Hi, I will look through your list but I feel compelled to say this, please please don't just post a huge text wall of all your haves. It is really annoying to have to scroll down and most users won't look at that. They will just pop over to your profile and see what you have vs what you need. This saves you time as well as us. Usually just post your wants and a few comparable value card you have for trade.
176 2016-03-19 01:41:33
Re: collected company, Path to Exile and more, easy wants (1 replies, posted in Trading Post)
177 2016-03-18 13:24:28
Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust (126 replies, posted in Announcements)
Well at this point, I think a majority of people are against potential rule as is stands. I am perfectly wiling to go with the will of the people.
178 2016-03-17 21:54:59
Re: W: Chord, Lands H: Tradelist (2 replies, posted in Reddit MTG Trades)
Do you have anything else that isnt posted? Your TL has almost noting worth the price of Shocks, much less Fetchs
179 2016-03-14 21:10:50
Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust (126 replies, posted in Announcements)
sebi wrote:
valdor wrote:Ill be honest sebi, that is kinda unfair to say. I love deckbox but I dont pay for premium. Instead I support deckbox by telling everyone I know about it and convincing people to try and join. I promote the site where I can. So saying that you can only support by paying money seems unfair to those that dont have credit/debit cards or are extremely tight on money that even $5/months is too much.
Sure, this is why ANY kind of payment information is accepted, you do not have to be premium. Which means you can buy or sell, or whichever way you prefer.
Having zero verification on our users is a very bad position to be in, because there is nothing we can do against scammers when they do not even have to show a credit card or paypal account to trade cards worth thousands of dollars.
That is fair. I did not consider the buying/selling bit so I can concede to that.
180 2016-03-14 21:00:51
Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust (126 replies, posted in Announcements)
sebi wrote:
El_Panda_Rojo wrote:The biggest issue I have is that people like myself who only trade on deckbox, not buy or sell, will never be able to get to level 4. I bought a card using the site one time, but for the most part if I'm spending money then I'm just going to do it using tcgplayer. However, I have hundreds of completed trades over a couple of years with 100% positive feedback - why should that exclude me from this "level 4" just because I don't have a credit card on file? Maybe I just don't want to put in my card info. That doesn't mean I'm a less reliable trader. Either change the criteria or scrap the idea, please.
So you consider the community a useful tool for you but you would not even consider supporting it by becoming a premium member, thus you wish that the idea be scrapped
Ill be honest sebi, that is kinda unfair to say. I love deckbox but I dont pay for premium. Instead I support deckbox by telling everyone I know about it and convincing people to try and join. I promote the site where I can. So saying that you can only support by paying money seems unfair to those that dont have credit/debit cards or are extremely tight on money that even $5/months is too much.
181 2016-03-14 19:22:57
Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust (126 replies, posted in Announcements)
9700377 wrote:
As detailed in the OP, this is a terrible idea, at least for me. If I want to trade with a new user, I'm *unable* to do something worth more than $50 with them? Allegedly for my own protection??? Under this rule, this would ban probably 25% of the trades I do.
I could see these restrictions making sense for newer users trading with each other. But for experienced users trading with newer users who will be sending first, this would be unacceptably restrictive.
I hope this is an "obvious" error. I think most messy situations arise when new users trade with each other, not when new users trade with more-experienced users. The latter circumstance does not need any additional protections, especially those that make viable trades impossible.
The proposed rule is to cut down on a potential scammers. Messy situations happen all the time and are not limited to new users. Hell I have had only one issue myself with trading and it was with a user that had more trades then I did. Are there suggestions to improve on the rule? Increase the limits? Or are you opposed to the whole thing in general?
Though the amount of times I see profiles that are potential scammers is kinda high. I am willing to sacrifice some trades to make sure I am protected from a scammer.
