Well first of all look at what NATO nations have in MBTs on the link. You'll be surprised. Will these new UK MBTs make a difference? Yes if only on a tactical level. In most cases, battles are won or lost at the tactical level.
However, even in the '80s when I was on active duty. NATO was depending on Gunships & CAS in the mix of NATOs modern mobile Combined Arms doctrine.
Stemming the USSR/WP tide rolling across the IGB, air assets were, as always, a critical factor. As a Bn Air Ops Officer in the 101, the tactic that was developed was the Joint Air Attack Tm[JAAT]. With Gunships working closely with A-10s.
Infantry & Tank units' priority targets were not only C3 but ADA. The USSR/WP had a number of mobile ADA vehicles. That would go along with the advance. To protect their forces from NATO's CAS & Gunships. So by removing their ADA gives your CAS & Gunships an advantage. I.e. Being able shoot while trying to take out large numbers enemy AFVs.
Infantry units had man-packed AT weapons, e.g. Dragon, LAW, Milan, etc. Plus vehicle mounted TOW and other AT weapons. The 101 had a AT Co., with M151 Jeep mounted TOWs. And Mech with M113s had 2 M901 ITVs with each Infantry Cos. Plus an AT Co. with M901s, as well. The US & NATO planned on taking on the USSR/WP with MBTs, AFVs, infantry and of course CAS, gunships and FA … lots of it. So today's Drones & Missiles will be part of that Combined Arms Team. And will probably be very important like any form of air or missiles. The US and NATO also have ground launched missile systems in their FA units. E.g. MLRS/ATACMs, etc. link link
So a again a superior MBT will give you an edge. But so do numbers. But in both case you have to know how to effectively use your assets. That is where the Combined Arms concept comes in.
As Grunt or Tanker you want the best weapons systems available to go to war. Who wouldn't ?
