Ancillary dev blog feedback feedback

The difference between a high value common and a low value uncommon could be far too slim In that system, an item valued at 29 uniqueness (highest value common) and 30 uniqueness (lowest value uncommon) was only a single point. We're interrogating leaving larger "air gaps" in the values we assign to rarities, to ensure that each jump in quality is a notable increase in power.

For sure there needs to be an "air gap" between qualities. It takes two items of one tier to fuse the next tier. Definitely don't want a system where we take two 29 points items and fuse them for a 30 point item.