1) Sorry, but I can't take seriously any claim that market anarchism is common sense. It's anything but common.
2) The ability to take complex problems and simplify them into something more manageable is fundamental to thought. You can't comprehend everything in the universe. I can't do it either. If you don't reduce complexity you can achieve nothing. You want to incorporate as much into your thinking as possible, but the claim that market anarchism includes less than other viewpoints is something I would contest.
3) Part of the reason it's so hard to convert people is that there are lots of things you have to consider before convincing yourself that it's possible, and many of them have competing theories about how a service may be handled. Not everyone on this forum has the same image of what ancapistan would look like, or how tort law would work, among other things. The appeal does not come from simplicity, and your claim to the contrary is a childish attempt at a put down. If I was thin-skinned like you, I would say that you are just trying to verbally dominate us, meaning you aren't a real anarchist.
I have never seen any nuence in anarcho capitalism: its all black and white, its coercive or not. no grey area, at all.
And how long have you been looking into anarcho-capitalism? If you have never seen any gray areas, then you haven't looked very closely or haven't spent enough time. For one broad example, consider the differences between Friedmanite and Rothbardian styles of making the case for market anarchism. Different values, different approaches, different conclusions about what will happen. Not everyone cares about the NAP, or believes in morals. For another example, you have agorists, and not all market anarchists consider themselves within this subclass.
How do anarchists feel about adverse possession?
How do we suspect water and air space property rights will be assigned?
How much homesteading is necessary to make something your own?
Pacifism vs acceptance of self-defense?
Most discussions among ourselves are on the gray areas. But the arguments you tend to bring up are things we've all seen before and dealt with many times, so our responses align quite well.