Cantriped

Just a warning that Combat Healing is usually excessively expensive, and Healing generally seems to be intended to be used outside of combat. "Drain-Tanking" simply isn't a cost effective strategy in HERO compared to taking less damage (via defense powers) or doing more damage (via attack powers).

First would be healing with side effect does Body to healer. Second would be a KA with linked healing.

The main problem with removing KA is that every single defense power is priced based on existance of both Normal and Killing Damage, and the opportunity cost that comes from having significant amounts of nonresistant defenses.
Oh... it is also Impossible to legally create an attack that causes Penetrating BODY without Killing Attacks... which significantly reduces the value of that modifier because who gives a rats ass about few points of STUN slipping through defenses when some usually gets through anyway by system design.
 
It is really, really hard to significantly damage anybody if they are receiving up to half-again as many points worth of defenses for the same price. Also... you can't really use any prepublished material as a change of that magnitude requires extensive conversion to prevent imbalances: Such as characters who had 30 PD but little to no rPD suddenly becoming totally indestructable, and vehicles who no longer have enough total defense to compete with the higher DCs and levels of armor piercing required to simulate lethal attacks.
 
If you are going to remove the KA... remove non-resistant defenses as well, and make everyone pay the resistant price for their defenses. That is fairer to all of the other game elements that have Resistant defenses by default (pretty much everything except characters).

For psychic powers, use Requires A Roll and Side Effects... then establish a table of possible side effects with various Active Point levels so that you can randomly generate side effects of a similar scope to the power that was supposed to be used. Otherwise you might not be being fair to players who would have been willing to pay that opportuniry cost for psychic powers.
For example, having your body combust and summon a demon from the ashes should only trigger from severely failing to activate a powerful psychic ability... Causing a TPK because you tried to cast the equivalent of Light probably isn't appropo to a TTRPG, even if it makes sense in the setting.

Of the two, FHC is slightly better than CC, each is essentially described as being a short version of the full 6th edition rules. I treat them like an independant ruleset due to the scope and nature of the changes... but that is a personal opinion. I also think FHC is physically much easier to read.
The main differences are that FHC omits many of the technological skills, while CC doesn't include ranged martial arts... CC also omits the vital paragraph from the Required Hands modifier that explains how it actually works. Sadly bith omit the Wind Levels Table...
 
Functionally, you can use any of the three to answer any given rules question and find the correct answer.
6e1&2 are harder to search, and have this tendancy to present optional rules in the same breath they describe the default rule... however it also contains articles on nearly all the odd little corner cases (the rest being in the APGs).
CC/FHC are much shorter and easier to search, but sometimes oversimplify or inadaquetly explain a topic in their attempt to be brief. The ommision of common optional rules make them less useful players using those rules, and finally what changes were made in CC/FHC rules were sufficient to throw off the costs of the vast majority of prewritten NPCs (who now need to spend far fewer points to be good at a skill like Animal Handler.

Also... don't be afraid to make up new skills if you want.  HERO has numerous examples of custom skills created under the umbrella of either Analyze or Power (not to mention all the Background Skills).
 
If you want Insight to be a skill in your campaign, it can simply be an INT based Power Skill that you make an Everyman Skill or include in the Templates available to PCs.

I'm not sure how Nega-Beam is relevent, besides being highly illegal and abusive. It is the second most terribly written power I've ever seen (the first being Captain Chronos in general and his NND Entangle specifically). Nega-Beam uses Summon to create a "Character" that represents an Attack.
 
HERO System should have long since included an Advantage for representing Homing attacks... so that we did not require such an atrociously built construct to represent a fairly common trope. For Example:
 
Homing (+1/4): Allows the Attack to function similarly to a heat-seeking missile. If a Homing Attack misses its target, it will bank around and attempt to attack the target again next phase (using the same OCV it initially attacked with). A character must normally pay END to maintain a Homing Attack (but needn't take any further action to maintain it). A Homing Attack is considered to have a number of meters of Flight equal to its maximum range. Homing Attacks have a normal Turn Mode (unless it takes No Turn Mode) and must obey all of the standard rules for acceleration/deceleration; meaning that it is fairly easy to block homing attacks (compared to other ranged attacks) or trick them into hitting something else (a Sucker Attack).

