OK, so I've probably clocked about 15 hours in the game, and I'm at the point where I am getting more curious about certain essential (but somewhat opaque) aspects of the game. 

Specifically, last night I was starting to pay more attention to resource management.

I grasp the concept that you're supposed to claim the resource nodes (so they can start churning out resources for you).

I also grasp the concept that you can build refineries and "boosters" to increase the speed of resource production.

And I do understand that there is a capacity for resource storage, which can be upgraded with Quanta.

It also seems readily apparent that when I build things, I spend resources (metal and radioactives).

This much seems perfectly clear.

Now for the more vague stuff.

I am not 100% sure whether, after I build a unit, it continues to cost resources -- but I am pretty sure that once the unit is built, it is no longer consuming any resources.

So I am going to proceed on the assumption that only construction of units costs resources, and that there is no maintenance cost. 

So given these parameters, I am left wondering about the strategic significance of resource consumption and storage.

The tutorial addressed these matters only a little... and didn't leave me with a sense that I fully understood the "big picture."

I'm just trying to think it all through...

I am wondering, for instance, if it matters when resources go negative. 

I played a level last night where I built a whole bunch of extra armories, so that I could produce more units faster. 

I noted that my resources eventually went negative, but the construction bars were still incrementing gradually.

So is the "negative" simply indicative that I have spent my storage, and am using more metal than I am producing at each moment?

Does this actually matter in a strategic sense?

I mean, you always want the maximum quantity of resources you can get your hands on -- so you can produce as much as possible as quickly as possible.

But, once you go negative, which seems to be inevitable (because you always want to produce MORE), then it doesn't seem like it will matter how you manage the resources...

In theory:

... the resources are being accumulated at the same fixed rate... 

... the ships still cost the same...

..  the game tries to make production happen at an optimal maximum rate (essentially a fixed speed)...

So in a negative resource scenario, which seems to be quite common if I am trying to take optimal advantage of my resources, is there really a difference if I have three armories or seven?  

I mean, it would seem to me that if I want to build 50 ships and I am at zero or negative resources...

... the same amount of production would still be happening each moment of the game...

... the production points would essentially be distributing equally among armories... 

... every available point of production would be consumed at each "click" of the game...

... the total resource cost of the 50 ships would would still be the same, whether I produce them three at a time, or ten at once...

... so the 50 ships should still take the same amount of time to produce regardless of quantity of factories...

... right?   

Granted...

If I do produce three at a time, I might see a couple of ships sooner...

BUUUT if I produce ten at a time, then when they finally pop out, MORE ships will appear...

... and I will ultimately have the same number, in the same time to complete, as if I just kept producing three at a time?

 Hrmm... Really not sure on any of this... just speculating...

Anyhow... would appreciate some insights into importance of resource strategies. 

 Just not quite seeing the depth yet.