There's a a lot they could do with player structures.

Right now, they could add mining/extractors on beta islands or sections of the beta islands you control.  That would open up the opportunity to charge a fee to let other corps use that land.  They could be throw-away structures like incubators and/or have the ability to fuel a shield that reenforces before being destroyed.  The controlling corp could also add fixed defenses, something else that would need to be fueled.

For more complex player structures, I'd put them on new continents atarting with an alpha continent.  I think there should be an increasingly-costly wardec mechanic (syndicate wouldn't like too much of it) allowing you to attack them so the structures would be fairly safe for the individual, but for the bigger corps they would face the possibility of getting wiped out by rivals periodically(I envision such wardecs to apply everywhere but the A-1's).  Hopefully, there would be a new research mechanic with structures, single line factories, defenses, mining, etc...

Sky's the limit for a beta continent.  It would be great to make it really hard for an established corp to defend both their beta island structures and those on the valuable of the continents.  You accomplish that by having tp's aplenty on the alpha continent, but very few on the beta continent.  You'll wind up with some people becoming outlaws on them and starting an interesting dynamic.  The structures themselves could be better on them with some unique advantages, worth fighting over.

^ Just some random thoughts.

This thread really is missing the fundamental point.

If they are going to keep "safe" areas in and around POS, and or, beta/gamma islands.
WITH OUT giving the defenders more to work with, all of this POS "stuff" will be worthless.

As from a cost vs reward stand point its just better to live off of alpha and *** those who "live" or say they live on beta's.

Safe Spots in beta = *** beta

Just Sayin
01000110 01110010 01100101 01100101 01101100 01100001 01101110 01100011 01100101 01110010 01110011

Drop the permanent outposts, make the "S" refer to structures.

No permanent, invincible structures. Make buildings easy enough to disable that a response is worthwhile for any enemy gang of at least a dozen bots.

Buildings should be small, and buildings should be fairly easy to build and destroy. I'd like the feel to be similar to an RTS, with a constant ebb and flow of destruction and rebuilding. Many smaller buildings (rather than single, large buildings) means easier entry for small corps, and "variable" damage from invasions: easy to knock out a few small buildings and reduce your enemy's capacity, but much harder to wipe everything out and cripple them completely. It also means giant blobs wouldn't be necessary to accomplish something, in turn meaning that smaller ad hoc defence gangs might stand a chance at repelling invaders.

Just a few thoughts.

Dev's listen to this guy if you want the game to be "fun" in the most *** way possible....

Just Sayin
01000110 01110010 01100101 01100101 01101100 01100001 01101110 01100011 01100101 01110010 01110011

No No agy Pos's would NEVER be like that...never never ever ever

Just Sayin
01000110 01110010 01100101 01100101 01101100 01100001 01101110 01100011 01100101 01110010 01110011

Related to this is that too much destruction means everyone is always poor, tending to lose more than they hope to gain. If there isn't enough destruction, everyone gets exponentially richer over time.

The latter is far worse: achievements become meaningless since loss is insignificant, and the relative cost difference between low- and high-tier gear becomes so small it's also insignificant. The new-old gap becomes much wider than extensions alone would account for.

For a meaningful "end game", Perp needs to be progressively more difficult just to maintain equilibrium (see: Red Queen). Then there would always be a need to push even harder to achieve greater things. Idle rich players just get bored and leave, or they get bored and troll your game from the inside (see: EVE).

1. Temporary/semi-permanent camps
2. Automated defenses
3. NIC sinks
4. A GOAL TO LOOK FORWARD TO

The 4th point being the major for me. Having a POS in EVE was the first time I felt I did achieve something in the game. PO outposts are just NPC stations for me. You can capture one but it ends there. No sense achievement. It was always there and will be there after you leave.

We just need a ring of BETA-3 islands with nothing but teleports to make use of POSes.

I think that while the Devs are super-competent and wonderful, they suffer from the indy syndrome of "lets let the players design the game for us". I personally don't see any outline of a plan or direction the Devs want to go, it mainly seems to be implementing few useful features and balance-tweaks based on "feedback" i.e. what persons X, Y, Z who are on Skype-contact-lists cry about the most.

POS! heck need i remind poeple just how PANTS POS's in that other game realy were? or have you forgotten? and there still pants all these years l8r ask you selves why! and DEVs plz dont go that route.

Players like to have an effect on the game. POS is a way to do that, but so if terra-forming, which is why both these subjects come up so often.

Its a sandbox game, it's expected that some type of player interaction with the environment will happen.

End game content in a sandbox game?...i dont agree..by definition only themeparks have end game...sooo...no..we dont need endgame content.

One thing is that you feel that you dont have anything to do..and another is asking for somekind of end game content like if you have already "beated" the game

there is end game content in every game. it's called differently but you cannot escape it. it's simply the point where you have done everything there is to do. some games have a level cap for this, some have a story line.