I like the relation level unlock for primary alpha terminal. maybe add a 'set your first spark jump' mission when required free spark level is met as an education mission?

To my mind the biggest question here should be the role Beta Outposts have: why do you want to hold a Beta Outpost?  The way I see it, beta Outposts at present are the games forts or stockades... not the powerhouse citadels of Gamma or the utterly impregnable Alpha, Beta Outposts are the safehouses in between.  Without a doubt the people most likely to be ruthlessly ganked on Beta are newer players, the kind of players that need forts.

These are the kind of forts I would expect to be held by mercenary, PvP focused Corps: they can farm the greatest range of NPCs and they can have access to Alpha resource gathering and Gamma production.  As far as risk vs reward goes Beta Outposts are really the best you can get; this is NOT reflected by the ease at which they can be aquired and maintained and their current state also undermines the relative value of Gamma based Outposts(you cannot blow up Beta). 

The point here is that Beta should be more dynamic; it is the real battlefield of Nia at needs to have the ebb and flow one expects from a dynamic environment. The best way I can think of accomplishing this is to make the following changes:

- all SAPs become Active Hacking

- raise the stability percentage needed to lock out to 75%. 

- make 'benign hacks'(a hack which closes a SAP but doesn't reduce stability) possible

- 75% decrease in the appearence of SAP cans.

- slight randomization of 'stability' gained from successful SAP hack.

- a sliding scale for a rise in the frequency of SAP activation depending on how stable an Outpost is(the less stable the Outpost is the more SAP activations happen from the current rates at 100% down to constant, multiple SAP activation at 0%).

This system would make it possible for a tenacious small group to hold a Beta Outpost far more easily, but also require that they did so with a purpose.  For a large, timezone spanning group to hold an Outpost is relativly easy... something like this would make SAP hacking a little more gureilla warfare and a little less 'defend the hauler'(something everyone is far more concerned about on Gamma anyway).

Hard to apply to a sandbox game without moving into the realm of actions that could have legal consequences in the real world isn't it?

removed: Zortarg convinced me

This would make me a very happy camper.  I'd love to be able to PvP a bit but I cannot really afford the losses; if supply was high then prices could fall... provided some smarty pants with a bazillion NIC doesn't buy everything he can in the name of 'market PvP'.

EDIT: Also the systems you describe are essentially facist: NIC becomes a 'token' which can be redeemed with the Company Store for items of value.  The relaitve worth and merit of an individual are not accounted for as an individual can be denied access to their 'deserved' items arbitrarily by their superiors. 

In a truly Capitalist Corp all produced items would go on the open market before they went on the internal market and they would be placed at prices intended to see them sell so long as a profit of some kind could be made.  Selling to ones enemies would be a matter of risk versus reward.

In a true Communal Corp all members would have access to all folders and production would carry on for the good of all.

Only the first of these systems has a hope in hell of working, just ask China.

Well, I would say that ICE changes this.  The downside is that people are too greedy and ergo products are not attainable.

There are plenty of PvP players out there who are happy enough to run around having their bots blown up left right and centre: for this to be sustainable however they need to join a large Corporation or Power Bloc... outside of this there is no sustainable way to mantain a competative edge in PvP.  Without the backing of a large Corp these players lose access to Tier 4 equipment at a sustainable price. 

When(if) large Corps sell high tier modules on the open market they price them out of a range that is accessible to those who intend to engage in regular PvP.  The end result is, and always has been, a standoff between two or three major power blocs who run a semi-communal internal 'market'.

If you follow this to it's logical conclusion the idea of working to attain 'end game' content becomes absurd; better to join one of the uber blocs and get it all on easy street.

does this mean I'll get my EP back?(it's in a support ticket)

This is actually a good point.  One of the biggest issues has got to be the lack of market based competition.  This is compunded be easy availability of resources. 

Perhaps requiring that Gamma based teleports that DO NOT connect to a Beta island be fed plasma(the common indy bot Plasma) on a regular basis to remain active could help here?  Add to this a 'warm up' timer and give a cargo scanner the ability to tell how much plasma remains in the teleport and logistics becomes something akin to SAPs on Gamma... imagine the sad face of a pl;ayer that mines the worlds supply of Epitron on a Gamma island only to have the teleports close down because they didn't do their homework...  This would also give PvE players a new commodity to sell and make indy bots a little more valuable.

Gamma is end game content, it shouldn't gain unlimited unlocking.

If it's a real cash only thing then I say go for it.  More money for the game project is a good thing... I might buy a reset once... but only once. It would be a good high cost item.

And it's also why the player base will nopt grow on Steam.  The flipside to the Steam coin is that the next MMO is in a box directly below this one... you log in, discover a community akin to a crochety old sewing circle that's not shy about stabbing you with their knitting needles because it's their right for being so old and young 'uns need to respect their elders and the Steam community moves on to a more level playing field.

Look at the massive decline in the Hawken population into open beta because they have a poor matchmaker: people want to have a chance, perhaps not an even chance but a chance at least.   Sandbox games thrive on ambition and big ideas; players need to walk in and think 'one day, this'll all be mine'.  If sandbox communities maintain their status quo they'll not survive the next generation of money spending gamers... and seeing as they are just plain dull with a small community they will fail.

Still... the lag(not latency) fest that it causes... the rendering on my poor laptop.