+1

... Which shatters. Why?

For a better experience in browsing this forum, please include small identifiers in the Topic Names.

[Rules Question] - If you have a question on card interactions or anything else. Someone will probably be able to answer your question pretty quickly.
[Deck Help] - If you are looking for help or ideas with a deck.
[Discussion] - a thread dedicated to a longer discussion  (as opposed to a thread dedicated to a simple question)
[Guide] - if you have written a more detailed explanation of a deck or strategy, in a how-to format.
[Poll] - This one should be self-explanatory.

Statistics page shows no cards.

sebi wrote:
Chaim wrote:

Not a normal browser, no. Cross-domain is not an issue.

Then you can just make a get request to the csv export url and parse it with something like https://github.com/wdavidw/node-csv . But I'll add a json one too in the API at some point.

Chaim wrote:

I get a page of gibberish at that link.

Yeah, the mime type is set to html by the cacher, old bug. That's a valid jpg image of the card though if you save it and open it.

Testing. The following should be an image of the most recent swamp.

Most recent swamp

sebi wrote:

You mean with js from a browser? I assume you can't do that easily because of cross-domain issues. You can't do it easily with normal JSON apis either, you need to do it serverside.

Not a normal browser, no. Cross-domain is not an issue.

sebi wrote:

For card images, right now you can get them for ex with:

http://deckbox.org/mtg/Swamp/tooltip

Support for separate printings to come later.

I get a page of gibberish at that link.

132

(2 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

sebi wrote:

It was mistakenly removed, will be coming back!

Can we also get an option from the page for a specific card, to add it to a deck?

HikingStick wrote:

You've been doing a great job with the site, especially given the amount of change in recent months. Thanks for building the premiere site for MTG inventory management, trading, and commerce.

Let's give a round of applause for the awesome Deckbox team!

pghprogrammer4 wrote:

I keep seeing the same several vacationed users pop up at the top of my trade results lists, and I'd like a way to remove them from my search results if possible.

+1

Can we also get a way to hide / remove that and the sellers section?

134

(2 replies, posted in General Discussion)

It is presently unavailable. See here.

sebi wrote:

We already have a CSV export available for sets.

Yeah, but how do I grab and trim that with js?

Also, will we be able to fetch card images easily?

136

(11 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

xMatch wrote:

Upon reflection, you're probably right. But I have seen many decks on here that I have *nearly* all the cards for, I was thinking that surely there would be some that would match outright. I may be wrong, but it would be very interesting to see.

'Nearly' is much easier to match than 'exactly'. Just add a "minimum percent of deck owned" option on the deck search.

137

(11 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

xMatch wrote:

If the search focused on modern-only, maybe?

That would make it worse, not better.

138

(11 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

DrakeSlade wrote:

I think he's trying to ask for a link that compares one's collection to all decks made on Deckbox, and displays decks that he owns all the cards from.

Here is a problem I see with that: If you want it to be that exact, then you are quite likely going to get no results unless you have a large inventory. After all, there are 14000+ cards.

xMatch wrote:

+1 if you add a mechanic that lets people +/-1 decks that are built by Deckboxers.

I give it a +1 as well.

139

(11 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

xMatch wrote:

...decks made with cards already in our inventory...

Can you elaborate?

140

(3 replies, posted in General Discussion)

yearofglad wrote:

Sometimes the text of the card changed from edition to edition and so you can narrow it down that way.

Also check the legal info / art. Plus, if you still have questions about specifics, post scans, and some of the experts can help.

FormalComplaint wrote:

I was thinking this would be useful for team battles. Anybody have any ideas?

Here are some cards that may be useful: (I have not really looked through them very well)

See also an interesting related deck of mine here.
Long live the emperor!

Moxy wrote:
Chaim wrote:

I keep a few pretty distinct collections (in different places) and sometimes would want to see if I have something at all or not.

Would using the Card Database to search for what you're looking for and the My collection tab on the card details suggestion mentioned previously not suffice for this?

