Votes in battleground states will always have more impact, but that has less to do with the electoral college makeup and more to do with the fact that we group the votes geographically and allocate them all to the same person. If/when Texas becomes purple, the impact of a vote there will be greater than one from a tiny deep red state, despite the fact that voters have less voting power.
Edit: Rewording my comment for clarity and to remove passive aggressive phrasing.
While this setup is blatantly undemocratic, it could be hard to argue that their voting power should be reduced when they're contributing more to the pot than they're taking out. A bullshit justification to someone who actually values democracy, but this logic isn't entirely insane. Indeed, this scenario is reality in some places on earth.
America, as we all know, is nothing like this.
The smaller states take more than they give. There is no excuse to not make their votes count the same as everyone else's.