Station Construction + Fleet Operations

The idea of habitats supporting or limiting government stations is pretty cool, and sensible. I would assume that habitats themselves would build more habitats, modelling population growth. If that were the case, then perhaps trade/system stability etc could modify the growth rate. Thus healthy, wealthy systems could grow faster.

Thus healthy, wealthy systems could grow faster.

This should happen naturally, in that healthy systems will have more stations survive. And more construction ships will survive. Thus the healthy systems will "fill in" faster. Habitats do build new habitats.

If that simulation is not sufficent, then the "fleet points" idea can be used. Basically a station generates X number of points per turn. Extra points are profits and are used to (slowly) purchase station modules. If the station must spend the points on repairs, defense fleets, or paying off pirates, then none are left over for profits. Healthy systems will have "fat" stations with many modules, and poor systems will have "lean" stations.

It could even be that the number of "points" generated per turn is based on the number of modules. Thus a feedback loop happens. Wealthy stations have more processing equipment, so earn more funds, so generate more profits, so purchase more processing equipment. Stations would have a maximum number of modules. Sabotage would involve destroying a station module with mining charges or something.

It could be that an "abandond" station is one that has zero modules attached. Taking over an abandond station would involve docking a prefab module.

Having habs generate points, especially based by module, seems to naturally follow through to limiting government. Just have the government "tax" a certain % of points from each allied hab and/or non-military station. These points, along with any acqured via military/privateer ops, owuld be all that the government would have for operations, period.

This would not only be more realistic but would also allow the simulation of government types more directly. In other words, a gov't that taxes too high a % will see slower growth - or even shrinkage - of its tax base but will possibly have more operations points for the defense of their citizens, much like any sterotypical socialist state. Conversely, a gov't. that has lower taxes has a good chance of seeing faster growth BUT (especially if smaller) might be caught flat-footed by an invasion...

This also would lend itself to changing fortunes in a government. If a war is growing (or just going badly), pirates are tearing a system apart, or what-have-you, the goverment (at least systemwide if not factionwide) would have to raise taxes to pay for defense. If unchecked, that destructive cycle closely models Earth-based examples throughout history.