the Churchill it also has afwul turret rotation speed that often times requires the hull to be manually turned to engage targets fast enough.