Ranked choice voting is a solid idea that is an improvement on single non-transferable vote systems by making tactical voting much less important, but by far the most important aspect of an electoral system (assuming it is free and fair) is proportionality. A proportional non-ranked system is far superior to a non-proportional ranked system.
To illustrate the difference, imagine there are three parties, A, B, and C, who compete in 50 evenly sized seats. In half these seats, 45% of the voting population support A, B gets 35%, and C gets 20%. In the other half, A and B are switched.
In traditional “first past the post”, votes for C do not affect the result. A and B each get around half the seats.
In a ranked-choice, non-proportional system, C supporters can choose whether they prefer A or B. So when C is eliminated, C supporters still get to express a preference and can influence the result. C still gets no seats though.
In a proportional system, A and B each get 40% of the seats and C gets 20%, reflecting their share of the vote.