5e expects the DM to houserule. The 1/2 movement to stand up rule was introduced because, again, 5e was meant to be easy to run - WotC having a vested interest in getting as many new DMs as possible running as many games as possible.
It was not built to be fiddly and fine tuned (3.x/4) but instead deliver decent performance to a wide range of people. They took out some of the more abusive exploits from 3.x, ignored others (declaring them something DMs can solve if it bugs them).
"Rulings not Rules" is a great design strategy and slogan for building a human run engine. Not so much for a computer game where ambiguity is The Enemy.
Right now I find combat to be very shallow and luck-based. I either win by exploiting LOS/shove or getting the initiative or get dumpstered because every enemy goes first and crits on every attack. A great many of the abilities and features that seem cool are far less effective than exploding barrels or shove, and every encounter is designed to require ruthless abuse of these new features or CRPG "AI"
