I think that would probably be extremely difficult, especially with their approach of having very large patches. With smaller patches it would be easier to do that, and indeed other games have done just what you suggest when something new doesn't work as intended.

I think the best approach would be to iterate rapidly on the PC version, get the game stable, and then integrate those changes back into the console version and make their patch. Right now they are not leveraging the advantages of having a PC release (rapid release cycle, good technical feedback), and in fact they are actually doing the exact opposite by handcuffing their PC release to the disadvantages of consoles.

I am not saying this as a console hater, this is just pure logic and business sense. And to be fair to them, they did sort of use this method for some things (I believe the increased tick rate came to PCs first, although that may have only been a server-side change).

In the long term I have faith that Ubi will get the game going, and I've defended them quite a bit here to that end. But whoever is handling this post-release stuff probably needs to be fired or at least relieved of these specific duties. This stuff is common sense and there are plenty of people in the industry who could have done this better. There are enough good and bad models to guide the decision-making at this point, so there's really no excuse. They are not handling this like a company that is committed to the long-term competitive viability of the game, they're handling it very aloofly like they don't even realize the potential of what they've created. I can only conclude that whoever is in charge of this has no knowledge whatsoever of competitive gaming or how other companies are doing this stuff right.