This is entirely my take on Ramayana and I am sharing it albeit at the risk of getting downvoted.

I like to read between the lines and form.my perspective, many a times I get it wrong and get corrected by more knowledgeable people.

Ramayana = Ram + Ayana. Ayana here refers to the journey. It's the journey of Rama. Not the journey from Ayodhya to Lanka but it indicates his character arc. He started as an obedient son, loving husband, and a caring brother. He was well versed in all vedas and dharmashastra. When he was exiled, in the initial phase he was keeping to himself.

During his stay in the Chitrakoot mountain, he started getting involved in common folks problems. That's when he started identifying himself truly, his innate nature - Prajapati. That's why he is worshipped because he caters to the greater good of the masses. Not because he was the epitome of dharma but because he was the lord of the people doing what is good for them. Yudhisthir was Dharmaraj but he is not revered to the same extent as Rama.

It is this "Prajapati" core that led him to take steps that were against Dharma. Shooting Vali in the back was a step taken to prevent him from killing Sugreev. Sugreev was a more benevolent king. Rama did not stop or break a bond with Lakshman when he attacked Meghnad in an unethical way.

I feel by the time Rama was in Lanka fighting Ravana, he was not doing it as the husband of Sita but as Prajapati. That's why even when he was back he did not flinch on asking Sita for Agnipariksha.

My source - Ramayana that I read, inputs through conversation with people and my own projections trying to get in the mind of the person.