Well, the way I see it, the greatest problem for multi-player games are the different timezones.
Players that don't contribute / enough can be sorted out fairly quickly, but waiting for the other guy - be it gm or player - who is on another quarter of the globe, just slows down the pace extremely. Like just now, I posted an action in flaborts 100 tile run - about 12 hours after his last post. Couldn't have done it any sooner. And those 12 hours, are still a quite good time.
Truth be told, after trying multi-player games twice, I don't think there will be a third try anytime soon. Well, that or suggestion games just sit much better with me.
Yes, well, I've lost far more than half my players. I'm more concerned with how to get more.
Well then, I flew over close to the last 10 pages of your united assembly game. Can't say that I read it thorougly, nor that my advice has much worth to it, so take all that follows with a grain of salt.
To put it simply, it seems like a game where players bicker with each other over... stuff. If they bicker good enough, or get favourable deals with their peers, the situation of their choosen faction gets better.
The concept itself - political intrigue - is not bad, but if I were to compare it to others I have seen of the same sort, the stakes aren't that high, and each and any interaction seems like it needs to be wrangled through with the other players.
What could make the game more interesting, would be to give the players another "turn", where their fate is left up to your dice, scenarios and own decisions therein. Something like... space pirates trouble the trading routes of faction 1. Faction 2 finds an expansive helium deposit. Faction 3 is being blackmailed by an unknown stranger. Just some things where they can act "on their own", and which can lead to greater success - or failure, depending on which kind of scenario the dice gave them.
By doing so, they don't have to wait 3 days to finish a discussion with the other players, but still gain the chance to rise above them.