The problem with your dynamic starting conditions, will inevitably lead to the overwhelming frequancy of "map screws". For your idea to truly rid the RTS arena of build orders, the dynamic start, or what have you will have to be to an extent randomized. Or what is the point?
So, what happens if as Greek all you get is a kataskopos a hero and a hoplite, but your opponent get's a full amount of villagers, for instance?
Your automatically at a disadvantage. It may be your idea of fun to lose/win because of such a gross inequality, but it sure isn't mine, and I'd venture to say that most other players would agree with that.
Also, along with your complaint of BO corrupting RTS, all games suffer from this phenomenon. It's called trying to win. In sports games, football in specific, if your opponent is weak against the rush but strong versus the pass, then what do you do? Run the ball down his throat. In first person shooters, if your good at sniping, are you going to run and find a short range melee type of weapon? Or are you going to try and find that sniper rifle and take out your enemies from a distance?
It's the same in RTS, if your good at a certain thing, and it gets you results that you are happy with, then why not do it? It doesn't make any sense to try different tactics that aren't going to get you anything, especially if your goal is to win. I like trying odd ball strategys as much as anyone, but I'm not going to use it when I truly am trying to win, it's just dumb.
Developers instititute certain "equalities" into the game, so that when a game is decided, it is usually decided by the skill of a player. Not his randomized place on the map. For there to be fair play in RTS there must be some sort of standardized play.
Just my two cents and I'm sure these points have been made in your other threads, but there are soo many posts in those things, that I just skipped over it, and came here :P.
I am Become Death; Destroyer of Worlds.