It's not "too complex", it works the same as legacy IP did just with a larger address space. You only think it's too complex because you've never bothered to learn about it properly.
In fact, once you add in all the kludges used to keep legacy ip limping along (nat, address overlaps, misuse of reserved or squatted address space, address recycling etc etc etc) then IPv6 is actually much simpler.
For home I gave up on it before because my ISP din't give a subnettable allocation
What ISP gives you a subnettable allocation of legacy ip for home use?
The standard for a v6 home allocation is /56 (see: https://www.ripe.net/publicati...) which lets you create 256 standard /64 subnets. If you get anything less you have a lousy ISP.
If you don't have any choice of ISP then legacy IP is one of the reasons - any new provider would be forced to pay a lot of money for legacy space, and pay a lot more to implement CGNAT while providing inferior service to customers.
If you don't have a subnettable allocation then you need to resort to kludges like NAT, which you're almost certainly doing for legacy traffic already. Yes v6 should be better, but even in a worst case it's not any worse.
Also a lot of users apply legacy thinking and assume the v6 allocation on the WAN interface is all you get. This is generally true for legacy IP because you're only given a single address on the WAN port and expected to NAT. With v6 you still get a single address on the WAN port but you're expected to use prefix delegation to get a separate subnet for use behind your router. Yes your router can actually be a router and not a glorified proxy with NAT.
Legacy IP actually works the same way, but typically only large businesses can afford enough address space to be able to route and subnet it properly.