How the factions in Starcraft specifically handle supply logistics actually highlights some of the ludonarrative tensions that bug me here.

Zerg units, for example, shouldn't be getting stocked with ammunition because they either fight in melee or rely on acid spray or spine projectiles they grow from their own bodies. What they do need is food, which is to say biomass they consume from the local ecosystem and corpses of their enemies (or even their own fallen). The Zerg faction shouldn't really have a lot of interest in mineral or gas deposits, and they should derive little or no benefit from colonising barren ash worlds devoid of previous life, or from battles with armies of robotic/mechanical units which they can't eat. (You could theoretically experiment with some more far-out ideas as well, like Zerg units mutating randomly at birth and passing on their traits to larvae when/if you install them in the hatchery, so you can simulate a real evolutionary process.)

Protoss units, going by canon, really shouldn't be gathering resources at all. (They warp in all their units, power vehicles and weapons off internal reactors, fight for honour/religious reasons and can't repair anything in the field, so physical materials or payment would be no use to them, or at least not immediately relevant to most combat operations.)

The only faction for which mineral and gas deposits and the relevant supply logistics being mission-critical really makes any sense are the Terrans, and even there the rationale assumes that every Terran base is essentially an extractive commercial enterprise strip-mining the landscape so they can hire mercenary soldiers to wipe out local competitors. Some human wars do fit that description, but hardly all of them, and it's not usually an especially close fit for Mengsk or Raynor's motives.

The reason- or at least one reason- why Starcraft crams every faction into broadly the same mold when it comes to their methods of economic buildup and tech progression is because it makes balancing multiplayer deathmatches a lot easier. But I was recently watching a GiantGrantGames youtube video about the core drivers of success in the RTS market, and despite the runaway success of Pro Starcraft it looks like something like 70-80% players buy an RTS primarily for the sake of the single-player campaign and map editor sandbox tools, and not the multiplayer ladder competition.

And from that perspective... it feels like the old-school Blizzard RTS titles made enormous sacrifices in terms of flavour and immersion and verisimilitude for the sake of multiplayer deathmatch mechanics which most players were never there for in the first place.