Among the open-source printer community there is a logically based, yet sometimes taken to inappropriate places desire to make printers "self-replicating" either fully, or more commonly "other than a few purchased parts."
In some cases this appears to lead to questionable design choices when some other process or material might be more appropriate to the job at hand.
Other than that (and sometimes influenced by it) the usual joys of getting the bed flat, the dimensions accurate, and figuring out the secret to getting the first layer to stick (with the sad realization that this may change somewhat with each new spool of filament - or even over the life of a spool of filament without taking extreme measures to keep it dry.)
In the "sure, there probably are packages out there if you have wads of cash" line would be structural analysis that takes into account the printing direction/layers and perhaps even optimizes that (though to optimize it, it would need some user input on what's most important, and that gets tricky with unsophisticated users...) or effectively a "smart slicer" that grasps where strength is needed and how to get it, without too much overkill.
On the reverse view, making something and having it break is HIGHLY educational (if treated that way) and that's nothing to sneeze at. But practically speaking I think we end up doing a lot of overkill to try to make sure that things don't break, with limited knowledge of the problems and limited tools available in the slicers.
Under pure pipe dreams (such as I understand the actual needs of the process) some type of easier recycling would be nice, as the various things needing to be sorted out lead to a LOT of scrap parts, at least at first.
And moving from scrap to "really annoying scrap" - nozzle drool. It's not hands-off on most printers I'm familiar with (which isn't many.)