I vote noob.
What limits any dreams that any user may have is that the flash space is not abundant and this is a real-time application, handling a 64x16 table for one engine and then a 8x8 table on another may require different calculations and lookup times. If we had faster cpu(s) and more memory that would be different, and so would the price of the hardware, I can name a few systems you would probably like.
Having said that, I feel it's a major hassle and a waste of resolution to be forced to use the same load sites on all tables, and in fact a step was taken away from that with the firmware of recent years. All engines have changes at some rpm or load where you put the most attention, and VE, lambda and ignition have different needs - which is why the the VE table has the most resolution and lambda the least, ignition in between.
Even if we had the same size tables, I would personally NOT use the same load cells in the tables - exactly because the requirements of each table is so different.
The tuning situation that you describe is one I don't really follow, there have never really been a similar reason for me and even if you change the lambda table you should not have to remap the VE table - come on, that's the whole idea!
If you're keen on trying out a few things, why not just change the values along rpm/load axis to center in on the exact load which you want to experiement with. I'm pretty sure you will not find something revolutionary that will require a larger table, at least not on a factory 16 valve engine.
