Is 100% Planet Viability Earned to Easily?

@VitesseLumiere

"...(what does the number of forward stations you have mean towards viability - that's convenience for you, not the planet or the colony),,,"

You would have to ask them that because they made it so that every forwarding station adds 2% to the planet's viability.

Regarding viability having a specific purpose in the game, as someone else pointed out, you don't even need it to beat the game and having 100% on all planets doesn't change the ending at all.  So what specific purpose do you think it is serving?

In all honesty, because it is affected by things like forwarding stations (which as you pointed out wouldn't logically affect viability) and other missions that similarly affect viability but logically wouldn't, it almost appears as though they did intend for it to be an immersive way of stating game completion.

I mean, aside from the one aspect I complain about it works almost the exact same way as a game completion score.  The same way you don't need 100% to beat the game.  The same way that it is linked to even the most mundane tasks.

And viability is not the same as 100% viability.  I'd argue that Earth isn't at 100% viability but it is at a viability high enough for us to live on. 

It's kind of like drinkable water isn't water that is completely absent of contaminants, it is water that has a toxicity below a certain amount.

So no, you shouldn't have to do every little thing to make a planet viable enough to sustain our people or complete the game, but just like how water filters cannot claim to remove 100% of contaminants just because they remove 99.8% of them... we shouldn't get 100% viability for only doing 85% of the things that affect viability.