"Good" vs "bad" plans: Cost shifting and intangibles

Hi all -- Like a lot of people here I am anxiously awaiting the announcement of the exchange plans for 2026. My wife and I may need to be on an exchange plan for the first time in a while (what a year to do it, huh?) and I am trying to game plan how to shop.

I wanted to ask to see if I am correct about one of the impressions I have gotten from this sub, which is that whether your plan is good or bad in ways that aren't directly tied to price don't depend on price or metal level. What I mean by this is things like: how likely are you to have claims rejected, how easy is it to get a hold of a person who can help you when issues arise, how annoyed will doctors be dealing with your insurance, etc. These factors depend on the company you buy insurance from and (unfortunately) whether you have an individual plan or a group plan where your employer can go to bat for you.

The metal levels, on the other hand, are purely about cost. So if I'm choosing between, say, two plans from BlueCross Blue Shield, a bronze HDHP or a gold plan, really the only deciding factor should be the money spent, and it's not like anyone's going to be nicer to me because I have the gold plan rather than a bronze plan. But it might be worth looking into, say, whether Aetna has a better reputation or deeper provider network than BlueCross Blue Shield. Do I have that right?