I do not get why people dislike the 2024 rules.

D&D has always been "homebrew" the books themselves state as much. Stating this "the rules are not set in stone. They are guidelines to help you understand the basics needed." In other words, these rules explain what it needed but is not limited to. So, you have OP level 1 characters? So what, increase the difficulty... Go by exp instead of milestone. 
I have started my first ever GM campaign. They are steamrolling my enemies. It is an undead campaign and so far, I haven't been using the ability of the zombies can get back up if the save throw is a success. Mainly because I forgot it in the start, but it will start soon for story reasons. (think Resident Evil Requiem) The reason it has been simple and easy so far is I have hidden challenges that are hard. If they found the starter map one they would have died... Luckily, they haven't tried. 
Following the rules they are winning but only getting 10-100 exp per kill, if they hit the enemy. but they have moved far enough that the zombies will now start to get back up, and different type of undead/hell types will be brought in. if the one lvl5 fighter is killing 5 zombies by themselves, time to, 1 and more, 2 change the enemies to something harder.
if the rules make the players stronger then make the enemies more than strong to combat them. they are not PC they are NPC they are not hampered by the players rulebook.

BTW I know that I'm not a good GM it's my first time trying. the group found one of the challenges two maps earlier than when it would become obvious each map has one. I messed up and nocked one PC because they forgot to tell me that they have advantage on undead and undead deal half damage to them. same as aberrations. They found the challenge I set with 6 Flame Skulls, and they took down two before one of the four party members fell. So, they are doing great, (I didn't know they should be taking half damage at the time.)

if you want me to explain the story I built, just ask and I'll tell you. I am hoping to make it has several branches that tie into one main story.

Quote from TymptedToKMS >>

D&D has always been "homebrew" the books themselves state as much. Stating this "the rules are not set in stone. They are guidelines to help you understand the basics needed." In other words, these rules explain what it needed but is not limited to. So, you have OP level 1 characters? So what, increase the difficulty... Go by exp instead of milestone. 
I have started my first ever GM campaign. They are steamrolling my enemies. It is an undead campaign and so far, I haven't been using the ability of the zombies can get back up if the save throw is a success. Mainly because I forgot it in the start, but it will start soon for story reasons. (think Resident Evil Requiem) The reason it has been simple and easy so far is I have hidden challenges that are hard. If they found the starter map one they would have died... Luckily, they haven't tried. 
Following the rules they are winning but only getting 10-100 exp per kill, if they hit the enemy. but they have moved far enough that the zombies will now start to get back up, and different type of undead/hell types will be brought in. if the one lvl5 fighter is killing 5 zombies by themselves, time to, 1 and more, 2 change the enemies to something harder.
if the rules make the players stronger then make the enemies more than strong to combat them. they are not PC they are NPC they are not hampered by the players rulebook.

BTW I know that I'm not a good GM it's my first time trying. the group found one of the challenges two maps earlier than when it would become obvious each map has one. I messed up and nocked one PC because they forgot to tell me that they have advantage on undead and undead deal half damage to them. same as aberrations. They found the challenge I set with 6 Flame Skulls, and they took down two before one of the four party members fell. So, they are doing great, (I didn't know they should be taking half damage at the time.)

if you want me to explain the story I built, just ask and I'll tell you. I am hoping to make it has several branches that tie into one main story.

It sounds like you've over-homebrewed to the point some of your playerss have figured out ways to game your setup.

Perhaps tone down such to rebalance things?

 The poll is missing an option for "No, the 2024 rules are not bad."

You said you're hiding the challenges that would make it harder from your players while throwing easy things at them. You're overcomplicating things. Throw the challenges at them if you want them to be challenged.

Also, it might be worth changing from awarding XP based on the monsters to awarding it based on milestones.

You say your PCs are level 1 - how many PCs are there? How many enemies are you throwing at them? how far away are you starting encounters? are you using only slow, melee enemies that start far away? Need more specifics

I think the 2024 rules are fine.

Phrasing your question from a negative angle isn't likely to lead to an unbiased set of responses, a better question would simply be "What do you think of the 2024 rules?" As Apple Paladin mentions there is no option to refute the negative assumption of your question. Also, why would being a GM or a player create a situation where they are unsure of their position? Of the 7 responses, four of them have a negative slant, two of them don't make sense and one is a joke answer.

I really like the 2024 rules, and given the sales numbers that have been reported, apparently I'm far from alone.

Nothing about the 2024 rules bothers me, I just don't use them because I don't see the need to invest in a whole new set of books when the ones I already have work just fine.

Encounter building isn't the only facet of the new rules, and it's definitely not the most important one.

@TymptedToKMS

Short answer: D&D 2024 rules are just fine, though encounter balance can still require a bit of experience and knowing your players.

Longer answer (in an attempt to answer the 'real' question).

Not quite sure from your post whether you are using homebrew or not.

If you are new to being a GM then I would say its best to not homebrew and just stick to the rules-as-written as far as character creation, monsters and encounters go. I'm sure most people make mistakes when they first GM (and that's fine). Balancing encounters is a bit of an art form, and requires getting a feel both for the rules-as-written and how your players play (whether they optimise or just go with what they feel; it can be different for different players). Adding homebrew on top of everything else just overcomplicates things.

If you have the DMs guide then follow the combat encounter rules in there to start, but it is good to err on the side of caution to start with and not go for 'high' difficulty, especially for 1st level players. Not good to TPK at level 1! Again, at least until you get a feel for how things balance out.

And players steam-rolling an encounter isn't always a bad thing either. As a GM your job is to make things fun for everyone, and players enjoy feeling that their characters are powerful. Until they meet the big boss :)

Because of it being my first attempt. I made sure to tell the players that it's going to be by the book. With little slight homebrews added. Until I get better with it. There's only going to be probably like five Homebrew rules that I am adding.

