In that case, we are (perhaps) mostly in accord. However, there are currently trade-offs for boosting in terms of heat generation and power balancing for boosting. Personally, I use charge enhanced PD engineering and find that in order to perma-boost I need to direct full-pips to engines. It is mostly impractical for me to perma-boost for combat reasons regardless of the ship I happen to be in (for various reasons), but if some find it doable and practical for them - far cop to them I say.
IMO bigger ships should be able to boost more easily - their larger size allows them to accommodate more powerful components and greater reserves and their larger surface area should allow them to more easily dissipate any heat gains. Their notionally longer stopping distance should also work to their advantage as well.
A simple compromise might be to make the level of boost proportional to the pip allocation in a comparable way to the way non-boost speed is limited by pip allocation. However, that would penalise everyone including the more peaceful players.
I do not disagree with the principle of not increasing thruster power (or at least not as much as it is currently) when boost is applied but overall I think the level/strength of complaints against the current flight mechanics are mostly unwarranted and unjustified. I know FD has stated they want to do something about perma-boost but IMO I rate the complaints about perma-boost (and similar concerns) at the level of "the-sky-is-falling".
As for CQC "boost diverter", I don't think I like that idea at all.
Bigger ships are also, well, bigger. Yes they can have bigger engines, etc., but they also have to move way more mass. As for the extra surface area, that's not how math works. As something gets bigger, the surface-area-to-volume ratio goes
down. That means bigger and bigger ships would actually struggle
more with heat, not less. This fact is why single-celled organisms tend to stay small. Since they don't have a circulatory system, they have to rely on exclusively surface exchanges for nutrients, gas exchange, etc. If they got any bigger, their needs would increase (greater volume), but their exchange rates (relative to their needs) would decrease. That of course is all pointless though, since sacrificing gameplay for the sake of realism is generally not a great idea, and also something FDev (by evidence of all the concessions the flight model already has) is not willing to do.
As for proportional boost, that was already added into the game to some degree. The more pips you have, the more maneuverability increase you get during a boost. It unfortunately does nothing to fix the permaboost problem though because, as you pointed out, you generally already have to keep 3 or 4 pips in ENG to pull it off. You may find it more practical to keep 4 pips in ENG during the ping-pongy joust fights that PvP often devolves into. You only need pips in SYS for a moment during the close pass (since that's often the only time you're getting shot at), and you don't need to keep 4 pips in WEP all the time since you're generally only firing during the close pass. Yes there's a cost, but depending on the flying style and weapons used, that cost is not really a thing.
