Are tanks and armored vehicles the equivalent of battleships in WWII (aircraft carriers obsoleted them)?
Just a question, I don’t know the answer.
I think tanks can be made more robust by eliminating the crew and crew space. That would reduce the volume that needs to be protected by armor, and the weight savings can be used for missile countermeasures.
The analogy I use is horse calvary, especially since it was generally replaced with armor about a century ago. Now armor is obsolete because basically it can't protect itself from all the ways we invented to kill it.
The future of kinetic war is swarms of drones and swarms of lethal and expendable wheeled and tracked unmanned platforms (some might call them robots).
Tanks are vulnerable to modern weapons but so is everything and everyone else.
In order to survive, a military force needs a very well coordinated combined arms force employing a very sophisticated and secure real time ISR capability
Not even stealth aircraft can survive unless they are well supported and protected.
The Ukrainians have some of the components of these systems and they can do a lot of damage but they are operated by unskilled soldiers who do knot understand how to use them properly, they are isolated and lack the mutual support of the other key components so they get attacked and destroyed in detail.
In addition, some re-imagine the tank as consisting of an especially well protected manned vehicle that is camouflaged and hides as it controls a number of unmanned weapons and recon vehicles that are also armored and do battle semi-autonomously.
As for the battleship analogy, it should be kept in mind that the USN still has some exceptionally well-armored ships -- aircraft carriers. They also have highly capable defensive systems and sail with other warships clustered about to defend them. In broad terms, this may be where tanks are heading, armored, highly capable, and highly protected.