The reason why I added something that could be a TPK, was if they rolled a Nat 20 while investigating close to where the trap was. And with it being the first layer of the map basically they did exactly what I thought they would do move around until they found the path to the next area.

So it's by the book with one massive rule being Homebrew. By going by what the rules say cantrips that are instant or one action can theoretically be used twice per combat. One as an action one as a bonus action. And I am allowing them to do that.

But the thing is as they continue and they get further into the campaign there's going to be wild magic that if they over abuse it it's going to start to go crazy. Like they're using which bolt I believe is the cantrip. They use it twice every turn.

Around now in the combat it's going to start to lose it's accuracy. Now that they're getting closer to the epicenter of all of the magic. They're going to cast witch bolt and I'm going to roll a d100 and if it's 80 and above one of the bolts is going to lose its Target and hit something else.

Quote from TymptedToKMS >>

So it's by the book with one massive rule being Homebrew. By going by what the rules say cantrips that are instant or one action can theoretically be used twice per combat. One as an action one as a bonus action. And I am allowing them to do that.

But the thing is as they continue and they get further into the campaign there's going to be wild magic that if they over abuse it it's going to start to go crazy. Like they're using which bolt I believe is the cantrip. They use it twice every turn.

Around now in the combat it's going to start to lose it's accuracy. Now that they're getting closer to the epicenter of all of the magic. They're going to cast witch bolt and I'm going to roll a d100 and if it's 80 and above one of the bolts is going to lose its Target and hit something else.

 MaedraDawnkeeper ... Sorry still new to this

Quote from TymptedToKMS >>

So it's by the book with one massive rule being Homebrew. By going by what the rules say cantrips that are instant or one action can theoretically be used twice per combat. One as an action one as a bonus action. And I am allowing them to do that.

But the thing is as they continue and they get further into the campaign there's going to be wild magic that if they over abuse it it's going to start to go crazy. Like they're using which bolt I believe is the cantrip. They use it twice every turn.

Around now in the combat it's going to start to lose it's accuracy. Now that they're getting closer to the epicenter of all of the magic. They're going to cast witch bolt and I'm going to roll a d100 and if it's 80 and above one of the bolts is going to lose its Target and hit something else.r

Quote from TymptedToKMS >>

So it's by the book with one massive rule being Homebrew. By going by what the rules say cantrips that are instant or one action can theoretically be used twice per combat. One as an action one as a bonus action. And I am allowing them to do that.

But the thing is as they continue and they get further into the campaign there's going to be wild magic that if they over abuse it it's going to start to go crazy. Like they're using which bolt I believe is the cantrip. They use it twice every turn.

Around now in the combat it's going to start to lose it's accuracy. Now that they're getting closer to the epicenter of all of the magic. They're going to cast witch bolt and I'm going to roll a d100 and if it's 80 and above one of the bolts is going to lose its Target and hit something else.

 RJP1973 ... Sorry still new to this

Quote from ApplePaladin >>

 The poll is missing an option for "No, the 2024 rules are not bad."

You said you're hiding the challenges that would make it harder from your players while throwing easy things at them. You're overcomplicating things. Throw the challenges at them if you want them to be challenged.

Also, it might be worth changing from awarding XP based on the monsters to awarding it based on milestones.

 The reason that I'm doing XP. Is now that they're basically at the halfway point. It's going to be a lot more difficult and I'm not wanting them to Super quickly level up.

They started at level 5 And they are about to hit level 6 after the 5th encounter with the enemies. And I'm about to boost the amount of XP that they can get due to the fact that I am now going to be using all of the abilities of the enemies. 

Long story short is the zombies have a chance to get back up at 1 HP I have not done that yet but I'm going to start doing it now. Long and short way of explaining it.

Quote from Thyrwyn >>

You say your PCs are level 1 - how many PCs are there? How many enemies are you throwing at them? how far away are you starting encounters? are you using only slow, melee enemies that start far away? Need more specifics

I think the 2024 rules are fine.

 So they are level 5. The campaign is a undead campaign. Right now the only enemies that they really fought or zombies and skeletons. (That's why I added the comment of resident evil) And and so far I have made it to where some are close some are far which gives them time to take out the ones close before the over swarm of far meets them. I say that there's steam rolling them but they do take damage it's usually like a fourth of their Max HP and they can heal quickly with the equipment that they were able to find. 

But that is about to change because it's going to get a lot more difficult with the fact that the enemies will now be using different weapons and all of their abilities. 

Quote from BigHeartedGuy >>

Phrasing your question from a negative angle isn't likely to lead to an unbiased set of responses, a better question would simply be "What do you think of the 2024 rules?" As Apple Paladin mentions there is no option to refute the negative assumption of your question. Also, why would being a GM or a player create a situation where they are unsure of their position? Of the 7 responses, four of them have a negative slant, two of them don't make sense and one is a joke answer.

I really like the 2024 rules, and given the sales numbers that have been reported, apparently I'm far from alone.

 Okay so the reason why I say the, no I'm a PC, no I'm a GM. So somebody who's not a GM only knows 2/3 of the rules basically with the player's handbook. And someone who's never played as an PC, they only know 1/3 of the rules.

One of our friends that just recently joined d&d hasn't even read either. And I only use the apples 5e character sheet. My campaign is the first time they've even read the player's handbook. And this is like his fifth campaign he's been in and he's just now starting to realize he is not the main character he is one of the side characters in the story writer is technically the main character. That's why I added those. For those who have not read all of the three main books.