Equipment doesn't "vanish" when you change to a form that didn't pay for it... Which is an obvious opportunity for abuse. The common solution is that The Hulk can't or "won't" use Bruce Banner's equipment... even if it is a weapon or vehicle that might only cost 1-point to learn to use.
 
Otherwise, if your GM is blind, you can build a Character that spends about 1/4 of his points on an Inherent Multiform (into an alternate form that is awesome with equipment), and the remainder on awesome equipment (like giant mecha). Then you just throw away the effectively 0-point True Form that is never going to be seen again, and play a character with more than half again as many points as everyone else for no legitimate reason.
   Be wary of the Multiforming Super-Pilot whose True-Form's Vehicle can Summon Automaton "Drones" controlled by the True-Form A.I. Computer Follower...

With the default Knockdown rules a knife can cause knockdown without the target taking any BODY damage.
Presuming a standard knife (a 1/2d6 HKA, STR Min 6) and a character with 16 STR or more.
If he hits the target the knife can do up to 7 BODY (on 1d6+1), On average this will result in no Knockdown/back, but if you rolled a 6 or less on the Knockback/down modifier (on 3d6) the attack will cause Knockdown (or 2-8m Knockback). This remains true even if the target wears Armor providing 7 or more rPD (enough to stop the knife from doing BODY).
 
Note, Space Marine armor looks crazy heavy, and probably provides Knockback Resistance (use the Mass templates for guidelines as to how much). Because they are determined the same way, Knockback Resistance also protects the character from Knockdown (unless it is caused by an Impairing or Disabling Wound, as those are described as being automatic).

Don't reduce her effectiveness, she paid 70+ points for the advantage of being able to do what she does.
If you need to challange her, use enemies that don't care if they are grabbed, or that can easily escape. Bricks, Mentalists and Martial Artists.
Any Brick worth their salt will have more STR than she has TK, making escape a matter of time. Mental Illusions can be used to make her accidently attack teammates much more easily than Mind Control, and in her case effectively knocks out both her and teammate automatically. Martial Escape and Contortionist give a huge bonuses to STR to escape. Also don't forget that Mental Powers (like EGO Blast), and lots of other powers (laser eye beams, frost breath, molten skin) can still be used on the character while the target is grabbed.

It doesn't seem to have a slight chance to dispel things, but instead just dispels things in the area indicated.  So it just sounds like an area effect (any) constant dispel magic with a fiddly description.  If you want the dispel to literally disintegrate magical items, a KA would be linked.

Coming from me, it is a rumor. While I do recall talk about it being worked on, I can't verify that.

This is a genre simulation problem, and such problems are often more easily fixed with design conceit than by changing the rules (in other words... just change how you use the mechanics, not the mechanics themselves. Remember that you have final say on anything players might want to build, and a responsibility to audit such material to ensure it is appropriate to your campaign. No amount of rules-text can prevent abuse and user error.
 
Sure... 15m of Flight has the same cost regardless of user size... except that a vehicle has already paid for its Size as a characteristic, making it pay an added fee based on size for movement powers is double-dipping and contrary to system principles. Given two otherwise identical vehicles the larger (or faster) one should be the more expensive one, and amongst two "equal vehicles" one migut be larger and slower than the other (as points spent on Size don't improve Flight).
 
As for the reason why one ship may buy more less movement than another, there is only one reason that actually matters. Because you said so (and/or because that is what is appropriate to the campaign). If you need your Carriers to be slower than your Fighters, simply don't let the Carrier buy more flight than you let Fighters have.

?? They're both in there, left-hand column.

