[groundzeros2015]

It’s counterintuitive but I learned this best by playing RTS games. If you don’t spend money your opponent can outdo you on the map by simply spending their money. But the principle extends, everything you have doing nothing (buildings units etc) is losing. The most efficient process is to have all your resources working for you at all times.

[heavyset_go]

If you don't have savings to spend for a potential change of tactics, larger players, groups or players with different strategies can easily overtake you as your perfectly efficient economy collapses.

Going to also echo the comment that this isn't an RTS

[groundzeros2015]

> this isn't an RTS

Yep. RTS is a context where the principles are more true.

In real life you aren’t in a 1-1 matchup with competitive success criteria.

[KingMob]

It's why I wake up at 3am to make sure my agents aren't waiting on me :D

[LaGrange]

> It’s counterintuitive but I learned this best by playing RTS games. If you don’t spend money your opponent can outdo you on the map by simply spending their money.

OK, hear me out over here:

We are not in an RTS.

Edit: in real-world settings lacking redundancy tends to make systems incredibly fragile, in a way that just rarely matters in an RTS. Which we are _not in_.

[groundzeros2015]

Agreed. Real life is not an RTS. Optimizing computer or business resources - kind of like one.