marginaleye
SOC-12
In Pocket Empires, only the "main world" of each star system matters. The basic assumption is that each star system is a single politico-economic entity, and that if the local Tech Level is high enough, the Resources of the rest of the star system are simply added to those of the main world (1 for each asteroid belt, and 1 for each gas giant -- I assume this is intended to primarily reflect utilization of the gas giants' satellites). There is, moreover, no distinction between ground-based and space-based Infrastructure. Since Traveller assumes cheap anti-gravity, and negligible interface costs, this makes sense.
In the 2300 AD universe, on the other hand, many star systems are politically divided, and interface costs are substantial (indeed, they almost always vastly exceed the cost of shipping, even across interstellar distances).
I propose that the best way to represent this would be to assume that "in-system space" be treated as a "world" which can be colonized -- "in-system space" would represent everything from factories and shipyards in Earth orbit, to a huge habitat at the Earth-Moon L5 point, to mining outposts in the asteroid belt. "In-system space" would have its own Universal World Profile, its own Resources, Infrastructure, Labor, and Culture scores, and thus its own Gross World Product in Resource Units.
"In-system space" would interact with its groundside "mother country" (and any other groundside entitles on other celestial bodies within the star system) as one world to another, via the normal PE trading, etc., rules (which would, of course, have to be "tweaked" to reflect drastically higher interface costs).
If a planet wanted to have orbital shipyards and factories, it would first have to colonize the "in-system space" of its star system, build up its Infrastructure, and improve its Starport. While they might remain parts of the same political entity, treating them as separate worlds would eliminate bookkeeping problems creating by having some facilities at the bottom of a gravity well, and others up in free interplanetary space.
In the 2300 AD universe, on the other hand, many star systems are politically divided, and interface costs are substantial (indeed, they almost always vastly exceed the cost of shipping, even across interstellar distances).
I propose that the best way to represent this would be to assume that "in-system space" be treated as a "world" which can be colonized -- "in-system space" would represent everything from factories and shipyards in Earth orbit, to a huge habitat at the Earth-Moon L5 point, to mining outposts in the asteroid belt. "In-system space" would have its own Universal World Profile, its own Resources, Infrastructure, Labor, and Culture scores, and thus its own Gross World Product in Resource Units.
"In-system space" would interact with its groundside "mother country" (and any other groundside entitles on other celestial bodies within the star system) as one world to another, via the normal PE trading, etc., rules (which would, of course, have to be "tweaked" to reflect drastically higher interface costs).
If a planet wanted to have orbital shipyards and factories, it would first have to colonize the "in-system space" of its star system, build up its Infrastructure, and improve its Starport. While they might remain parts of the same political entity, treating them as separate worlds would eliminate bookkeeping problems creating by having some facilities at the bottom of a gravity well, and others up in free interplanetary space.
