I agree with you on 1. But let’s talk about what I mean with fighter controls.
Have you tried to multibox carriers? It’s quite difficult to multibox carriers, since there’s a lot of micro-management involved. A lot of Rorq pilots, especially in the larger blocs, are multiboxing six, eight, twelve rorqs to mine. You force them to use fighter controls, and I’d wager that the number of Rorqs they can actively manage drops considerably. That’s what I mean. Increase the cognitive load to run a single Rorq, buff its mining output to compensate, but not enough that one player can make 12 Rorqs’ worth of minerals.
As for 6., I am absolutely certain the big nullsec blocs would howl in protest over this. But it fits with EVE’s “risk=reward” ethos, and it would force krabbers to spread out, away from their supercap umbrellas (which, in my mind, is what’s making nullsec so stagnant right now).
And I do agree with you about the latter stuff: I think (?) CCP is making some good moves with making caps less oppressive, so I’m hopeful they fix it. But I think the needlejacks are a band-aid, and I’m also deeply skeptical of randomized, contextless pvp skirmishes as a basis for interesting gameplay. I want pvp to be meaningful, which means I want to have a reason why I’m getting in this fight besides just #content, and I want the outcome of that fight to have consequences.
That’s another part of EVE’s ethos that CCP seems to be neglecting here: your choices are supposed to matter, and that applies just as much to how you approach pvp as a whole as it does to how you approach each fight.