No, I mean i find it boring. There's no variety; Tanks attack, mech infantry defend, that's it. In medieval times, you have to put a couple of pikeman to defend against knights, crossbowmen and macemen against melee. And of course, a couple of Longbowman. usually, 1 pike, 1 crossbow, 2 longbow.
Sure, if you choose to ignore available units and play poorly, it's "boring". If you think it's "tanks attack, mechinf defend" only you'd get utterly mauled by someone halfway competent or a high level AI.
Let's look at our options in medieval:
Mace
Xbow
Pike
Lbow
Knight
Treb
One anti melee, one anti-mounted, one city defender, one melee city attacker, one basic mounted that doesn't hard counter anything, and a typical siege unit. 6 options with some paper-rock-scissors to it.
Now let's go on to modern:
Tank
Infantry
Marine
Arty
Paratrooper
Tatical Nuke/ICBM
Fighter
Bomber
Anti-Tank
SAM Infantry
Mech inf and modern armor + gunships show up later...as do things like SAMS/MArty etc. but it's the same idea. Notably gunships take the place of anti-tanks however, and either they or nukes complement paratroopers very, very well.
So:
1 armor unit, 1 hard counter to an armor unit, 1 air unit better vs other air and naval, 1 air unit better for inflicting ground damage, one unit on the ground that counters air, 1 basic defender, 1 specialized naval attacker, 1 unit that adds speed/dynamic placement (paratooper), 1 typical siege unit, and the ultimate mass collateral unit in the game.
There are more unit types, more hard counters, and more strategic variance in modern times. We haven't even TOUCHED the difference in NAVAL warfare between the eras!
Anybody who can count should be able to see that there's MORE variety in later eras, not less...not to mention some strategies that are completely impossible until then.