[quote=@ASTA]
<Snipped quote>

The idea is solid, but this is one step away from Kardashev-style technical tiers that will only be given legitimate worth by a handful of player nations that effectively set an extremely inconsistent technological standard for "advanced". I'd argue antimatter reactors are innately inferior to thorium fission reactors or fusion reactors due to their need for active containment units that, should they fail, will result in the utter destruction of the reactor and anything within an X mile radius, but I doubt anyone cares about any of these factors because the superficial Space Opera standard can easily be invoked as a suitable (to me: sloppy) counterargument. 
[/quote]

To be completely honest, this is 100% true. I have a naval ship that runs off of antimatter, and either nobody realized that, or nobody realized what an absolutely terrible idea it was. If that ship is EMPd, then you can say goodbye to its whole fleet. But this is sci-fi. You can say that all your ships use fusion reactors if you want, but don't expect everyone else to do the same because it's more realistic. The Stardust/Void of the Stars/Star Empires (Let's pretend that last name never existed, shall we?) have always been focused on letting the players do whatever they want without godmodding. Wilson, at one point, wanted to implement universal FTL restrctions, which was a major problem because everyone's FTL worked differently (Aside from all the minor nations that for some reason used the same type of drive). That argument almost killed the OOC. Let's not have another, shall we?