I think it really boils down to a perception issue. I think more people would be happy paying a flat fee for a language package then deal with the angst of "wasted" money paying for languages that some users don't leverage. The package as it currently stands would "work" if I could assign languages to users and have that reflect back up to pricing, but that's cumbersome to manage from a customer perspective and sounds pretty painful to implement from the provider perspective.

It may be useful to consider a baseline two-language deal, as Javascript + one server side language covers a huge amount of use cases.

That said, you cover 2 out of 3 of the following scenarios pretty well with the existing model, I just happen to fall into the third, which is probably the smallest sector for you guys anyway:

1 - Small startups, probably standardized on one or two languages, 8-10 people 2 - Larger orgs (200+) where the cost is negligible compared to revenue. 3 - Medium-sized, microservice/squad based orgs, with heterogenous language support but focused within teams.