Greater height is usually cited as an advantage for mechs, but as I see it, if there were ever some situation where the advantage of height was that substantial, the practicality of simply sticking an elevated turret on a base similar to a tank's would come up before a mech's design.
I suppose that if the mechs were already built, they wouldn't bother making that kind of vehicle, but that relies on the idea that someone had wanted the mechs around to begin with, and for that, you'd need to have some very specific role mechs performed best that didn't come only from their height.
That usually means terrain that is extremely unsuitable for conventional vehicles, or too cluttered for them to turn in easily. And that
usually means locations such as steep mountain slopes, or in dense forests or urban environments. However, these areas afford infantry tons of cover to approach and fire from, so there would need to be a pretty significant reason that such a location is worth risking so much heavy equipment on (as opposed to say, bombing it to smithereens, moving on to a different location, just sending in mobs of their own infantry, etc).
(And by the way, even though a mech might have a slightly smaller ground profile than a conventional vehicle, their legs make them perhaps even more vulnerable to IED's once those have gone off, and that much harder to fix once they're busted)
That aside, I also think it's important to point out how adaptable the brain is. It already seems capable of very easily recognizing how to use plenty of brain-computer interfaces, and it has shown compatibility with everything from cybernetic hands that have touch-sensitivity, to implanted devices that can aid with sight. I'm not entirely convinced that it would be that much more difficult for a pilot to pick up on a traditional tank's controls if they were ported into a more direct brain-interface.
Keep in mind that even if the mech is far more human-like than a tank, it does not mean the design would exactly mirror human anatomy. A multi-story gun platform with robotic legs is probably not going to have many practical reasons to be built as our towering metallic counterparts, when you consider issues of stability and mobility at that height and weight. This would mean that the legs would 'feel' completely different to a pilot compared to their own experience of walking. Balancing, be it without arms or while firing guns with heavy recoil, would likewise not be something analogous to a human's regular gait or posture.
I'm not sure I can really get behind the idea that the pilot is the one providing the 'balancing programs,' without having something like an inner-ear sensor that relays information to the pilot like their own body would, along with quite a bit of practice with this new set of legs. While the 'main computer' would be elsewhere, the various sensors and the mechanisms required to help a pilot balance would still need to be on board the mech. And of course, there's the issue that if all of this is done remotely, then once communication fails in a combat setting, the thing will fall right over unless you include redundant programs on board anyway.
Perhaps you have something different in mind when you talk about these neural controls, however...