I prefer turn-based strategy games, although I like real-time ones as well. The problem is that the whole term "real-time strategy game" is essentially an oxymoron. Games like Starcraft and Command and Conquer are awesome games, but they're entirely focused on TACTICS, not strategy. It's all about who can build the most units in the fastest amount of time; given two players of roughly equal skill level, whoeever can build fastest is almost always going to come out on top. Compare that to a game like Civilization, where there there are economic, cultural, and diplomatic paths to victory - not just military.

RTS games definitely work better for a quick online match, of course.

Real Time

I really enjoy both myself.

RTS

If you're talking about two military forces engaging each other, then you're talking about tactics, not strategy. Actual military strategy has years of pre-planning which is further analyzed over the course of days, weeks and months after the conflict is committed to.

Really, no game is comparable to real military strategy, and almost nobody would want it to be.

Sorry for the tactical/strategy semantic split, but there are real-time tactical games, and I find them pretty enjoyable actually.

RTS and TotalWar

RTS for sure. Warcraft 3 FTW.

TBS - Civilization, Master Of Orion, Master of Magic, Fire Emblem, Final Fantasy Tactics, Nippon Icchi games

RTS - Homeworld, Total Annihilation, Warcraft 2 (don't even suggest any Blizzard RTS games after Warcraft 2, I *hate* them)

RTS just look at AoE.

I enjoy both, played lots of both. I just like RTS games a bit better because they are usually faster. But I always bring Lords of the Realm 2 with me when I travel because it is a good excuse to sit in front of the computer for a while and try to win a map.