In 2.0, you had a better idea of which depth chart was going to be used to determine the starters by looking at your Base Offense in your main playbook, and we could display which players were marked as starters based on those settings. The difficulty I see with 3.0 in identifying your starters and really knowing you have them set to come in and play and get credit for the start is in figuring out which depth chart they need to be in.
The actual marking of the starter is easier as you just click the guy you want versus the 2.0 method of cross referencing the Base Offense with the depth charts. The second part of the equation is that they actually get in to play. This affects starters and promised playing time. With the new interaction between playbooks, formations, and depth charts, it can sometimes be confusing on which players are actually going to get in the game and how much. If you keep the settings simple, and you can actually keep them at the 2.0 levels, it isn't that tough to determine who gets in, but if you want to take full advantage of sculpting your playbook, you can have all sorts of depth charts being pulled from.
I want to put more analysis tools for playbooks on the depth chart page, like the old one we have on the practice page, that break down a playbook by formation. We could also break it down further by depth chart if we find that would help. So, for instance, you might see that the playbook you are using uses the Pro-Set 34% of the time, or maybe that it used the RB-Power depth chart 10% of the plays. I think we can come up with a standard mix of plays from your playbook for each situation, as there's obviously going to be more 1st and 10 plays called than 4th and shorts. This would help a little with understanding which formation sets are being called and which depth charts are being used, but you still have to understand how all of it fits together to really do it right.
I don't think we can do anything with promised starts or playing time in the "set recommended" logic. That part would be up to you to figure out if you have a player that requires playing time above and beyond just ratings. There's also cases where you might want to move a player up in the depth chart due to his IQs or something else that isn't factored in to the logic that just sorts by position role formulas.
What I would like to look for at this point is anything that we can add to the pages that might help you make this connection between playbooks and depth charts.