As of right now, there's not enough depth.
That's a given. Those who spend more time studying the game and tweaking their strategy should have the advantage, which is already the case as the game currently stands. Implementing more options simply increases the depth, and subsequently the overall fun factor of the game due to a wider variety of tactical decisions, placing more emphasis on managing skills, rather than the basic limited array of logical choices. I guess I'm just not intellectually challenged enough by this game.
That's a given. Those who spend more time studying the game and tweaking their strategy should have the advantage, which is already the case as the game currently stands. Implementing more options simply increases the depth, and subsequently the overall fun factor of the game due to a wider variety of tactical decisions, placing more emphasis on managing skills, rather than the basic limited array of logical choices. I guess I'm just not intellectually challenged enough by this game.How exactly did you come to the conclusion that this game should be about micromanaging match tactics? There are plenty of other aspects of the game that are and should be equally important.The tactical options are adequate. If you don't feel challenged enough, maybe you should pay some attention to the strategic decisions necessary to manage a successful team.
Eh.. I don't know about that. 90% of the game is basically setting up your player rotation, matchups and tactics. The rest is a cakewalk.
also a reserves team that plays against other second teams so more players get matches and can try and push into a teams lineup