182 2016-03-14 18:16:20
Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust (126 replies, posted in Announcements)
This all sounds really fair. My question in can I still ask a user with say only 15 trades (this should make them Level 3 if all trades were bigger and they met the time requirement) to still send first even though we are both level 3 but I have 85 more trades? Or since we are both level 3 we are required to simul-send?
183 2016-03-10 01:31:17
Re: H:lots and GP Vancouver playmat W: Wishlist (4 replies, posted in Reddit MTG Trades)
Bump. Still really looking for those priorities.
184 2016-03-08 18:26:56
Re: H:lots and GP Vancouver playmat W: Wishlist (4 replies, posted in Reddit MTG Trades)
Updated and bump
185 2016-03-07 15:02:10
Re: H:lots and GP Vancouver playmat W: Wishlist (4 replies, posted in Reddit MTG Trades)
BUMP
186 2016-03-05 16:50:20
Re: H:lots and GP Vancouver playmat W: Wishlist (4 replies, posted in Reddit MTG Trades)
Bump
187 2016-03-04 17:10:24
Topic: H:lots and GP Vancouver playmat W: Wishlist (4 replies, posted in Reddit MTG Trades)
Hey all. I am looking to clear out my wishlist. The priorities are:
Gamble
Maze of Ith
Dust Bowl
Coalition Relic
War's Toll
Kher Keep
Secondary priorities are:
Atarka's Command
2x Vexing Devil
Devastating Summons
Everything else is tertiary in priority:
4x Entomb
3x Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
4x Ancient Tomb
1x Cabal Therapy
Mystic Confluence
4x Bloodbraid Elf (FNM Promo preferred)
3x Ponder
188 2016-02-21 06:49:19
Re: Magic for Marriage - now with duals (8 replies, posted in Buying & Selling Cards)
Are you still selling?
189 2016-02-18 19:24:07
Topic: R/mtgeternal (0 replies, posted in General Discussion)
Hi all, so on Reddit there has been a small movement happening. With the announcement of Eternal Masters coming out there is a flow of mixed feeling in most people. For those that play Legacy already, there is a breath of life that they feel this set will bring more people. Things like Force of Will and Wasteland are confirmed to be reprinted and there are many other speculated cards that are to be reprinted. There then are others that feel while this set is going to be great, there comes the realization that while the spoiled cards are high priced and Eternal Maters will bring down the price, this set will not reprint anything on the Reserve list and that those cards, like the duels and Lions Eye Diamond, will reamin to be the biggest barrier to playing Legacy. This is already has spiked cards like Tropical Island by $50, the same with Lion's Eyes Diamond. This is making it so that unless you already have RL (Reserve List) cards, you still may never be able play Legacy.
Enter https://www.reddit.com/r/mtgEternal/.
From the FAQ on the subreddit: Eternal magic is a competitive format that does not include reserved list cards. The popularity of modern comes from the mix of power level and availability of cards. There is no doubt that players wish to play legacy as it is a much more complex and intuitive format. With the upcoming set EMA, there will be a large influx of cards available to be played in eternal formats, however the barrier will always be the restricted list cards which we have already seen spike beyond reason. The fact is that new supply of these cards will never be made and we as a community must adapt to that. This format will not be legacy, and it will not be modern. It will evolve it's own meta-game with cards that need to be removed from the format or added as appropriate. This will be done as a community.
We are serious about getting this format going and to make it evolve in such away that it can coexist with the other formats. We do not want to take over Legacy or Modern. We want our own format that we can Force of will someones Splinter twin as an example. We want to have access to these powerful and iconic spells with out having to spend $1000 on just 4 lands. Please join us as we work out details and strive to create this format. This is a community driven format that will discuss cards and talk about it before bans happen. All decisions will be based on how the players feel about them.
190 2016-02-17 16:00:10
Re: Magic for Marriage - now with duals (8 replies, posted in Buying & Selling Cards)
Crap... I hate that I have to wait for may tax return. I want sooo much of your stuff lol.:D
Are prices negotiable with a larger order?
