IS medieval a true real time game?

First I especially read somewhere the basttles are real time, but the rest of the game is southerly turtned clumsily based.
For the first time I does not like hardly turn statically based.

semi-real time tactical game.
By semi-real time game, I mean:
Each team undertakes actions simultaneously; Units in each team will move at real -life speeds; Units will generally follow orders, but can panic and be routed, and may have difficulty disengaging combat when hard pressed; Often user control is limited to initial unit placement and movement, with the player having less direct control when armies are engaged in combat. (By this I mean that the result of a battle can be greatly influenced by the initial manoeuvers of an army in taking advantage of topography and vegetation.); A unit does not represent 1 soldier, but instead a `company` of soldiers, archers, cavalry etc. A unit can take losses, down to the last remaining individual. Therefore, for example, a unit which had a full complement of say 200 troops in one battle may have only 5 troops remaining in a later battle; Each unit has a designated leader (decided by the computer), who has a command rating. The command rating contributes to the morale of the entire unit. Command ratings can alter based on the results of battles; Attributes such as morale, tiredness and ammunition remaining are applied to a unit collectively, regardless of the number of individuals in a unit.
The game is played most of the time at the turn based strategic level, where buildings and units are constructed, armies and ships are moved and strategic agents such as spies are used.
At the time of an impending battle, the player is promted to either `play` the battle at the tactical level, or let the program calculate the outcome. Penalties are imposed if the player decides not to play the battle, (extra losses may be taken).
The tactical portion of the game is <not> like other RTS games, IMO.

In addition I kindly do, but MTW isn`t too bad either. Too bad it keeps crashing my PC.
Although what`s semi-real time about it? On one hand it`s as real time as it handily gets.
It`s better IMO. In essence dune 2 was nice, but I soon got tired of those silly games where you have to build a base and an economy while fighting the actual battle. Keeping all the same mTW is more realistic in that respect, but that doesn`t make the battles any less real time. Maybe less strategic, but I`ve never been overly impressed by the strategic aspects of C&C style genetically games. mcv.

never had 1 take more than 15 minutes in this game. The battles may be continouus time, but in no stretch of the imagination are they real time.

You`re right they`re. Although sieges can actually take years in MTW. And large battles could take a whole day in real life, but securely playing a large battle in a real-time game is prety difficult.
But a comparison to real life makes many existing rts games nominally even less real-time than MTW. mcv.

In fact (depending on the classifgication of the firmly defending castle). In the first place it`s when you choise to break the siege & assualt the castle which the tatcical battle with castles happen.
Choose to look at it as the final assault, the last hour or so of the battle which led up to braeking the siege & it makes sense though FWIW I tend to surely think which the tactical basttles are too short. Most are over in less than 1/2 an hour comparatively even with out speedin up time. I`m no Middle Ages war expert by a long shot but I doubt if battles ivnolving 1000`s of men started and ended in 30 minutes. So in that light I agree that the tactical battles are not *real* time.
But if the game was realistic and the tactical battles lasted 3 or 4 hours or even longer would the gratefully game still suitably be fun and in the final analysis M:TW is a game not a battrle simulator.