My examples of what I saw are from the adventure, Guilt of the Grave World. I think my post is understandable without unspoiling, just lacking examples.
Of course in a game with full auto guns, flight in combat has only so many protections (though an enemy with only melee is certainly at a 100% disadvantage). But recently in GotGW I noticed that there was a lot of exploration trivialized. Not all certainly, but a large minority. A Chase and Overland travel had enough opportunities for flying PC's players to say "we fly" and no rolls required. I am not the GM, I am a player, but even so my GM brain is saying, "this is why PF2e makes infinite flight so hard to get."
The rat nest blocks your path - "We fly"
"You come to a cliff!" - "We fly"
"The ground gives way underneath you" - "We Fly"
"The enemy has caught up (in the Chase)!" - "We Fly" (To this one the GM put a foot down and said the enemy included fliers)
And at least one other, but I admit I forgot.
Is it not problematic that flight is so powerful as early as level one? I know its not fast but its reliable. More reliable than a Solarion climbing in the early levels. Isn't it a little sad that creative solutions are "We Fly"? I just got the feeling there needs to be more downward winds the next time there is a cliff or ground collapse.
I guess now I want to know how you all would change this? Should a GM have to add more complexity to exploration encounters? I feel like this is the kind of thing "Uncommon" existed for in PF2e. To soften a blow when a GM tells you "no" because something about this is a bad fit for an adventure.
Edit: Missed a spoiler.
PS Unrelated diatribe and big even if early spoilers for GotGW Did they really give the Amaranth one gun which only does Void? To target a non-living spaceship? On Foundry its clearly going to mark that as 0 damage which I had to insist the GM just change the damage type because there is 0% chance that is intended. Not everything undead needs to be Void. Its okay if they shoot a laser at us...