The good racers still make a lot of difference. As we can see from Hamilton against Bottas and more spectacularly Leclerc against Vettel. They try to minimize the error. What we see is the maximum Mercedes can offer and the same with Leclerc. Which is why everyone hadn't known that Ferrari can actually compete with Mercedes until Leclerc took the task in his own hand. Your statement is accurate in addition to this.
"Ritualized Warfare"! That's totally a random word play.
F1 is essentially a car developer's marketing platform for their progressing "formulae" within the rules inscribed by the FIA. The most important thing is the race and the challenges they face against other cars. It's the most important element of F1 Championship. Without the pure racing entertainment, F1 is exactly a car's version of Apple's show case events.
If you consider this as ritualised warfare, then every modern business management is a ritualised warfare. Even football clubs are ritualized warfare units.
Nevertheless, it is not of my concern to argue about the institutional functionality. I am not talking about it at all. I'm only concerned at why would anyone who watch the race wouldn't want closer competition. Out of the last three races, the only significant event was the defense of Leclerc against Hamilton. Everything else was simply a soap opera.