Why scratch your left ear with your right hand? (i.e. why go the long way around)

143

(5 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

This is what I see (and saw earlier), I just didn't get a chance to post about it earlier.

Moxy wrote:
scshunt wrote:

Also I can't disagree more with anyone saying that you shouldn't be able to view all your cards from different inventories at once. That's my #1 use case: I want to know all the cards of something that I own, regardless of where they are.

Maybe a good comparison is thinking of inventories as separating your cards in the same way another account separates the cards in that account from the cards yours. You wouldn't look at a listing of your cards mixed with my cards. They're distinct entities. The only way our inventories would ever really interact with one another is through some sort of trade or buy/sell transaction. Moving a card from one of our inventories into the other inventory.

If you have a collection of cards you want to see grouped together for some reason using tags would likely be a better solution.

If you have a collection of cards you keep *strictly* separate then inventories would be better.

vikirosen wrote:

I know that the Inventory button is intended to show every card in my collection, but I keep my Rebecca Guay collection strictly separate from all my other cards, so when I search through my Inventory I would prefer not to see those at all, by default, with the option, of course, of making them visible if need be.

moxy wrote:

if you manage a personal inventory and a community inventory. This is for groupings of cards that won't intermingle with one another.

Both examples of using inventories to *strictly* separate cards. Neither of these situations would you want to see both sets of cards together at once as a whole.


What situation would you want to group and see various inventories listed together where using tags for such groupings would be sub-optimal?

I keep a few pretty distinct collections (in different places) and sometimes would want to see if I have something at all or not.

145

(5 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

Can you be more specific? (i.e. what you mean by over and over)

146

(1 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

See here.

Would it be better to have a customizable label, or determine format based on country?

Paddock wrote:

I agree that this needs fixed.  Priority should be Land, Creature, Enchantment, Artifact.

Deathsloch wrote:

its probably because their first word is enchantment not creature.

Nope, that's not it.  Artifact is also the first word for Artifact Creatures.

I checked, and the current order seems to be Land, Enchantment, Creature, Artifact. (and the Gods' Weapons sort under enchantment.)

Moxy wrote:

I thought I read something last night about assigning tags or moving cards between inventories in bulk, but don't see it today. This would be a really nifty feature though, especially when setting up. I could see this coming in handy during block rotations and you need to move all your older cards to another inventory or update block related tags. Maybe moving in bulk between inventories could be accomplished with a "trade" but might be better served with an actual function with options to preserve tags and other identifying information about the cards being moved.

I had posted this, then noticed that it was mentioned in the first post (in the first draft of the idea).

Moxy wrote:
Chaim wrote:

And if we end up getting multiple inventories, we should also get an "All Inventories" view.

I disagree with this. In my view the point of an inventory would be that those cards are physically distinct. If you needed to view groups of cards together at once you would most likely be better served with tags. If you look at how the inventories are configured now you're not going to be mixing warhammer and magic together and looking through them as a single collection or single search result, they're that distinct. Extra inventories of one game should remain that distinct. In my viewpoint it should be right down to including decks, searches, tradelists, & wishlists. Inventories would represent separate and individual real world collections that one maintains, not "sub-collections" or parts of an overall whole.

Okay, I was looking at it from a slightly different viewpoint. But I still think that the option should be available. I would want the option to look one place and see if I have the card at all.

Moxy wrote:
sebi wrote:
Chaim wrote:

For the record, I have a few cards listed as poor condition, when really they are M/NM, Misprint - Ink Blotches. That is one of the reasons that I would really like freeform tags/labels.

Would this be better solved by just having a free form notes field on the card?

If there's an option for a freeform notes field then personally I would "tag" cards like this "Misprint", then use the notes section to identify and describe the actual type of misprint that occurred for the card. This would allow you to search for your tag and flip through all your misprint cards as one grouping. The notes would help identify markings for a specific card without making the tags overly specific.

I can see it either way. For the initial version, I don't think that this is necessary.

Moxy wrote:

Hmm, photo notes/attachments anyone?

This smells of "then we're going to need a bigger server" to me.

150

(1 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

See discussion here.