191 2016-02-17 15:54:18
Re: W: Thought-Knot Seer, Reality Smasher H:List (4 replies, posted in Reddit MTG Trades)
Trade sent.
192 2016-02-08 20:07:36
Re: H: Modern (updated) W: Ad Nauseum (2 replies, posted in Reddit MTG Trades)
Are you wanting any serum visions or just the original?
195 2016-02-01 23:07:21
Topic: W: Norin EDH (2 replies, posted in Reddit MTG Trades)
I am looking for stuff specifically for a Norin the Wary EDH deck. Everything in my want list is needed at equal priority. I have my TL open and I also have the GP Vancouver Play mat and Promo Stoneforge Mystic. that I might be willing to trade away.
196 2016-01-25 17:57:16
Re: Need GriShoalbrand stuff (4 replies, posted in Reddit MTG Trades)
Just two more cards! Thanks to all those who traded!
197 2016-01-25 14:17:03
Re: Combo deck (11 replies, posted in Decks and Deckbuilding)
Honestly, if you ar going to try and do this combo, you might as well add Fling as a way to push the damage right to the face. If it gets countered you are boned but it is another way to try and push the damage.
198 2016-01-22 02:31:14
Re: Need GriShoalbrand stuff (4 replies, posted in Reddit MTG Trades)
Updated and bump.
199 2016-01-20 21:36:01
Re: Recent Modern Bans (7 replies, posted in General Discussion)
FlutterGuy wrote:
I honestly believe bloom titan will evolve. One of my buddies play it and he switched to 4 Azusa and 4 Simian Spirit Guides to still win on turn 2. I feel like people who want to play degenerate decks will switch to this.
I understand the twin ban. I don't think twin was unhealthy, sure it pushed decks out of the format, but it also policed decks. The only reason it got banned, I feel, is because of the pro tour. Just like pod last year, Wizards needs to shake things up to diversify the meta. I don't know if I agree with them on that, but they are a business and they can't let a cash cow like modern get stale.
And I might be bias on this, but I think the new best deck in the format is Anafenza/Melira company. As a person who plays the deck, I just don't see how we lose now. Gain infinite life on turn 3. Twin was really the only deck that didn't scoop to infinite life. Now that that's it if the way aggro decks can't beat Kitchen Finks. Control decks don't really get a chance to interact. You also just win before midrange decks get to stabilize. Other combo decks can't go off as fast and now probably can't beat the life gain.
But that's just my two cents.
I agree. I have heard that Bloom players tweaking the list to still enable fast turn 3 kills with the right had and SSG. I dont think Bloom is dead just yet and can for sure evolve to a good level. I like adding more Azusa to make up for Bloom.
I am still unsure. While I hate that they banned Twin just for the PT, I am also pretty excited to see where things are going to go and how the Pros will go into the event.
I think that other combos like your Anafenza/Melira can start making an appearance with the main combo deck being taken out.
elpablo wrote:
I was a bloom player, it's a super challenging deck to play correctly, and I really liked playing it. The lines are not intuitive at all. I'm a better player overall from having run it the last year or so. However, I was sure something was going to happen to it though, so I aggressively traded into twin the last month or so... talk about getting kicked in the nuts...
uhg... anyways...
With that, i think kiki-twin could be a thing... kiki does die to bolt but you can also res him with k-command. Kiki/k-command is like having 7 coppies of twin in your deck or more thanks to jace/snap. The mana base would be supper tight though... I think cryptic command is probably just unable to be played in the kiki version of the deck.
I have tried to play Bloom and I agree, you really have to know the deck to play it well. I couldnt figure it out and I respect those who can. As we mentioned above, have you though of trying to play Bloom with 4x Azusa and Simian Spirit Guide? Is that a good change to keep the deck alive in some way?
Yesh. if you want UUU up for Cryptic and RRR for Kiki, it just wont work. Cryptic would be cut for differnt counter spells I think. More Dispels in the Main probably?