There's a lot there you could switch out...or, for that matter, eliminate altogether. And that's what's crippling this right now. For example, how many sequential devices do you need when you actually have very little in the way of logic and other clocking modifiers?
Stop and look at this build carefully, asking yourself constantly "Will I need this in 18 months?" This seems awfully specialized...and if your musical direction changes, will this build still serve your needs, or just turn into a 12u money pit?
In another post I did today, I mentioned what I call the "sexy module syndrome". This build here is that in action. Lots of wild panel art (which will be loads of fun in a dimly-lit venue! as in, no fun AT ALL), very specialized modules, and not a whole lot in evidence that is "boring". And the "boring" stuff, in the end, is what makes these function. There's not too much in the way of general-purpose stuff, either...things that you can say "yes!" about when you ask that question in the last paragraph. Yes, eight Doepfer A-110-2s all in a row would look really bland. And they seem boring in of themselves...until you start adding other basics, and then you get to really unleash those VCOs with, yep, just as much capability as several complex oscillators (depending on what else you have on hand) but more importantly, less cost than several complex oscillators.
And about all of that jazzy panel art...
Here's an experiment: turn your display brightness down to about 10-15% of normal while looking at your build above. Can you still make perfect sense of what you're looking at? No, you can't cheat by getting your eyes a couple of inches from the patchpanel on the screen, because if you do that live, it'll look really derpy. Treat this as what it is: a simulation of light levels you may have to deal with in live performance. Does this build make sense in dim light? My bet is that it won't. And yes, I know a lot of module designers pride themselves on their "edgy" designs...but then, go have a look at Grayscale's listing, where there are LOADS of plain-layout redesigns of all of that "edgy" stuff because, basically, those "edgy" graphics ARE ANNOYING. And also, turn down the lights and "let's see what happens" comes into play; are you up for memorizing every single knob function, switch function, patchpoint function, etc when the patchpanel looks like total gibberish? That's where this leads.
Yeah, I know you have a lot of this gear on-hand already. But seriously...back up for a moment and look at some prebuilds, classic synths, etc. They work because they play into what the performer needs before they know they need it. Try removing some of those "can't part with" modules, decomplicating the build. Try coming up with an arrangement of modules that reflects the signal flow you require before you plug in that first patchcord. And how much did that Piston Honda cost? The one you can't use because of the "everything else" that you're supposedly so locked in over? Hate to tell you, but you're up to your navel in that proverbial money pit already, friend. Time to figure out some strategies to get out of it!