You calculate each element of a compound power seperately. For example:
 
Powered Armor: Compound Power All Slots (39 APs); OIF (-1/2), Real Armor (-1/4)...
1)  Resistant Protection (5 rPD/5 rED), Hardened (+1/4) (19 APs). Cost: 11 points.
2)  Life Support (Self-Contained Breathing) (10 APs); 1 Fuel Charge Lasting 1 Day (-0), Linked (Slot 1; -1/4). Cost: 5 points.
Total Cost:  16 points.
 
EDIT: The total cost was wrong... so sleepy.

I think this is oversimplified, but I like the idea of an attack which tries again until either it hits or it runs out of steam (toss on Physical Manifestation and you can also KO the ongoing attack).
 
Constant allows an attack that hits once to keep doing damage without further attack rolls, but stunning or KOing the power user, loss of LoS or changing slots in a framework all shut it off.  If all of these will also shut off your Homing Power, then a hit on the first attack "wastes" Homing, but it also "wastes" Constant, which would not have kept trying in each subsequent phase until it succeeds.  Maybe for +1/4, it tries again once, doubled for each additional +1/4, requiring no further attention from the user (maybe even no ongoing END - the END to fire the initial attack is still flying around). 
 
You could make a Homing Constant Uncontrolled attack - once it hits, it keeps going for as long as the END you dumped in to power it.

I've built a homing variant like that, it had a cost and build structure somewhat like DOT with how many attempts it made and how quickly it would seek.  The simpler the better, though.  Uncontrolled would allow the thing to go without being aimed (for as many phases as END was paid, natch) otherwise I'd say the person who fired it would have to steer it into targets.  That makes it kind of expensive, but its an attack that keeps trying and you can fire one off every phase if you have uncontrolled on it (or, with autofire, a host of them each phase).

With the default Knockdown rules a knife can cause knockdown without the target taking any BODY damage.
Presuming a standard knife (a 1/2d6 HKA, STR Min 6) and a character with 16 STR or more.
If he hits the target the knife can do up to 7 BODY (on 1d6+1), On average this will result in no Knockdown/back, but if you rolled a 6 or less on the Knockback/down modifier (on 3d6) the attack will cause Knockdown (or 2-8m Knockback). This remains true even if the target wears Armor providing 7 or more rPD (enough to stop the knife from doing BODY).
 
Note, Space Marine armor looks crazy heavy, and probably provides Knockback Resistance (use the Mass templates for guidelines as to how much). Because they are determined the same way, Knockback Resistance also protects the character from Knockdown (unless it is caused by an Impairing or Disabling Wound, as those are described as being automatic).

I think it is very, very odd that you've given Double Knockback to the bolt weapons.
The first reason is inefficiency, the threshold for causing knockback is 50% higher for Killing Damage than Normal Damage, and KAs only cause 1/6th more BODY per DC (the target's applicable defenses are irrelevent to the Knockback calculation, so it does not matter that the KA will tend to inflict more serious injuries. Attacks intended to cause Knockback usually use Normal Damage instead.
 
The second has to do with the compatibility of the mechanical and special effects. Double Knockback is typically reserved for torrential attacks (I.E. those made with a powerful, but diffuse force, like a gust of wind or wave of water.
As I understand it the Bolt Guns are essentially standard firearms (in that they are ballistic weapons that fire reasonably small, high velocity physical projectiles). Such weapons simply don't cause Knockback, the projectile is moving too fast for the force to be distributed evenly. It is far more reasonable to assume those bullets are going to core out or blow off part of whatever they hit. At most, ballistic weapons cause Knockdown (a limited version of Knockback with a flat push distance of 1 hex/2m).
A Bolt Gun certainly shouldn't be causing an average of 8m Knockback per shot (meaning a single bullet will consistantly hurl a normal human more than 20 feet backwards), nor should it have a maximum of 42m Knockback.
 
