Of course balance is important between factions
And a game like AoE4 will never have an asymetry like Starcraft, Grey Goo (agreed with HolyProtoss here, great game) or whatever examples you otherwise have.
But I actually can think of more Strategy games who are asymetric then symetric, many of them were really good.
[quote=“Huge5000RTSFan, post:24, topic:102977”]
-we do experience how it does dumb down the base build and simplifies tech trees
[/quote] That is not neccesssarily true. Many of the asymetric games I’ve played had varying tech trees which were not oversimplified. And while base building is simplified in some more modern RTS games, it is not something that happens in Asymetric games alone.
[quote=“Huge5000RTSFan, post:24, topic:102977”]
-we do experience how it does give certain factions unfair advantages
[/quote] That is true to a certain degree. But if well enough thought through it is still possible to balance an asymetric game properly. There is more room for error, but in many asymetric games when theres something that gives one faction an edge, there is still something that the other faction can leverage against it.
[quote=“Huge5000RTSFan, post:24, topic:102977”]
-we do experience how it does make games lame to play and breaks balance
[/quote] I already answered to the ‘breaks balance’ part above (since broken balance and unfair advantages are basically the same) but I wholeheartedly disagree with the notion that asymetric gameplay makes a game’lame to play’. Rather on the contrary, change between factions can shake up the gameplay.
On the one hand - take Age of Empires 2. It is one of my favourite strategy games - and I think many here would agree. But while the different Factions have some details changed in how they play - in the end you CAN play almost every tactic with almost every nation. And with checking a single box in the game setup screen you really can do it. It’s a fun game but I defend against every enemy basically the same. I build my base exactly the same way. My unit composition is also largely the same.
Now take AoE3 as a light example for asymetric gameplay (which is certainly closer to AoE4 then DoW or SC).
If you play the Russians you have massive ammounts of trash infantry which can protect you artillery. Also you always recruit groups instead of only single units.
If you play Netherlands your whole economy is suddenly gold based, luckily you can build banks.
Play Spanish and suddenly you got Rodeleros who can take on many other Melee units.
Next match you play English and since you levelled high enough you can upgrade your longbow archers to Elite and ruin your enemies days. Also - your houses work differently.
You play German and you love your advanced peasants. And not to mentio Doppelsöldner.
And don’t get me started on the expansion factions.
I am not expert balance wise, AoE3 seemed to do a well enough job for that. But the gameplay in the question how different the factions were and how it felt different playing with and against the different countries was brilliant. (You can think of cards and shipments what you want, these are not point of the discussion here :P)
And again: DoW3 was a Dumpsterfire, we all agree - it is not a good argument in either direction because the game itself is a pile of crap.