A lot of games let you automate building by either using AI governors or setting/scripting preferences. I don't know that a lot of pausing is always necessary, there's some pretty clever implementations out there.

I also prefer turn based, but GalCiv 2 is already a recent, decent 4X Space Strategy Turn Based Game. It's simply that I don't want ever to become under time pressure, at least not in SP mode. However like in HoI, where you can pause at any time, its okay, its like many infitinely small turns where you can decide for every turn to stop. That's fine too.
Homeworld or Sins of a Solar Empire were much to stressful for me.

I'm absolutely fascinated by it. My favourite space 4X was Space Empires 4 Deluxe before I played Distant Worlds. DW plays sort of like realtime Space Empires 5.
Before I played DW I also thought that space 4X games had to be turnbased because there's so much to do but DW have a very good control interface and decent automation. One of the best features is that when you click a screen to, say, build new ships it pause the game automatically.
Sins of a solar empire also show that you can make a realtime space 4X. I agree that it's a light strategy game, more like a regular rts but it still is a 4X game.

Then it is antithetical to everything you are trying to argue for, being that you have no appropriate justification for the blatant remarks you have posed, and only rely on personal bias.
Which, in itself I have nothing against. But, maybe I didn't make myself blunt enough in the previous post: there is still a subtle distinction between expressing disdain for a certain genre, and making a molehill out of even the basic trivialities. I could care less if you were to stand atop a mountain and yell about how much you dislike the 4X RTS genre, but your asinine claims about how "the developers fucked it up" despite having absolutely no knowledge of the intentions of the developers, or the direct parallel of the quality of a game and its gameplay mechanics, don't make any sense to me. You speak of logic, like it was ever in any of your posts at all, yet apart from instinct, what do you know of the game that the rest of us who pre-ordered don't, to know how it is going to turn out?
Of course, perhaps your foretold prediction, with a double emphasis on the bolded term, would come true.
There's nothing wrong with not liking 4X-RTS games. It's based on this rationale i.e. freedom of expression that I pride myself in the ability to beg to differ, amongst many gaming peers, that Starcraft 2 is not the next holy grail of strategy gaming.
I do think it is appropriate to have an open mind even when someone comes in and argues against my initial beliefs like a know-it-all. I'm not even in the beta, but if somebody can tell me, with the utmost passion, how the game's just not going to work out, I'd be interested to hear, provided there is sufficient evidence instead of having "past experiences" and sweeping statements masqueraded as "logic".

I would like to get this game, but I am waiting for a sale to take place. To order a disk version is $60.84 with shipping which is too costly for me personally.

I am not sure whom you want to address with the second paragraph. However, I agree completely with the first one.
For the initial topic of this thread. I like 4X space strategy games. I might try it out, maybe it will work.
For the discussion if real time of turn based is more appropriate, I prefer turn based, reason being that I do not want to become under time stress in single player mode (as already mentioned). For me turn based includes real time with a always present pause function because then its like infitely small steps. So the important feature about turn based is for me the ability to pause. Actually I think that this in general can emphasize strategy over tactics.
However for the game of this thread it might still work also for me. Who knows.

Not it isn't. You just say it is. That's not the same thing. It's also just your own opinion that I have no appropriate justification for what I say. There is really no reason to repeat the same things again, read my previous post.
Yes, only that I dont' consider them as "basic trivialities", if I did I wouldn't mind of them enough to type a single word about them. Again, just because you say something it doesn't mean it is true.
Well, my "asinine" claims (love the word) are based on previous experience on the genre. The same reason I know I don't want to get shot in the face, although I have never been before. It's based on previous experience with other subjects (well, technically objects but yeah) and knowing the results each time are not going to be as good as if it was turn based. (the 4X in space, not the shooting)
Yeah. (let's just pretend you didn't try to mock me here, again)
I have already told you. You just have to either accept what I say (not going to happen I think), or buy the game and play a huge galaxy/game setting and see how it is for yourself.
You might enjoy pausing the game every few seconds or do or don't do something important in game because you missed the opportunity to react in the time given or because 100 things happened at the same minute and you missed a few of them.
That's good for you. I do also know that I don't like this type of play and yes it is based on both past experiences and logic whether you like it or not.

