Increditably primitive and wrong approach.
The demand for small simple modular overseeable units - is good for producing a set of tools for an engineer. This is known as composable approach.
Now, what engineer actually does (and its his job), is to implement a solution towards the needs of the user. He works as a part of the team that do field questioning, research, proof of concept and then build a solution for the user. This is known as contextual approch. He uses prior mentioned blocks from composable approach to build it.
So if your installer is a set of blocks, that require engineer skill with get-down-to-the-guts way, then it is nothing but an engineer toolbox. Fullstop.
Why is it so? It could be that you lack time, or lack motivation - in either case growth towards user level is not taking place.
If you tell your users of advantage of "flexibility" then its just plain lie.
However, if your installer is user friendly, automated, but allows driving off the road (or not), then it is a user software. Fullstop.
Arch is an engineer toolbox.
With installer gone, its just a sign of them not wishing to work for users, or users hardly ever interested in Arch - only engineers.
Sure, you can write 10-line bash script. Every time. Like an engineer.
Your definition of an engineer is one who writes 10 line bash scripts to automate USER facing tools? Yes, fdisk, mkfs, etc are user tools, not "engineer" tools. A true engineer would use a hex editor to create their partition table.