Re: Bases Foci
In my opinion, it really depends on the effectiveness, the impact on the scenario/campaign, and the potential for unbalancing.
I don't consider this too unbalancing unless you're running a heroic campaign where characters are easily killed. I would probably let it be a focus with bulky and immobile limitations.
The teleport when near death is more powerful than the cloning vat simply because the character doesn't actually have to be taken to it. Depending on how frequently near-death experiences occur, I might allow it also.
In both cases, the GM should be sure to make something happen to the devices to make it impossible for the character to be restored to life, at least for a time.
Such a creature is more useful. It is essentially another character for the team. I wouldn't allow this as a focus.
Again, possibly. If they really are immobile, then yes, buying them as immobile foci is appropriate. But if the base is so inaccessable (a fave is to put the base in a pocket dimension) or so guarded that the foci can never come into danger, then there is no real focus limitation.
But other limitations may apply. "Immobile (-1/2)" is a possibility and there may be others.
Exactly. Consider the difference in likelihood of damage to the device when the character is attacked versus having the device attacked in the base. That will give you a feel for what limitations to assign. A focus that has a high probability of damage when the character is hit would be no better and possibly worse than an OAF. Characters with foci that can only be damaged when used (teleporting circle that is pulled out of the character's costume and thrown on the ground) would be at most an OAF and probably lower, say -1/2.
A base or home can be a special effect. That is, it is trivially easy to destroy and anything in it is destroyed. This is the kind of home that is destroyed in a single explosion, blast, or punch. If the players want a base to actually defend anything, they need to pay points to get defenses.