So after parusing the pathfinder material, I've reach the following notions as far as the tier/gestalt system.

1) Tier and Gestalt is a construct used to balance D&D 3.5 characters.  3.5, while containing the semblance of balance, was eventually crushed under the wieght of it's inherant inadequacies.  Casters are overvalued, and, to quote Zal, "OP as FUCK!"  Gestalt with Tiers brings the rest of the party into line with regard to this.

2) This system likely does not apply to Pathfinder.  While the buffs that martial classes get may seem broken and OP at first glance, it's important to remember this, as articulated by Opal: "They are only overpowered if you assume that D&D 3.5 was properly balanced."

3) One suggestion I have is to somewhat re-tier the pathfinder base classes.  Most will be T3.  My further recommendation is to provide a different tyoe of gestalt if people feel that they still need power/flexibility to compete with the Big 3 (Cleric, Druid, Wizard).  For this gestalt, I'd recommend allowing T3 pathfinder classes to gestalt with all NC classes but expert, adept, and the noble class from Dragonlance, and allow T4 and lower pathfinder classes to gestalt freely with all NPC classes.

4) I don't think that the gestalt will be needed.  Fighter and paladin have become engines of death.  Ranger is now able to perform at a much higher level.  Baba's rage powers can be amazing.  Monk and rogue are solid DPS/Support for the mainline tanks.  Hell, even bard is more useful.

5) PrCs:  In the past, we've done dips into PrC's in order to pick up front-loaded abilities.  Pathfinder gives every class a high capstone power (L20 for base classes, L10 for the PRC's that I have seen).  While dipping is still allowed, you lose skill points, and access to that castone.  With that in mind, I can forsee less multiclassing than before.  Also, there are far fewer splat classes, as Paizo is slow to publish this sort of material.

6) Class conversions:  More a subpoint of point 5, many PrC's and base classes from 3.5 may simply not exist.  Examples include favored soul, scout, Warblade, Crusader, Duskblade, Hexblade, Swordsage, swashbuckler, and a few others that we like.  Also, most of the PrC's that our group likes are not included.  This means that if you like the RP of a class, and you feel that it cannot be recreated with one of the base classes, it will fall to you to come up with a conversion.  All classes will have to be vetted, and once converted, we can add them to the Pathfinder Conversions sections of the page for semi-permanent storage.

Thoughts?

No immediate disagreements. I do still like the idea of gestalt, though, as most classes still dont reach the level that is 9th level spells, but keeping the gestalt as it is (basically only allowing gestalt with certain NPC classes) is a good idea. 

Because the development quality of Pathfinder is so high, I suggest using the system without gestalt until we see for ourselves that adjustments are necessary. (Those mega-capstones are an excellent deterrent to class-whoring.) But I'll go with whatever the group decides.