However I do not argue that more options is always pleasant I think that in this case it would mean more gambling and less real tactical game play. What will the other player play each quarter? what should I play to counter his tactics?
This will be very hard and more then often gambling will take place. Is this what we want?
Personnaly I don't like that idea.
Gambling is what we have now. We don't have any clue about the tactic the opponent will play. If he decides to change his habits and surprise us, we are lost.
What the game needs is a big amount of conditions and consecuences. For example.
"If player x of the opponent team is on the floor, I play player y"
"If I am winning/losing for more than 20 in the last quarter, I play my bench players"
"If the other team is playing inside, I defend 2-3"
"If player y has played the 30 minutes he needed, I substitute it"
"If any player has 3 fouls in the first half, he goes to the bench" (no need for the simulation to do that for us)
and so on...
That is the kind of strategic decisions that a real coach has to do.