That's stretching your definition of genres a bit too far. CT as a strategy game makes much sense as calling Call of Duty a RPG game because it has a leveling up system and level unlockables and added skills. Does that makes sense to you?

I've played all of them, except Yygdra Union. They are another sub-genre of strategy. What genre would you put Little King Story and Pikmin? Of course they are strategy. Do they play like Fire Emblem? To an extent yes, but they aren't in the same sub-genre. CT has the same notable idea of micromanagament that you would have in these games. Strategy games encompass many different timing methods, so you really can't judge it from that area. Strategy games also don't have to be strictly grid based, and don't have to revolve around missions. If you read the OP I explain this.

Edit: Actually are all Action games the same? No. There is sub-genres like Platformers, Fighters, Hack N Slash, etc.

No because that would be incorrect, and this isn't something we can all agree on and everybody is happy. JRPGs and WRPGs are NOT genres.

I read your entire OP, if you read my first post you'll see what I mean.

Again, you're stretching the genres a bit too far. Chrono Trigger doesn't have more micromanagement in combat than a FF game or even old style rpg games like Ultima, Crystalis, DQ and so on. You can say that because you feel that, but it doesn't even make it remotely true, your grasping at small straws trying to tie up and knot things of polar oposites.

Hell, even one of my favourite RPG's and games of all time, Parasite Eve, has tons more micromanagement and strategic outputs in combat than Chrono Trigger could ever have. Now you say that Fire Emblem and the other are a sub-genre. You're creating Sub-genres out of sub-genres. As if SRPG wasn't enough, you're trying to categorize them into another subgenre, as to fit into your theory.

As a scientist myself, I tell you, you're doing the complete oposite of what you should be doing to prove an hyphotesis. You're fabricating your own assumptions out of thin air, making connections and elations between things that barely do have. As I said, to use your logic, you'll have to consider other genre games to be RPG as well in most mechanics.
Once again, I use the COD exemple. You'll have for most of it's core gameplay time RPG elements, with leveling up, perk (skills) management, gun evolution (which is found in RPG games that use guns) and more others.

You're theory had sense at start, yet you lost it credibility when you tried to bring together games that have nothing to do with the genres that you're trying to create.

I would put most of those games under strategy as well. Some would go under Action-Adventure. These wouldn't be SRPGs. They are a different sub-genre called Turn Based RPG. I'm not creating any genres. Notice how I go about comparing Action-Adventure's and Adventure RPGs. I first as a question. Then I make an observation. Then I make a hypothesis from the data I observe. Then I form a conclusion. Whether I explain that conclusion or not is my choice after that. Now I did the same thing with the Strategy genre, but instead of asking all of those questions I just did that myself and found one where it works.

In taxonomy you start with a general question. Say for example: Is it a vertebrate or not? Then you form two groups. Those that are vertebrates and those that are invertebrates. Then inside each group you ask another slightly more specific question. You do this until you narrow it down to one answer.  I'm doing the same thing with RPGs, but I'm not getting as detailed, that would take forever. I see that you are studying Biochemistry, so you should know how taxonomy works, maybe I'm missing something, but I think I'm going about things right.

I won't disagree with you factually, because I said that you had a point in the start of your OP. I agree that RPG's should have a deeper separation between them, but because of that same separation, I don't agree with the choices you gave for most RPG's on your list.
In my field of expertise we separate proteins, molecules, enzymes, etc. for their function, complexity, nomenclature and specification.
One protein can be exactly identical as another one, and have the same functional group, yet they belong to an entire different group, because their actual functionality is different, even if in the surface they look the same.
This happens in a similar fashion on the gaming world. On the surface you've got games that have similar mechanics, but that in their core they are completely different, thus they don't fit in the same group. That's what i'm trying to say about CT as a strategy game. While it does have micromanagement mechanics and turn based actions similar to a strategy game, in it's core is much more than that, it doesn't fit in that group, as well as a Fire Emblem or a Shining Force does.

Then let me ask. What is the core gameplay of a strategy game? How does that differ from Chrono Trigger? What about other games that don't fit in the group "as well" yet are categorized as such, like Pikmin and Little King Story. I would What general genre would you list Chrono Trigger under? What is the core gameplay of that genre? Even if it doesn't it doesn't fit "as well" I think that is the closest thing it would fit with. It definitely is more "strategy" than "role playing". Or at least it fits the definition better.

Much much fail in your thoughts ... first of all we have to consider all game elemets if we want to categorize in genres b/c u see a classic Adventure game is nothing without it's story rly ... no one cares about the ill logic puzzels it's all about the story. Now no one can blame you for beeing confused about the genres. The main "problem" is that for generating a stronger feeling of progress you have the RPG elements in nearly every game so it's realy hard to consider which game is an RPG an which not. On a side note the genre Action-Adventure is crapiest bull crap of crap crap b/c if someone say to me this game is an Action-Adventure is generealy have no idea what this game lookes like. Just compare Metroid Prime to Super Metroid or Ico .... now there are similarities but they are also shared by other genres.

Now from what i know there are some  core elements which define genres and allthough i can't remember all of them here are some which could be interesting:

Adventure: Story

Shooter: Level Design

RPG:Character Progression

Jump'n'Run: Player Progression

RTS: Level Design

These are the primary things which drive me to play on in the corresponding genre. So for the debate: RPG vs Strategy. You have to admidt that there are some elements of strategy in the RPG genre like water is good vs fire etc but are these things what drive you through the game? Are realy these little strategic moments the force behind the game? Or are you interested in maxing your character out, exploring his story or creating your own story with this character to make him the brave warrior or the bright wizzard he could be? Therefore you have mostly different paths you can go in true RPGs. For example the spheroboard in FF10 or the different classes in Secret of Mana 3. In game which only get some RPG elements for the better overall feeling there is simply just one possible way or the cusomization options are not very broad like for example in Batman:AA (you eventually just get all the stuff) or Infamous.

Now strategy games generaly involve very little of overall advancement. There are tiers, but progress is not permament and in the next level you have to start from the beginning. The most important thing in strategy games are the levels, that's partly why it's so important to have fog of war. The player have to explore the map, the player have to be surprised and awarded for exploration. Like killing creep camps in WC3 to get items or exploring a hidden mineral field in C&C:RA. Now ofc the battle is big part of RTS but most of the time it's building base adopting to the Level Design and to new units(yours and of your enemy) and gaining an edge in resources.

i agree with you more or less

but my god is zelda different than ultima man

wow

I will ignore the bolded.   I'm going to address some things. Firstly, you cannot have more than one factor when classifying something. It is always a question of "Is it X?" or "Is it not X?". Then you split it from there.  By having more than one variable you will make it very subjective, and it would make the point of classification moot. Otherwise if somebody found that the gameplay of 2 games is similar, but the story of one is more similar to another what genre would they categorize it as? Video Games are categorized by their gameplay, and that is why I only mentioned gameplay. 

Now lets get to the point of what is the core gameplay of what genre. The only thing I'm going to do here is ask two questions, so I can be clarified on what you mean. 1. Do you think that Little King's Story and Pikmin are Strategy games? 2. If not, what genre are they of or share most in common with?