Repeating Contract/Flowing Contract And reverse contracts

[Guest]

The baisi of this idea is that i have seen many ppl saying looking for daily supplier of X.

Idea 1: Repeating Contract
You set up a contract that repeats every X many hours as long as Seller has enough product in their warehouse and buyer has enough caps.

Idea 2: Flowing Contract
The contract is set up in production mode. When the buyer accepts production starts and as each unit ot the product is mad it arrives in the buyers warehouse and the seller receives the aggreed caps per unit. This would take up a lot of proccesor power so maybe it only updates every 1 or 2 hours.

Idea 3: Reverse Contract
A buyer can send a contract to another company saying i will buy product X at price y per unit for a quantity Z.

So what do you think. Please dont just post i like this idea/ i hate it give reasons so that it can be developed.

[Guest]

Idea 1: Repeating Contract
You set up a contract that repeats every X many hours as long as Seller has enough product in their warehouse and buyer has enough caps.

Still not likely to happen. Too much automation and the game "plays itself." Also there is the chance of it getting out of control - you have barely enough caps to accept the contract but now not enough to start your next production.

Especially if real life gets in the way and you can't log in for a day or three. You'd come back to find your warehouse full and your coffers empty. Potentially quite troubling.

Idea 2: Flowing Contract
The contract is set up in production mode. When the buyer accepts production starts and as each unit ot the product is mad it arrives in the buyers warehouse and the seller receives the aggreed caps per unit. This would take up a lot of proccesor power so maybe it only updates every 1 or 2 hours.

Close to the other idea, I'm afraid it's the same result. Since production only completes as a single group, it would be remarkably similar except you'd have no control over what you send and no ability to group items.

Now I could potentially see benefit in a setup where the buyer sets certain conditions, and sets certain money aside, for contracts that meet certain criteria. For example, I say I'll accept any oil contracts q0 at 27, and I put a million caps aside, and as long as a contract meets that criteria and money fits in the pool, it's accepted. In that situation there would still be a high level of control as you'd have to keep re-filling the pool each time. And there's protection from purchases when you're not ready, since the money is set aside.

But this is just me talking on what I think a possible design compromise might be. Don't take that to mean it will happen - the designers are pretty happy with way the current system requires / rewards activity.

Idea 3: Reverse Contract
A buyer can send a contract to another company saying i will buy product X at price y per unit for a quantity Z.

I could have sworn I suggested this myself at one point. But this is the closest I could find. (It's about reverse market orders.)

I do like it. I think it's potentially a little awkward about the quantity. People always have extra cash on hand, useable for other things. So a contract coming in at a little higher / lower quantity than expected is no big deal.

But most people don't like to keep extra finished goods lying around their warehouse. Inputs, sure. But fixed goods - if it's ready, they'd rather sell it. So you get two problems sending a buy contract: 1, offering to buy too many. They can't fill it, and have to wait for the next load or arrange a different contract. 2, offering too few. This leaves leftover for the producer, and they have to send a contract anyway, making more work.

I do see the appeal though. It transfers the risk and waiting to the other party.