So how does that sound?
I would likely use this system over IC2s system, I really like it. The star-trek-ian remote acquisition concept is a stroke of genius.
The only part I'm remotely ambivalent about is the teleport beacon, specifically the "unpowerable" booster blocks that can be placed in the world. I like the idea of boosting or dampening your "entanglement acquisition signal" - or whatever pseudosci we're throwing at the wall here - but placing a block down, even if it ends up costing you the block seems like it would too easily defeat an infrastructure-tied signal dampening system. Say you're trying to prevent teleports into and out of a region, so you set up these dampening towers tied to your eNet. All would be well and good, but if Jonny Trollsalot is carrying around 64 singal-booster blocks, he can circumvent your infrastructure with little to no preparation ahead of time. Perhaps moving the signal booster to an infrastructural block (tied to an eNet) would be better? Just a thought. Or, how about a compromise: The more signal-booster items that a player has in their inventory, the better the chance that their signal has of overcoming whatever environmental dampening is happening. Perhaps make the "beacon" item nonstackable, so that the player is effectively trading "likeliness of successful teleportation" for "amount of stuff they can take with them".
So, in a nutshell: Signal dampening block, requires EU, reduces chance of player's successful teleport in area. Signal boosting block, requires EU, increases chance of player's successful teleport.
Tricorder Signal Beacon item, unstackable, kept in inventory to boost individual player's chance of successful transport.
Anyways, the whole idea sounds awesome. I'll make the textures