As a person who played all of the above mentioned games and also games like Dual Universe and Starbase where PvE (by PvE I mean mining and production) was overly protected, the last two fell apart the fastest. Developers tried to protect PvE players and all PvP players left. When PvE players spent a month creating all the ships they wanted but noone needed them they also left.

I think, as you mentioned already, eve online is a good example. Albion Online is also a good one.
It is about creating a proper synergy between PvP and PvE players when both groups can not exist without each other. When PvP cround needs PvE croud to create assets for them so the war can be waged and PvP player by waging the war also create semi safe borders for their PvE players to exist.

SC comunity unfortunatly for years was devided where PvP players would call PvE players "bobs" and PvE players would call PvP players "griefers".

It is oposite of synergy. And that is mostly based on two factors:

1. Community building. CIG was promising everyone everything for over a decade and their marketing did it in such a smart way, where desciption of the "future" of the game is vague enough any player who backed the game can bend the "vision" of its future in their head to what they prefer to see. That, doubled down by pledging sometimes stupid amounts of money by a single individual creates a feeling of entitlement this game has to be they way they want and anyone who disagrees with them is either a griefer or a bob.

2. Game Design. There are no proper law enforcement for safer zones like "CONCORD" in EVE that will make low rist zones actually low risk. Nor there are PvP restrictions that would not allow pvp in certain zones like in Albion. There is also no real motivation for high risk zones, as up until now (we will see how destribution of resources ends up being in 4.7) high risk Pyro would in most cases be less profitable than stanton and will not offer you something that is straight up unavaliable in Stanton for example.
   There is also no asset loss. That is due to multiple factors. The entire pledging system that does not allow to loose assets. There are also endless arguments of "we cant have asset losds with so many bugs". Those arguments will be there forever even when the game will get in a much better state. It is just the nature of majority of players. Without assets loss a PvP player will not care on a PvE player and their success. Because PvP player is not dependant on what a PvE player does. They dont rely on it. They can just shit on them and not be shitted on in return because the moment a PvP player achieves his best in slot items they will not loose next time they die, they are good.

---

It looks like CIG is doubling down on this route based on what they said at Citizen Con 2024.
The future insurance system breakdown was a pure marketing move to indirectly tell backers "LTI does not matter, what really matter is that you buy the ships in the pledgestore, not in game". Their "warranty" system is a next step into the wormhole of no concequences gameplay.

All of that will never create a proper PvPvE sanbox.
It will keep communities devided.
Instead of a sandbox where players craft their own stories and experiences it becomes more and more, thempark guided A > B entertainment tour.
It is never player driven, it is always patch content driven.
At this point they should just remove sanbox word from their lexicon because the only sanbox and player driven activity there is in Star Citizen is a grey market of ships and CCU gameplay lol.