You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Deckbox Forum » Posts by StubbyG
Pages 1
Hello everyone! I just wanted to put a post here so everyone could find a link to join the mailing list. Just follow this URL and put in your address: https://www.zeromailer.com/join/magic
I don't have a set frequency with how often I send out, but I think it will be about twice a month. I will definitely do one in advance of any events I have planned. Feedback on the newsletter, this group, my events, etc. are all appreciated! You can email me directly at Garrett.Hansen@outlook.com.
sebi wrote:Fropper wrote:Thank you!
Any info whether Rennaissance and the other missing editions will be added?We didn't have them because gatherer does not list them. We need to build an importer for magiccards.info for these sets. It's high prio now, so it will come in the next 2-3 of weeks, along with the trading opportunities rewrite.
That's awesome! You guys are the best!
I second this.
As for the rules text changing, I believe the rules team updates Oracle (the official card text as opposed to the printed one) every time a new set comes out. Sometimes it's just keywording something (such as "fights" or "dies" from M12) but almost every Oracle update has a significant change for a couple of cards to make them work more smoothly within the rules.
Also, if 2008 is when you did the DB import, there will likely be a lot of subtle differences since they did the biggest comprehensive rules change sine 6th Edition in 2009, when M10 came out.
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!
Once more, I saw another post I'd like to add commentary to. 
I would love to see cards of mismatched versions, or at least of unspecified versions, appear in the trading opportunities window. For example - I haven't specified the version of Ponder that I have. My partner has specified only Lorwyn version. It turns out that I have some from Lorwyn -- I'd at least like to see that we have a possible match. I have over 12K cards on here, and I can't possibly go back and enter the version on all of them, but in many cases possible trading matches aren't showing up.
I'm not sure how I feel about this particular suggestion, but I would love for the opposite to be true. I have a lot of cards in my wishlist with unspecified editions because I just need the card. I don't know if this affects my trading opportunities or not, but I would prefer that it didn't
Lastly -- the default pricing -- I think it makes more sense to leave the default pricing of an unspecified card as the LOWEST priced version, as opposed to the most recent version -- it will provide an incentive for people to specify their versions, since adding the version can only increase your price/value.
I'm pretty sure the most recent version typically is the lowest priced version, since they're usually still being opened in packs. Check the prices on shocklands for a good example of this.
HikingStick wrote:I think, long term, it would be great if the cards were in collapsible rows (or something similar):
Detonate (4)
+- 5th E. (1)
+- 4th Ed. (2)
+- Mirrodin (1)Those who want the details get them, but those who don't can see the total quantity on a single line.
Agreed, this would be perfect.
I would like to toss my two cents in for the collapsible rows. I love being able to see different versions on their own rows, but most of the time I want a total count. Also, as it stands now, only the row showing the total would need to have the deck count in it, because having the deck count for all of that card show up on each row is confusing. Alternatively, maybe we could have the option of specifying which cards are in which decks. I know this would help me out, especially with tracking foils. As an added bonus, it could help improve the accuracy of the "deck value," especially if the issue with foil prices can be resolved.
Hmmm... Foil prices seem the same as non-foils...
As much as I want the foil prices to be accurate, I believe this is more an issue with TCGPlayer's API. If you click the link (price) and actually view the cards on their site, they don't distinguish between prices for foil and non-foil. You actually have to scan the list for a foil version which, of course, is a higher price and likely affects the "average" and "high" prices of the card in question. Pretty stupid if you ask me, but a lot of people use TCGPlayer for their pricing and, as far as I know, they're the only ones with an API.
Thank you so much for Commander's Arsenal! I just got it for Christmas and was about to bug you about getting it in the system. Now, have you figured out a way to the Duels of the Planeswalkers precons in there yet?
Also, thank you for the total decks column again. I have a suggestion to make it more useful though: allow us to flag decks as 'active' or 'inactive.' As in, this deck is physically together or just a decklist for a past or future deck.
Thanks again and keep up the great work!
Pages 1
Deckbox Forum » Posts by StubbyG