Any chance of a more recent snapshot of the server or just the characters?
A lot of the newer guys can't log into the test server.

That's not gonna encourage people to live on beta.  I think having one spark for beta as well would not be too much.

EDIT but maybe limit it to ownable outposts

I like the idea of remote supporting modules in principle with one very BIG caveat. 

It should not be something that works well when done completely passively (lock, activate, forget). 

The reason is that it creates roles that are important for the fleet but mind-numbingly dull for the player.  The result is that either multiboxers (nexus alts) get some adavantage or some poor newbie gets the job of being the remote module monkey.

What if it was only on beta/gamma?

What about lower level combat missions on beta that are - kill a specific npc?

Also, this is maybe a bit of a radical idea but what about some kind of dynamic mission reward pricing?
Each mission from each location would have a payout associated with it.
As more people do the mission (from that location) the payout would decrease.

Specifically, the payout could be a function of n/N
where 'n' is the number of times this mission was completed in the last month and 'N' is the number of completed missions of that level in the last month.

This way the total pay rate of missions of each level could be controlled but the attractiveness of a particular mission at a particular location would be balanced by a market-like system.

In most MMOs the psychological argument is enough.  However, in most MMOs the outcomes of fights don't have any lasting effects on the game as a whole.

The main problem with the ECM mechanic as it is currently is that it makes numbers a much more decisive factor.

The main thing that makes perpetuum pvp more interesting than eve pvp is the use of terrain.  ECM ignores terrain and positioning, instead allowing the side that fields more people to simply shut down their opposition.

Take an example of a fight of 6 vs 4.  If the side with 6 can bring 4 camelions (or even better 2 cam 2 intakts), 1 ictus and a dps mech, what combination of 4 bots will really be able to stand up against that?

(this actually sounds like a fun exercise for the test server if people can be bothered)

tbh I don't think general chat is the best way of getting player feedback.

I am all for players talking with devs.  I would just ask that before we talk about specific mechanics we should all (players and devs) state what the aim of any proposed changes actually is. 
In other words, what is the problem that is being addressed. 

Otherwise there will be a lot of arguments about details with no progress because people are talking about different things without even realising it.

I think taking SAPs just to maintain stability is a bit much with the current population but it would make sense if stability did not go up by itself. So if nobody takes a SAP it just stays the same.

I think making it mandatory to take the specimen SAP just to maintain stability is a bit over the top but this would not be so much of a problem if not taking it didn't cause you to lose stability on your own outpost.

Defending a specimen by taking it would also just be a matter of keeping a bunch of everything in that outpost.  Some corps can afford to do that with ease but for others it would be a major PITA.  My suggestion would be to make the specimen sap spawn a container with a largeish item near one of the teleports on the island.  The goal would then be to get that item into the specimen SAP.
This would create a more level playing field for corps that have a lot of resources stockpiled and those that don't.

Having to take your own SAPs would also address the problem of defenders having to sit formed up on a SAP for one hour without getting a fight because they know that attackers will move in only if they leave.

double

I think the market would be fine with this provided that those bots actually got blown up.

Both the supply and demand sides need to be addressed.