Quite interesting, it seems very real-world and practical based on what I think I know of the Russian experience in Chechnya.
First Chechen War was much like the Winter War - a real embarrassment for the Russians. The Second... not so much. The Russians brought their A game and it did not go well for the Chechens.
Worth remembering that the Russians are our peer or near-peer in terms of their military at a minimum, and that the Chechen Wars were a literal peer fight in terms of tech, with Russian equipment on both sides and Russian/Soviet veterans fighting for Chechnya (so no issues of one side getting front line gear but not knowing how to use it or being grossly inexperienced). At least to start; the Second Chechen War had Russia bring out their revised gear built off the lessons of the first one. That’s when the Chechens discovered that they had to launch a saturation attack of at *least* six heavy ATGM at a Russian tank equipped with the latest version of the all up Arena APS to even have a chance of a damaging hit. Often they had to launch more or just give up. NATO ignored this.
NATO kept ignoring this until the Syrian civil war proved that NATO frontline tanks were horribly vulnerable to modern heavy ATGM. At this point, I’m very willing to at least seriously consider the Russian doctrine for modern urban warfare because they seem to be looking quite seriously at it. APS to protect the tanks and a BMPT to take down the rooftop threat... or the building that the threats came from.
The Israeli solution to this involves the 60mm mortar their Merkavas mount. We (and most of the rest of NATO) don’t really have a solution for this that is contained within the tank platoon. Yes, “call in air support” is a solution, but it’s one with problems.