I have suggested some ideas to make the game have obstacles that do not pertain to monthly income. I in fact (partially) agree with you on this point about the subjectivity of another monthly decrease in profits. Security brings a lose lose situation (financially) being that you have to pay for more staff, or lose park rating. However, it brings about an interaction with the park if you are not taking care of it, and security seems like it would be part of "owning" and "operating" your own personal theme park. Just IMO it feels like a necessary part of the game.
But really, how is this any different at all from having too few janitors to empty the bins and sweep up the overflow?
But is there an idea you had that could add obstacles without being purely a number/expense based obstacle? I mean, I could name a few but I already have in other threads.
Well, back when I first got the game and hadn't researched how it actually works, I did suggest a few things that, in retrospect, I realize now were either already handled elsewhere or were better left as abstractions. Since then, I've tried to limit my suggestions to interface improvements, bug reports, and similar things within the context of the game as it is, which really isn't going to change in any substantial way until PC2.
But to answer your question directly, no, I have not suggested any additional obstacles that are substantially different from anything we already have. And neither have you, really. Which is my main point.
* It costs X amount to run a park of a given size and complexity. This is all overhead, made up of staff salaries, ride operating costs, etc., including security, multiple shifts, vacation, liability insurance, workers' compensation insurance, taxes at all levels of government, employee pension plans and benefits, you name it. Pretty much all suggested additional obstacles fall into this category and can easily be abstracted by jiggering a few values, rather than acutally implementing a whole system for it, which just eats into CPU / GPU time.
* Peeps are only willing to spend Y amount for any given thing. This is the easiest way to implement all the additional overhead suggestions. Just reduce how much peeps are willing to pay for anything by whatever percent seems appropriate. For example, right now, you can charge (ride prestige) / 37.6 and nobody will complain about the ticket price. But what if that was 37.0 or even less?
* Ride aging. This throws a curveball at park managers because it makes their income stream time-dependent. As such, it creates an incentive to add new stuff on a regular schedule, which means the money to do that has to be available, which means the effects of everything above that reduce income are compounded. And besides, this gets folks out of their comfortable steady state. So many folks hate this. But you have to admit, it's a new and different obstacle. Any other new and different obstacles would have be be along this sort of line instead of just another way to increase overhead.