That's kind of irrelevant to whether 3e was balanced. Because it wasn't. At all. No one denies this. You would need to rewrite every class in the PHB, many feats, most spells, and a boatload of items to get a balanced game out the other side.
This was literally admitted by Paizo directly. I can't remember the man's name, but one of their lead dev/design people made very clear that the reason they needed to make PF2e was that they couldn't fix the deep, fundamental, pervasive problems with the PF system--and 100% of those problems were inherited from 3e.
I would far, far rather have 140 pages of tiny fixes than 1 page of fixes and a broken mess. Any day of the week.
4e was a very well-balanced game. It got fixes to help improve that balance over time. Why—how—is that a flaw?
More complexity is the flaw.
Character sheet was 5 pages, every class had powers so you have to figure that out that and the errata.
Balance isn't the be all and end all you think it is. My errata was a list of banned stuff (S tier broken build pieces) and basically use 2E Spells and Magic item creation rules tweaked.
We were plugged into hivemind meta, every ther 3E group was not.