As George and others have noted, opinions vary, so it is a good time to state facts first, then offer comments on the facts afterwards.

1. In Bird's Chess, after 1. Ch3 Black has to defend against 2. Cxh7# since the h-pawn is undefended. Checkmate results if it is not defended, so there is clearly no arguing this point!

2. In Capablanca's chess, the push of White's d-pawn will reveal the attack of the Archbishop against Black's undfended i-pawn.

3. In "Wrong Bird's" chess, 1. Cc3 requires Black to respond to the threat against the undefended c-pawn.

4. In Gothic Chess, there are no such 1-move threats.

I think we can all agree to the above.

The question remains, is 1. Ch3 a "good move" in Bird's chess, since after defending the h-pawn, Black may be able to gradually build up pressure against the misplaced White chancellor. Same for the other variants mentioned.

I think we can all agree there is nothing wrong with 1. d3 or 1. d4 in Capablanca's chess, yet Black still must react against the i-pawn "attack". I don't think a natural move such as 1...Nh6 can be labeled "forced" since it is a move you might want to play anyway.

But, given all of the above, I think it is also safe to say that in the other variants, the scope for play in the opening is reduced as a direct result of the initial configuration of the board.

In this sense, we might loosely refer to Gothic Chess as "having the most balance."