I used to play RTS games exclusively, and a lot of the fun really comes from envisioning a strategy and forcing it through to the conclusion - bonus points for winning. Those last cluster fuck moments are often just that - pros can keep a handle on it but if you're playing anywhere else most often you're basically cycling through unit types and making sure they're shooting the right enemy rather than making significant longer term strategic choices. The individual overall strategy at play was decided when you started playing and from there it basically turns into a question of picking right and adjusting if you picked wrong.The "strategy" is basically the resource collection/management and knowing which units to have and where to send them at which times; clicking even 384 times a second can't compensate for not knowing what you're doing. I've always likened it to the video of this kid juggling and solving Rubik's Cubes: immensely impressive feat, but why the hell would you???
Either way, RTSs always leads to confusing, cluster-fuckery in the end, and it amazes me that anyone can competently manage it all and for FUN nonetheless.
Now that I'm older and slowed down a lot (,and honestly enjoy games where you walk through the countryside delivering packages) I've been on the hunt for a more realistic RTS. When I say realistic I don't mean "WW2 down to the nuts and bolts", I'm talking about information availability, order delays, incorrect information and so on.
I'd play red alert 3 again, war bears and all, and still love it but what I want is a game where units can't react immediately to orders because it takes a while to hear and understand it. Or where the information you get is communicated by people under fire and is therefore not necessarily totally accurate.
Something super heavy on the strategy without going turn based on me.