Title says it all really. By simultaneous turns I mean that each turn is divided into a planning and a resolution phase. All players do the planning stage simultaneously where they make decisions but nothing actually happens and, once they all press end turn, all the actions are resolved simultaneously. In practice, the resolution would probably be done sequentially for things that don't matter, and would have some rules to break ties for things that do matter. The classic example of this is the game Diplomacy, or the recent Frozen Synapse game. Another would be Civ where all players simultaneously decide what to build, pick research, and tell units where to move. Once all players are done, then the research/building/moving happens at the same time. This would make no practical difference for research/building, but for moving you could have the situation where two units move into the same tile or one evades combat by moving out as another moves in. Note that this is different to simultaneous turns in Civ multiplayer as of now, which is more of an RTS clickfest. As I see it the advantages are: All the advantages of turn based strategy over real time (click speed doesn't matter, more thinking time, etc...) Less waiting around time in MP Far more thinking time for the AI in SP. This is especially true now that we all have 8 threads in our computers. An extra layer of strategy/tactics involved in anticipating what your opponent is currently doing. while the disadvantages are: Probably more difficult to program, especially the multi-threading ????? Am I missing something here? It just clearly seems like the better option. It combines the advantages of the Firaxis TBS and the Paradox RTS approaches.