I think it would be good to build upon the contracts.
For example
instead of contracts simply being concerned with just money being exchanged for products, you could add more
1. Lock prices: A buyer could agree to lock a price for contract between themselves and a seller, this would mean that if the price of the product increases or decreases it would remain the same for the contract.
buyers could pay a higher prices because they suspect the price of the product will increase.
2. Auto-supply: A contracter could set the contract to happen automatically, for example.
The contracter agrees to supply the buyer with a product every 24 hours, the system would automatically take the product from the warehouse and send it at a pre-defined price to the buyer. If there isnt enough of the product a message could be sent to the buyer and compensation for late delivery could be arranged.
3. Contracts could be concerned with a buyer being able to send a quantity of another product for the products they need
What does everyone think?
More robust contracts
Moderator: moderators
-
Guest
point 1 an example from the "real world" would be mortgages, a mortgage buyer can lock their payment rate at a certain price, and if mortgages rates increase they do not need to pay more.
I would mean that buyers in kapilands could choose to pay that little bit more just incase the price of the product increases. This would give them an advantage in the future if prices to purcahse the goods do increase.
point 2 I kinda thought so wasnt sure if would be ok since its only a small aspect, its just that real life contracts can rely on frequent deliverys
point 3 Idk I think its like a case of exchange one line of code for another, which theoretically could be simple to do with just products but idk either lol
thanks for the back and forth
I would mean that buyers in kapilands could choose to pay that little bit more just incase the price of the product increases. This would give them an advantage in the future if prices to purcahse the goods do increase.
point 2 I kinda thought so wasnt sure if would be ok since its only a small aspect, its just that real life contracts can rely on frequent deliverys
point 3 Idk I think its like a case of exchange one line of code for another, which theoretically could be simple to do with just products but idk either lol
thanks for the back and forth
-
Guest
1. Already happen, the seller send the contract for the price agreed.
2. Automatism in the game are not desirable, cause that would lead the players to only log once a month or more.
3. The buyer don't send contracts, only accept them
2. Automatism in the game are not desirable, cause that would lead the players to only log once a month or more.
3. The buyer don't send contracts, only accept them
Last edited by Guest on 06.06.2009, 22:48, edited 1 time in total.
-
Guest
Your points are very valid but the problem lies in the recourse, if we do have a contracts of x units of y at $z daily then we have the problem of people being offline or running out of cash then there is no recourse or way to get what you're owed any more than if you sent a normal contract.
No. 2 will never get implemented as its basically an auto-bot built into the system. A power producer could make a contract selling his entire power to another then come back very month to start new expansions and buy premium and the game wants continuous players rather than log-click-log.
Your last suffers from the same problem as your first, players cannot be forced to accept daily and senders cant be penalized for not producing the required amounts daily or forgetting to send a contract smaller players would quit and bigger ones would have a drop in profits.
Hack my problems apart and find a workable solution, when you do you have my full support at least
H
No. 2 will never get implemented as its basically an auto-bot built into the system. A power producer could make a contract selling his entire power to another then come back very month to start new expansions and buy premium and the game wants continuous players rather than log-click-log.
Your last suffers from the same problem as your first, players cannot be forced to accept daily and senders cant be penalized for not producing the required amounts daily or forgetting to send a contract smaller players would quit and bigger ones would have a drop in profits.
Hack my problems apart and find a workable solution, when you do you have my full support at least
H
-
Guest
So horizon your basically saying these things cant be implimented due to the fact that the developers want players to sign in daily and due to bankruptsy problems.
I can understand that, the sign in daily thing yeah because this site must make a fortune from people seeing the adds and they wont see them as much if they only sign in once a month, plus obviously the game is a constant game not a once a month.
However the whole bankruptcy thing....shouldnt that be a players responcabilty.
We need players to be aware of this so they can learn from the mistakes the real worlds made lol.
I can understand that, the sign in daily thing yeah because this site must make a fortune from people seeing the adds and they wont see them as much if they only sign in once a month, plus obviously the game is a constant game not a once a month.
However the whole bankruptcy thing....shouldnt that be a players responcabilty.
We need players to be aware of this so they can learn from the mistakes the real worlds made lol.
-
Guest
Thats the one thing I dont get with this game, the adds. They only advertise to another of their games, they could make a fortune from a few k plp viewing their adds constantly, then they could employ some more coders!
Back on topic
IN a perfect universe yes players should be responsible for their actions but its like the old banking system (i dident see this first hand i wasn't on then) it collapsed because big players would have troubles such as unexpected time away and then their loans would default leaving billions in FA siting there.
Unlike real life I can go "stuff it, I wanaa go play footy" and get up and leave if things dont go my way and have absolutely no problems leaving others out in the cold. I agree that it would be great to have the certainty of a guaranteed contract everyday, I could pre-plan expansions ect ect but I doubt if your function as it should and be more of a headache then the lack of such.
What do yall think of government contracts?
There are several gov contracts available each week and players bid on them to secure the weeks production. So one could be 1000 Cars at Q5 for government fleet. Payers would bid and the lowest bidder would be able to produce those cars and receive a guaranteed sale. If he or she defaulted or dident send enough it would go to the next highest bidder ect. Kind of like a contest but with an actual profit and no score items to stop biger players from biding 2c for cars ect
Thoughts?
H
Back on topic
IN a perfect universe yes players should be responsible for their actions but its like the old banking system (i dident see this first hand i wasn't on then) it collapsed because big players would have troubles such as unexpected time away and then their loans would default leaving billions in FA siting there.
Unlike real life I can go "stuff it, I wanaa go play footy" and get up and leave if things dont go my way and have absolutely no problems leaving others out in the cold. I agree that it would be great to have the certainty of a guaranteed contract everyday, I could pre-plan expansions ect ect but I doubt if your function as it should and be more of a headache then the lack of such.
What do yall think of government contracts?
There are several gov contracts available each week and players bid on them to secure the weeks production. So one could be 1000 Cars at Q5 for government fleet. Payers would bid and the lowest bidder would be able to produce those cars and receive a guaranteed sale. If he or she defaulted or dident send enough it would go to the next highest bidder ect. Kind of like a contest but with an actual profit and no score items to stop biger players from biding 2c for cars ect
Thoughts?
H
-
Guest
hmmm well i spose you could have the oppurtunity for players who default on loans to sell off aspects of the business and the debt assosiated with it. That could be interesting let more devoted players build a failed business up and sell it on at managers level
Government contracts I like however wouldnt it only be accessable to large companies
Government contracts I like however wouldnt it only be accessable to large companies
-
Guest
-
Guest
too bad no one listens anymore 