I am a min/maxer, and I hate this. I like trying to create a well designed character and take the best possible perks and so on for my playstyle. I do not like when doing so means I completely trivialize the game.
Can't really argue with the Straw Man. This still seems like a very extreme corner case. I'm skeptical that your 'well designer character' requires you to use the exact same build as the OP. Also, you still have to sacrifice hundreds of points in Armor to keep yourself from getting one-shot by a decent Frost Mage.
But I'll bite, and discuss rebalancing a bit.
I doubt they will completely remove certain enchants from the game. They did implement a soft cap using diminishing returns, but I guess they could nerf the power of enchants using a patch?
What is the highest damage a player could expect to receive in a single blow? I'm seeing Ancient Dragon Bites at about 300 damage. So assuming Morrowind-style damage reductions calcs, it takes 1500 armor to reduce that to 50 points of damage? 2500 points of armor reduces it to 32 points. What would you consider is the lowest a player should be allowed to reduce an incoming 300 point attack? Or would you prefer to rebalance weapon damage too, so it became an even trade of blow vs blow? Ancient Dragon has 3100 hp, we max out at 800, so if we traded blows only, we'd both die at the same time? What would you call balance here, assuming we can't retcon the enchantment tree?