Well, I have to disagree.

I often deliberately used the past perfect tense.

Consider:

Eli wasn't at the meeting. He had gone to town to buy some groceries.

By using the PP in the second sentence, it gives the reader a clear connection as to what activity happened first. Consider this difference:

Eli wasn't at the meeting. He went to town to buy some groceries.

In this second case, the reader has to apply and stretch some logic to determine what happened first. For example, Eli could have left for town five minutes after the meeting started.

----

As well, the past perfect is used in Type 3 Conditionals:

If Fred had taken the vaccine, he wouldn't be in the hospital with COVID.

And it is used in indirect speech:

Fred said, "I didn't hear anyone dying of COVID."

Fred said that he hadn't heard anyone dying of COVID.

This grammar has direct speech moving one step back when converted into indirect speech. It works for all tenses. I believe this tense shift aids in communicating the subtle idea of time.

-----

Of course, the past perfect is not necessary when time prepositions are in play.

And in the days of superfluous writing, the PP was used as much a possible to convey a sense of superior intelligence. We are not yet cured of that.

I would recommend to never use the past perfect UNLESS there a real need to compare one time with another. While less common than simple past, it is quite valuable in communicating subtle ideas in time.

Do not throw it away.