OP is wasting his time, on the Codex it's a tradition that you prove your mettle through hating RWTP. At the same time, you ought to wax lyrical about TB. Or else.
In reality, both approaches have their own strengths. TB allows for incomparable granularity, one action can be given far more subtlety. We see this with things like aimed shots at body parts, spending action points for increased hit chances, very precise movement. TB lends itself very well to setting up intricate combos where several carefully planned actions can lead to a tide changing result.
RWTP, on the other hand, handles far better scenarios where improvisation and tempo are crucial. Simulatnaeous resolution and differing completion time of various actions allow for not only setting up your own plans but also for far more effective disruption of others. You don't need to implement specific hacks to allow for interruption (like 'ready vs' etc), it emerges naturally. As the numbers of enemies increase, the virtues of RWTP become more impactful. And vice versa, as the number of enemies decrease the subtleties of TB become more engaging.
Ultimately, the crucial difference lies in the fact that TB has far far longer history of design than RWTP. TB was being developed at tabletop, while RWTP could emerge only with ascent of computers. If we compare number of system and games that were developed with TB in mind vs TB, it's not a surprise that there are far more good TB games. Add to this the fact that many RWTPs are TB masquerading as RWTP and the already huge discrepancy grows. It doesn't mean that TB is inherently superior, just that it is easier to implement and more tried-and-tested solutions have been established for it.
In fact, I would argue that the only games that fully embraced the consequences of going RTWP are BG games.
Actually, it's not in BG games, just in IWD games. One of the reasons why IWDs are shit.
The kiting has to be the worst
Because it's much better when units just stand around waiting to be killed? Kiting is prevalent because it's a reasonable and natural tactic. The problem is not the fact that people attempt kiting, but the fact that logical mitigating factor are not implemented like different movement speed and ability to hobble or pind down opponents. And that makes kiting automaticaly succesful, no matter circumstances.
But compare TOEE complexity with the other inferior RTWP D&D variants
Can I dependably disrupt spellcasting in ToEE and build my tactics around it? No. Do I have to fear being disrupted by opponents? Not really.
Do I have to be wary of backstabbing enemies attacking from the shadows? Not really.
Do I have to first peel away magical defenses from spellcaster before turning him into pincushion? Not really.
Do I have to be wary of morale breaking points? Not really.
So where is this complexity in combat dynamics?
I have played through ToEE for the first time with one PC and few hirelings (and you're supposed to use a full party? A joke.) and the game was piss easy. Even a wizard with a reach weapon and familiar can solo initial areas, just cast obscuring mist and have familiar tank. In general, ability to trip and reach weapons allow for abuse of AoOs. Which is fun, but easy, far easier than BGs.
About kiting, its more a flaw of the AI than it is of the RTWP
As adressed before, kiting is a natural tactic that should be embrace by the system with the sensible countermeasures implemented.
As a kid i liked RTWP more so i played a lot of them and looking back the combat sucks
When you were a kid you played these games for the first time, now you know them by heart. It's obvious combat won't surprise or excite you. It's the same for TB games.