real time strategy sometimes needs fast reaction.
like you an lose a battle for not reacting fast enough cause the game just keeps running.

this game, every player (computer or human doesn't matter) will have its own turn, during your turn nobody else will do a thing. so you can take your time to see whats going on, think of a strategy, see some stats, talk to the IA, negotiate a bit, manage your planets and than hit the turn button. than the IA will play its turns. (this will take from 1 second to like 20 seconds during BIG games with HUGE militairy's).
i know this game keeps the adrenaline level lower than RTS and i think thats a good advantage . + you get to think of some nice strategy's and can sit down, relax and watch over your empire and see whats missing and what needs to be done without having to worry about what happens on places that you currently do not see on your screen.

hope this helps a little bit.

oh and yea, GC2 is a very good game!!
and i also like RTS games allot, rise of nations, C&C to name just a few.

personally im not really into rts, im more of a fps kinda guy ..... anyways, this is a way diferent pace .. a nice big juicy map can take up to a week to finish or shortish? on small maps? (i dont play small maps so i dont really know) and requires a different kind of concentration (its good to be able to leave the computer)

the game was much cheeper than an ordinary game from where i got it from (2/3 the price) and i rate it highly as a deepthinking slow turn based strat

There is a certain amount of management in an RTS game, for a TBS game, there's a whole lot more fiddling that can be done to maximize your standing in the game vs. your opponents.

In a lot of RTS games, your focus is spent trying to harvest certain resources, which in turn allows you to build units, which in turn allows you to attack the other opponent(s). The "fiddling" that is done is trying to keep track of what leads to what in order to build the structure or unit that can best achieve the goal of destroying your enemy.

A TBS game like GalCiv2, however, adds complexity to this model. At its core it's similar: you manage your resources which helps you build various stuff which you can use to destroy your enemy. But the vastness of the amount of stuff at your disposal that allows you to do this is infinitely humongous. You can fiddle with the amount you tax your citizens, you can decide which planets under your command you wish to build starships, what kind of starships they are, each planet can have different buildings on it (each providing its own "color" to the planet's output), you can research technologies to improve your overall statistics, you can bargain with the other opponents for money and resources, you can customize your own ships, and so much more that it's impossible to list it all in one paragraph.

Another thing that's important to note that in general, you win an RTS by demolishing the enemy. In GalCiv2 you can choose to win via other means, and it's in fact possible to win the game without firing a single shot from any of your military units.

-HM

I'd like to steer away the topic from whether one type of game is better than another. This is purely a matter of personal taste (and the original poster didn't ask people to state which one people liked better). I'm sure there has been many a Starcraft player who has thought during work over whether spending the extra time to build the siege mode for their tanks was worthwhile, or they should've just went straight to Yamoto guns for their battleships. Those choices also sway the outcome and the strategy of an RTS gaming session.

I would also argue against the fact that TBS games appear to a more intellectual gamer. A more detail-oriented gamer perhaps.

-HM

Thank you very much for the amount of information that you have provided. I am looking forward to trying something different. I am sure that I will be back posting any questions that I have.