I think one thing being missed here is the value of stopping worker production. Your examples assume constant worker production from both players, but don't account for strategic cutting of workers due. Typically on a two base economy a player will stop producing workers in order to produce the maximum amount of units for a timing.

I haven't seen much in the analysis mentioned on gas so assume everything below is pure mineral income

So the 2 base player will be at

HOTS: 32 workers ~1300 income

DH10: 16 workers ~950 income

LOTV: 32 workers ~1300 > ~1250 > ~900

Compare that to a 4 base player

HOTS: 48 workers ~1950 income

DH10: 32 workers ~1750 income

LOTV: 48 workers ~1950 > ~1950 > ~1950

This is the income disparity in those cases

HOTS: ~650 or 1.5x

DH10: ~800 or 1.8x

LOTV: ~650 1.5x > ~700 1.6x > ~1050 2.2x

The other question I have relates to income rates before saturation. I'm not sure how to measure it for an in game senario, but it will be easier to saturate new expansions meaning those income disparities will be hit quickly as opposed to taking more time to ramp up.

My other concern is that the lower income makes worker disparities from harass more extreme. There are questions of harassment units only killing a few workers and it just being too crippling of an economic difference. Taking out 4 workers is suddenly half a base of income as opposed to 1/4th. Of course these are questions that would need to be solved through play testing.

I'm just mainly concerned that this model makes things an extreme instant impact as opposed to having a gradual impact. You feel the economic increase more instantly from easier worker saturation and you feel the decrease as more extreme from worker deaths.