I 100% respect this.And that is why I much prefer PF2 math where they have painstakingly worked to ensure the math is very tight. The rules very clear and mostly controlled. Classes are very balanced. And challenges are difficult for their level. If this wasn't what you were dealing with at your table, then I can see why maybe you don't share the same appreciation for the PF2 math.
But, you must admit that you are describing a player problem that you are using rules shackling to manage.
If one doesn't have this player problem, then not adding a shackle is, well, not adding a shackle.
I have several other issues with the PF2E math that create dissonance in the experience. So while not having this shackle on the players is a good thing, it is just on top of avoiding the other problems.
I don't think my opinions should be construed as meaning anything to you. But they are what they are.
I'm not trying to insult anyone either.
But, at the end of the day, it is not your opinion or mine that counts. It is how much does a given system appeal to a wide set of players. And, further, how sustainable is that appeal. I strongly believe that as months continue to go by, the constraints of the PF2E math will wear on some portion of those who are now playing it. Just as the 4E fanbase shrunk, I see PF2E shrinking. There will always be a devoted core who love it. And good for them. Though I think ti would be better for them if they could trade off a bit of the shackles for more of a playerbase.