No.
The only reason you feel this way is because you don't play competitively. I speak from both sides of the spectrum in that I play highly competitive games and I also LOVE the games you speak about.
1. Campers - Camping is NOT a viable strategy in a highly competitive game. Why? Because you won't have resources to compete. Camping only works in situations like Mount Olympus where crates are on and you don't get rushed.
How do you defeat campers? Usually through the air or just brute force. Try getting a massive economy (since you have the whole map) and controlling as much area as possible and then surprising him with kirovs or tons of rocketeers to break through his camp. It's rather easy for me to beat a camper, as I am experienced, but it will be difficult for you to do the same. Just practice.
My game on Mount Olympus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAPLOfLAb6c&list=UUBkmpxxL9FlHTiErpRUAYbA
This is how you beat campers. Although, this guy wasn't AS good as the best campers are, it still represents a method.
2. Money maps - Not all money maps are the same, and each has a different personality to it. For instance, I love beach frontier. Where you say it 'defeats the purpose of the game,' I say it enhances a major quality of the game. Instead of worrying about money, you worry purely on building as much as possible - navy, army, air army, defense. And then attacking in every which way.
Whereas a game like funny big map brings you nonstop action from the get-go, However, it's not my cup of tea. Other games that limit you to just tanks and defense are also not my favorite, but I just don't play them.
This is the beauty of beach front: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alwWfujrawg&list=UUBkmpxxL9FlHTiErpRUAYbA&index=8
To be honest, I have more fun playing games like this ^^ then I do 'competing' nowadays.
MY suggestion to you is go play quick match and compete. You surely sound like someone who wants to compete.
Edited by XXxPrePxX, 28 September 2014 - 01:03 PM.