OK, this is getting silly.
First, let me get this out of the way, because it is important:
Chénier, your idea is an interesting one, and I won't rule it out.
BUT
Please, for the love of Tom and Great Cthulhu, stop making assumptions about how easy or hard something is going to be to code, especially after someone who actually has access to the code has contradicted your stated assumptions.
I don't care if you think X is going to be something that takes 3 hours of coding, or that Y is something that will take 3 months. When you post stuff like you've been doing here, you just sound both ignorant and arrogant, which is a very bad combination.
There are cases where the amount of work required to do something weighs heavily in the decision as to whether to do it at all, but in almost all of those cases, the change would be a) extremely easy (a few minutes' worth of work, plus maybe some debugging or balancing time), b) extremely hard (completely rewriting major components of the game), or c) something that, in the developers' opinions, is of little enough benefit to the game that it should only get done if it falls into category (a). (And it doesn't.)
So, for that vast middle ground, where things are neither trivial, nor borderline suicidal, nor mostly pointless, the decision on whether or not to do them will most likely be made based on the merits of the idea. (The decision on when to do them might very well be based on how long they'll take, though.)
Thus, unless you have a strong reason to believe an idea falls into one of those categories, don't even bother mentioning how long you think it will take. And if someone who should know tells you it doesn't fall into one of them, please don't argue about it.
Because you don't have access to the code, and thus cannot reasonably assess the complexity of any given task on it, whether or not you personally have the programming skill to perform the task yourself.