Can, but will they in a consistent manner? Also I don't think there is much point in doing some synthetic comparisons while ignoring human factor. Spreadsheet numbers laid out in an asymetric way do not make a game, spreadsheet numbers combined with players having their not always rational preferences make the game. And even if you assume that one of the factions draws all the mouthbreathers, you have to balance around that, unless maximizing the enjoyment of most people is not your goal, but why would any gamedev bias their 3-way game towards 2-way, which could easily snowball into a massive ****-show? Take Starcraft 2 or Warcraft 3. I stopped following blizzard games long time ago, but I recall that blizzard took statistical discrepancies seriously. And even if it was hard to find a concrete proof of imbalance between races and tweaks were not perfect, at the end of the day, even if you played an purported "easier" race, the game still compensated for it by pitting you with players adequate for your MMR/ELO rating. Shouldn't the game account for the quite recent influx of "skill" on the TR side in some way? It's not. Top 1% of players do not balance make. Also SS is a tiny subset of the whole problem space, for example what does SS tell you about vehicular balance? Absolutely nothing, that's what. It appears that in the minmaxed play ground vehicles are a horrendous waste of resources, BTFOed by equally priced air that enjoys unmathed mobility without sacrificing anything for it. Is SS meta still about air, sundies, MAXes and HAs? SS is almost an entirely different game from the live play.