I'm confused. You're advocating for a system that will result in smaller stockpiles by crafters:
"fewer rich locations will appear, meaning smaller stockpiles"
You think 6 day spawns are too long:
"for a resource to stick around for 6 days is quite a long time."
"20% more frequent changes"
And in the same vein you state:
"the quantity of resources wont change at all."
Can you explain how that math works?
As a SW, I use vast sums of resources. As a SW who strives towards crafting capped gear, that means having a good supply of top resources when they spawn. Your suggestion would hurt that both in quantity of resources I can gather for my schematics that use a LOT of resources, and in how many I'll be able to make because it was not in spawn for long.
This will result in higher prices from me to end users: rampant inflation. It will happen across all crafting classes. Those made with top resources will cost abundantly more, because it will cost more to get them and there's less of them. Scarcity will inevitably drive prices up.
It will also result in more mediocre crafted gear as less top-end resources will be available, resulting in more crafters making the same thing as another. If I wanted that, I'd play SWTOR with its "everyone makes the exact same thing" system.
I gotta downvote this.
Sorry for the confusion, but I didnt say 6 days was "too" long, but I will say that 21 days definitely is too long for any resource to linger.
When i say the quantity of resources wont change, this means people can still harvest just as much as they ever did. The difference is that rare quality resources might show up less often due to there being less variety available.
With fewer types of resources on a planet, there wont be as many places on planet where you have lots of overlap. I am just predicting that this would mean there would be less overlap. Sorry I should have worded it differently. I incorrectly assumed people would make the connection.
High quality resources would be less common, and therefore might be worth more. This is not inflation, this is supply and demand. Inflation would be if the price of everything went up due to their being a larger supply of money in the system. Any inflation you see in thsi game is caused by that, and that alone. The more money people have, the higher the prices will be. That is where the game is heading right now because of a lack of money sinks.
The simple nuts and bolts of my suggested change is that players would need to move harvester more often, thus spending more credits that leave the economy. Or to put it even more simply, increases that money sink.
I hope this clears up your confusion.. You shouldnt vote on something you didnt understand. Just dont vote at all. Ive rewritten my OP to help clear up the misconceptions.
Just one question, since im not really familiar with SW, dont you get most of your resources from asteroids in space? I dont know what the resource rotation rates are for space resources, but you dont use harvesters, so I dont see how this change would affect your bank account.
One more thing. Taking away the childs candy is never going to be popular with the children, so all the downvotes are meaningless, unless you can somehow make a reasoned logical argument for why its better for the child to remain a spoiled glutton. So far in this discussion, no one has been able to do that, and quite frankly, its probably an impossible task, simply because its never a good thing to spoil children rotten.
