I suppose it really matters if we're supposed to consider the battles in with this or not. I'm assuming yes. Battles can lengthen turns considerably, and I prefer to play them all out unless there's some reason not to (like it'll be boring because one side is a 10:1 favorite). So a typical turn for me is probably in the 5-ish minute realm for management, but then there can be battles on top of that to make it so much longer.
I'm also with Kobal2fr about the turn length - the early ones go incredibly fast. Once you play early time period a few times it becomes completely obvious what to build to kick-start your economy, and you just sorta do it naturally. The middle turns come into all the less obvious choices. You've also usually got only a few rebel fights to deal with in say the first 30 turns as you grab up all the rebel provinces, where later on factions attack you out of the blue and you can count on pretty much constant war. That IMO is what really bogs the mid-years down - all the fighting of battles.
Anyway that should give some idea for now. I'll see if I can remember to record my turns and the passage of time when I next play to see how much I'm actually getting done, and how quickly. Should be pretty revealing.
Of course I'm not really worried if I discover it's taking me forever: time and progress are measured entirely differently when you're on the battlefield, which IMO is how it's possible to play such time-consuming campaigns and still enjoy them the whole way. The duality of the game in campaign map vs battle map is so great that it actually creates interest where you would otherwise become bored of either one independently. You finish a battle... but suddenly, you have to rule! You make executive decisions, and now you have to defend your territory. They're so vastly different that playing one makes you appreciate the other anew when you finally get back to it.
Bookmarks