TheSword
Legend
Ok. I’d respond that in 3e and 5e martials were never just restricted to attack actions.One of the things that many people who liked 4e will also tell you is that it gave a number of martial characters (e.g., fighter, rogue, warlord, ranger) more meaningful tactical options than simply declaring a basic attack action or making multiple attacks. It was loads of fun IME of playing a warlord and fighter in 4e. I'm far less interested in playing fighters in 5e than I was in 4e.
In 5e alone, there is charging, shoving (to move or make prone), disarming, overrunning, grappling, shoving aside, marking, not to mention a host of feat based options and choices. Then we add activating magic items, attacking with off hand weapons, using maneuvers or subclass abilities. Of course the clincher is that the DMG can use shove and grapple as inspiration for making other responses to what a martial character might chose to do.
The suggestion that a martial character in 5e without spells just decides whether to attack is patently untrue.
Now if your DM won’t improvise combat situations or use the expanded options in the DMG then your beef is with your DM not with the 5e rule set.