Again, how do you explain the RTS genre in general? Or the evolution of gaming?
People used to think that we could never have RTSs. "How am I suppose to control an entire battlefield in real-time?" "How am I supposed to manage the hitpoints of every single unit?" "How am I supposed to calculate how long it will take for my units to complete their move order every time I issue one?" and the like. But that genre has worked out pretty well.
It started with relatively small RTSs (Came MUCH later, but I think Starcraft only let you select 9 units at a time). But it evolved. By having basic AI, we could leave units as a "garrison" as it were whose job was to just sit there and try not to die immediately if attacked. Obviously the player would probably want to go help before they DID die, but whatever.
Then it evolved more. We have games like Supreme Commander where it actually plays more like a 4x than anything else (research, queue up unit production, send them to attack or defend locations, etc). We have games like Company of Heroes where the unit-AI is largely smart enough to handle itself for anything short of an offensive (and even then, they do a pretty good job).
So let's look at the 4x game. We have the ability to set waypoints and rallypoints for the purpose of movement. So build units, and have them immediately head to the frontlines. We used to have to demolish old buildings to make new ones. Now? They just auto-upgrade (either after pushing a button or finishing research). Even the incredibly painful ninety-million-sliders things are getting phased out. It is all about streamlining stuff.
Hell, in GalCiv2 (which came out quite a while ago), I generally can ignore systems that aren't heavy-duty manufacturers after I queue up the buildings I want them to use. They upgrade to new tech on their own, so they just become happy sources of research or money. And, after setting my economy to a wartime one (ie. build an endless swarm of ships to smash against defenses), I don't even need to check on the factory planets.
So why couldn't that be made into a real-time 4x game? Capture a planet, set how I want it to be built up, move on. Keep garrisons of ships to react to incursions, and focus on the parts of the empire that need my focus.
Again, the problem is you are imagining MOO2 or SE4 as real-time. Open your mind and think in terms of how the genre evolved.
Oh, for another example: "We can't add z-axis. Players are already busy watching left and right for nazis. Having to look at ceilings or platforms for imps will just make things WAY too confusing and difficult". Or "We can't make the player manage the power levels on their ship. They are already busy shooting at space cats, do they have the time to concentrate on boosting power to shields or guns?"

DUDE, I am not against RTS. Relax.
Supreme Commander doesn't play like a 4X game. I don't even know how you could see that it does.
As for the rest, if you still don't get what I am saying, just forget it. No reason to argue.

Oy. I am trying to explain that strategy games CAN work in real-time (they already do :p). No reason the 4x can't.
Wiki defines a 4x game as "a genre of strategy video game in which players control an empire and 'explore, expand, exploit, and exterminate'". And now that I suddenly remember what the four Xs stand for, that IS an RTS, but whatever.
My point with Supreme commander was that it actually emphasizes "empire"-level control and just building units and only taking control at key battles. Sort of like how a real-time 4x would work.

Good for you. And still, the rest of your post does not justify the inflammatory and somewhat libelous remarks made against a game or developer - genre not withstanding - you have no knowledge about apart from that which is summarized on the website; and still, you continue to justify your post with a feint of you knowing the game well enough to decide it's qualities. Are you from Blind Mind Studios?
As for the rest of your post, I'm not even sure where to begin. It is my opinion that your posts are irrational and highly influenced (and emoted) by your personal bias; true I don't think I ever denied this, so I don't know where you got the idea that my posts are anything more than my own opinions. But, it's comfuckingpletely different from me telling you how wonderful this game is - which I have not since my first post of this thread - as if I already played the game, as opposed to me telling you to rant within reason because you are way over your head about one single game that's still in closed beta, simply because you don't like the genre.
Man, I haven't tried Wendy's before, but apparently their burgers don't look very appealing, like what's up with all that brown sauce and those pickles. Yeah, the next time my friends wanna eat at Wendy's, I'm going to yell at the manager and tell her (or him) how much Wendy's sucks, despite me never having eaten a single burger there before.

None of the post above (or the paragraph below this) was directed at you that's for sure.
There is a famine of turn-based games, I agree, but TB or RT to me doesn't matter as long as the product I paid for is enjoyable. I am still more biased towards TB, but even if I didn't favour it, I'm not going to rip apart a single game - indie no less, where the developers have made a firm stance that the game's going to be cheap and affordable, with no DRM - solely due to my disdain for the genre.

lowyhong
Ok seriously this needs to stop now. You still don't get it, I am done trying to explain it.
Good luck.
of course it CAN (could) work in real time. Just not at the scale it wants to work. Sins kinda work, though if Sins is an actual 4X game is another discussion. Rebellion (star wars) kinda worked, but not fully. you had to constantly changing speed later in the game in large galaxy settings.
Supremacy (virgin mastertronic) worked fine, but you didn't have thousands of systems to work with and hundreds or thousands of ships and you didn't have other little things like diplomacy etc.
It's not that this game won't run or be playable. But having to pause or change the speed a million times per game, then that is a clear message the game required turn based system, not real time just because it attracts more people.
(yeah yeah I know)

You're right, I don't. How you think your hate for RTS mechanics in a 4X game validates your wrath towards this game still escapes me. Nor do you need to explain further since I think everyone else can see your posts for themselves.

Well, if the fundamental concept can work (and we agree there), there is no real limit to scale, if the game mechanics and UI are streamlined enough.
What are the Unit counts in Supreme Commander? Considerably larger than anyone ever expected back when they were playing Warcraft 1. The jump is being made pretty rapidly with this, but it could work. No way to know how much micromanagement will be needed until release (or a demo).