With reference to the after cephs, I don't see any aesthetic 'failure' in the outcome. I see an improvement. The Mandibular plane angle (MPA) in the after from where it is measured (with reference to the horizont) has decreased and the profile line up (with reference to a vertical) has improved and is within an aesthetic norm.
With reference to what people have in their 'mind's eye' that they want to see in the mirror, that is beyond me to measure/compare with points, angles and planes, and not something I can opine on. What I can say here is that the after ceph shows an improvement that is within the aesthetic norms of aesthtic balance
The main failure I noticed here is that the before ceph is (CCW) rotated away from the horizontal and vertical planes as if a PHOTO of the before ceph was chosen for this presentation. The after ceph is aligned with the vertical and horizontal planes. That is to say, the ceph stat in the after is aligned with the vertical plane of the after photo but the ceph stat in the before is rotated in CCW direction away from the vertical plane. None the less, when this was compensated for, the MPA was REDUCED by about 4 degrees.
The after ceph seems to show that the look of CCW-r was achieved mainly via somewhat of a CCW 'twist' of the mandible itself and a sliding genio (outward horizontally and upward vertically which is a technique they can use to give more of the look of CCW especially in a case where the CCW-r is ANTERIOR IMPACTION and there is only so much anterior impaction that can be done without the upper teeth disappearing. Basically CCW-r to the maxilla, ANY KIND, will only reduce the MPA by the same amount, NOT MORE than that. So, if the MPA is excessively steep and that steepness exceeds the the CCW-r done to the maxilla, CCW-r to the maxilla won't reduce all of it. Geometrically impossible.
So, what's the issue here? You are using cephs to talk about things you see in the MIRROR that you don't like which are not seen in the cephs. The after ceph shows an improvement with reference to your starting anatomy. I would not suggest or encourage any more revisions.