Maybe call low-threat instead of moderate-threat? I agree there’s a bias against “easy” fights (as evidenced by some of the comments here), but I wonder if there’s also a counter-intuition with the term “moderate-threat” that will actually beat the crap out of the party unless they work together effectively as a team.I think when it comes to encounter difficulty part of the issue with getting some groups to adjust encounters to suit their needs is psychological. PF2 calls a spade a spade, but as we have seen in the video game world there a number of people who want to play games on an easier mode while not wanting to call it that. When you say maybe stick to low threat encounters until you find your feet it does not feel good despite being a fairly accurate assessment of encounter difficulty. Like the encounter difficulty categories in 3e, 4e and 5e have this psychological boosting effect because they call things challenges that are not in fact challenging like at all.
Alternately, instead of calibrating the guidelines against expectations, just build them with those expectations in mind. Shift all the creatures’ levels up by 2. Everything is built to a guideline anyway, so it’s not like level matters. Now, you can have four 1st level creatures fight a 1st level party, and it won’t be an extreme (i.e., deadly) encounter.