Almost all of these powers should (per RAW) have the Beam modifier as well... Although Beam bundles several minor restrictions that I sometimes choose to seperate. For example, a Lasgun can probably be Spread (if it is a coherent beam as opposed to a energy bolt), while a Bolt Gun could not. Meanwhile a lader is not much use for blowing open a hole in something but an exploding projectile might be.

This is a genre simulation problem, and such problems are often more easily fixed with design conceit than by changing the rules (in other words... just change how you use the mechanics, not the mechanics themselves. Remember that you have final say on anything players might want to build, and a responsibility to audit such material to ensure it is appropriate to your campaign. No amount of rules-text can prevent abuse and user error.
 
Sure... 15m of Flight has the same cost regardless of user size... except that a vehicle has already paid for its Size as a characteristic, making it pay an added fee based on size for movement powers is double-dipping and contrary to system principles. Given two otherwise identical vehicles the larger (or faster) one should be the more expensive one, and amongst two "equal vehicles" one migut be larger and slower than the other (as points spent on Size don't improve Flight).
 
As for the reason why one ship may buy more less movement than another, there is only one reason that actually matters. Because you said so (and/or because that is what is appropriate to the campaign). If you need your Carriers to be slower than your Fighters, simply don't let the Carrier buy more flight than you let Fighters have.

This is a genre simulation problem, and such problems are often more easily fixed with design conceit than by changing the rules (in other words... just change how you use the mechanics, not the mechanics themselves. Remember that you have final say on anything players might want to build, and a responsibility to audit such material to ensure it is appropriate to your campaign. No amount of rules-text can prevent abuse and user error.
 
Sure... 15m of Flight has the same cost regardless of user size... except that a vehicle has already paid for its Size as a characteristic, making it pay an added fee based on size for movement powers is double-dipping and contrary to system principles. Given two otherwise identical vehicles the larger (or faster) one should be the more expensive one, and amongst two "equal vehicles" one migut be larger and slower than the other (as points spent on Size don't improve Flight).
 
As for the reason why one ship may buy more less movement than another, there is only one reason that actually matters. Because you said so (and/or because that is what is appropriate to the campaign). If you need your Carriers to be slower than your Fighters, simply don't let the Carrier buy more flight than you let Fighters have.

I wouldn't mess with point costs.  Instead I would pre-design a lot of the ships and just limit what the players can take.  Just because the game system would let someone buy something, that doesn't mean it's appropriate in the campaign setting.  For example, you can't normally be a starship commander in a D&D game.
 
Point costs aren't about how "realistic" something is.  It's about how useful it is in the game.  FTL speeds get very high for a tiny increase in points.  That's not realistic at all.  But remember, in the game, there's not much difference between 20 points of FTL travel and 50 points of it.  In both cases, you're traveling to a fictional location that is as far away as the gamemaster wants it to be, and it takes as long to get there as the gamemaster says.  It's a "scene change" power.  The GM says "Okay, you're traveling to the Andaarian Nebula.  You've been going there for the last 4 days.  You still have 2 more days to get there.  On the way, your trip is interrupted by this thing happening."  It doesn't matter if it's the Andaarian Nebula, or some other place he made up.  It doesn't matter if you've been traveling for 4 days, or 4 weeks, or 4 hours.  You've entered into the realm of GM narration.
 
It's perfectly fine to say that your big battleships can only go at X speed, while smaller interceptors can go faster.  If you want your game universe to work that way, that's fine.  But don't bother with changing the point costs.  It will give a false illusion that you've balanced it somehow, when in fact you haven't.

Today's Penny Arcade is relevant:
 

The DOD's contingency plan for zombie apocalypse is a fascinating read and could be a useful background document for PA campaigns.
 

Sumptuary laws would certainly give your players some much needed law-breaking time. I find most players need a to spend a little time flaunting the laws of whatever fantasy society you've built. This is an easy, no-serious-outcomes law for them to break. You can have a slightly secret black market dealing in pretty clothes and good food. The characters get to discover it, interact with the slightly shady npc's, and generally feel like they're real edgy.