jfadeX wrote:
Based on what you said, above, it shouldn't be too difficult to expand the pop up, add a card name header, and expand the entry boxes.


Something else I was wondering - you cannot flag a specific card FOR a specific deck, correct? If I have two decks with a Darksteel Colossus each, I can't currently flag which deck has the "foil" Colossus in it? Just making sure.

Thanks again!

I didn't even think about basic land. I gave up entering them by version when using the previous version. It's a good point.

That said, the change might seem technically easy to us, but it really will come down to Sebi's time and priorities. I now agree, however, that space for three digits seems reasonable and probably should be part of the system.

As to your final question, I believe your assessment is correct. I've only recently started thinking about adding specific versions as I've started making EDH decks.

I'm glad you enjoy the site. I wish you years of many happy trades!

HikingStick wrote:

jfadeX wrote:What do you think about an inherent, or flat, multiplier added to the base value of a card if it's marked Foil? Go on the low-side and just use Base Value * 110% or something?

Unfortunately, I think such an equation breaks down on the two ends of the value scale. Most penny cards are worth between 25 and 50 cents in foil. On the high end (e.g., some planeswalkers), the foil values are much higher than the standard versions (e.e., Lilian of the Veil at $25 and the foil at $60).

Man, I wish it was that easy. Some of the old stuff is just crazy, like an MM brainstorm (foil common is $100). Even in a new set, cloudshift regular is 15c and foil is more like 1.75. It sucks when I'm doing all these bulk trades, you really do have to check every single one because you never know what will be sneaky-expensive.

Nighthawk wrote:

HikingStick wrote:

jfadeX wrote:What do you think about an inherent, or flat, multiplier added to the base value of a card if it's marked Foil? Go on the low-side and just use Base Value * 110% or something?

Unfortunately, I think such an equation breaks down on the two ends of the value scale. Most penny cards are worth between 25 and 50 cents in foil. On the high end (e.g., some planeswalkers), the foil values are much higher than the standard versions (e.e., Lilian of the Veil at $25 and the foil at $60).

Man, I wish it was that easy. Some of the old stuff is just crazy, like an MM brainstorm (foil common is $100). Even in a new set, cloudshift regular is 15c and foil is more like 1.75. It sucks when I'm doing all these bulk trades, you really do have to check every single one because you never know what will be sneaky-expensive.

Yep. I was randomly looking up values for some of my cards one time when I found a foil Gush. I was quite surprised at the results, to say the least.

By the way, I have a foil Gush if anybody is interested in a trade! ;)

NullParameter wrote:

Nighthawk wrote:

HikingStick wrote:
Unfortunately, I think such an equation breaks down on the two ends of the value scale. Most penny cards are worth between 25 and 50 cents in foil. On the high end (e.g., some planeswalkers), the foil values are much higher than the standard versions (e.e., Lilian of the Veil at $25 and the foil at $60).

Man, I wish it was that easy. Some of the old stuff is just crazy, like an MM brainstorm (foil common is $100). Even in a new set, cloudshift regular is 15c and foil is more like 1.75. It sucks when I'm doing all these bulk trades, you really do have to check every single one because you never know what will be sneaky-expensive.

Yep. I was randomly looking up values for some of my cards one time when I found a foil Gush. I was quite surprised at the results, to say the least.

By the way, I have a foil Gush if anybody is interested in a trade! ;)

1. A flat percentage mark up definitely would not prove very accurate when conducting trades. That much is true. I wonder why the current api does not differentiate between the two.

2. I was the same way, though to a lesser degree, when I was cleaning up some commons and came across a playset of foil giant growths. I probably own 150 giant growths, but the four foil ones add up to be $75-$100. Crazy.

3. I'd be interested in a foil Gush - what are you looking for - just PM me

4. Would it be too far-fetched to allow end-users to assign a custom value for specific iterations of cards? Maybe it could be highlighted orange or something once it's been custom-valued so other people realize it is not a system default.
Say I have a foil Masticore that has been signed and altered by the artist - I could assign it my own value and it would instantly be trade-recognizable as such.

jfadeX wrote: 1. A flat percentage mark up definitely would not prove very accurate when conducting trades. That much is true. I wonder why the current api does not differentiate between the two.

I think I should clarify what I meant, as the API does fine bringing TCGPlayer's prices (most of the time) but the fault lies with TCGPlayer itself. The site aggregates prices from many, many online vendors and can give you the low, average, and high prices quite quickly. However, they don't have different price listings for foils and non-foils. This (I think) not only skews the high and likely the average, but makes it really hard to judge the value of a foil without checking another source like StarCityGames (which is really a different pricing system and tends to be a little high anyway).

Also, I'm glad I'm not the only one who would like to see specific editions/versions in our decklists!

jfadeX wrote:4. Would it be too far-fetched to allow end-users to assign a custom value for specific iterations of cards? Maybe it could be highlighted orange or something once it's been custom-valued so other people realize it is not a system default.
Say I have a foil Masticore that has been signed and altered by the artist - I could assign it my own value and it would instantly be trade-recognizable as such.

I really like that idea. When Sebi gets back from holiday, he can let us know if that would be even remotely possible.

Deckmaster set is missing from the dropdown choices of sets;

https://www.wizards.com/magic/tcg/productarticle.aspx?x=mtg/tcg/deckmasters2001/productinfo

jfadeX wrote:Deckmaster set is missing from the dropdown choices of sets;

https://www.wizards.com/magic/tcg/productarticle.aspx?x=mtg/tcg/deckmasters2001/productinfo

Sorry for the multiple posts, but came across these at different times:


Anthologies set is missing from the dropdown (pendelhaven, for example) + Duels of the Planeswalkers is missing (basic lands, as an example)



Also, is it possible to include Summer Magic as a set?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Edition_%28Magic:_The_Gathering%29#Summer_Magic_.28Edgar.29

Don't know if this is still the place to post this, but... the login popup is nearly completely unusable on most of the Android browsers I've used. The menu pops up, but when you click in a field to enter your credentials, in zooms in horribly, the popup is off the side of the page, and you can't see any of the submission buttons. It's pretty bad.

Hi,

The login dialog will be changed a bit to work better with the browser autofill feature and this Android issue that you are mentioning will be fixed too in the next release that shouldn't take much longer :)

marumari wrote:Don't know if this is still the place to post this, but... the login popup is nearly completely unusable on most of the Android browsers I've used. The menu pops up, but when you click in a field to enter your credentials, in zooms in horribly, the popup is off the side of the page, and you can't see any of the submission buttons. It's pretty bad.

Something similar happens on iTouch but if I just zoom out it automatically corrects its self.