sebi wrote:
Fixed, enchantment creatures are now considered creatures.
Awesome, thank you.
1 2014-05-24 16:38:48
Re: Enchantment Creatures sorting into the wrong section (15 replies, posted in Site Discussion)
2 2014-05-17 19:56:02
Topic: Enchantment Creatures sorting into the wrong section (15 replies, posted in Site Discussion)
In the deck builder, some Enchantment Creatures (or maybe all of them, I haven't tested them all) are sorting into the Enchantment section. I think it's probably reasonable that Enchantment Creatures should sort like Artifact Creatures--into the Creature section.
The two I've noticed are Perplexing Chimera and Thassa, God of the Sea.
3 2014-04-02 20:28:45
Re: Site-wide card pricing changes (197 replies, posted in Announcements)
Timber wrote:
clockworkcactus wrote:I can't imagine there isn't a better solution to monetizing the site than the market. I understand the need to monetize, but why would you think it would be successful if in the process you alienate a good portion of the user base you've been building for six years?
Hopefully you guys come to your senses and figure out a better solution.
Read the previous posts from the developers:
1. no market feature = no funds = no deckbox new updates. If you want the site to continue, you have to get through this growing pain.
2. The toothpaste is out of the tube. Even if the market feature was eliminated, TCGplayer has blocked its API for future use.
3. This API problem was inevitable.
1. You may be willing to accept that the market feature was the only way to monetize the site, but I'm willing to bet that you're in a very small minority among the users here.
2. You have absolutely zero way of knowing this. TCG Player is a large business. If you think TCG Player wouldn't again allow a site as heavily trafficked as Deckbox to resume driving business to them if Deckbox removed themselves as competition then I don't know what to tell you.
3. I'm not even sure what to make of this. It's a very blunt statement with nothing backing it up and it stands against common sense. The API problem came about because Deckbox thought, for some reason, that if they started competing against TCG Player that TCG Player would continue to allow them to use their pricing data.
4 2014-04-02 19:34:54
Re: Site-wide card pricing changes (197 replies, posted in Announcements)
buughost wrote:
Is this because you guys explicitly added a market/sales functionality? If so... Get rid of it. I feel like your primary user base is traders not sellers (though I could be wrong). Maybe you should do some research or poll your active user base. I've sold stuff here occasionally, but I'd rather have TCG pricing integrated rather than a specific sales function.
This sums up what I feel pretty well. I use Deckbox for trades and TCGPlayer/LFGS for purchases. I have no interest in combining the two into one site if the end result is worse for trades because the key feature that made bulk trading and trading in general convenient on Deckbox is removed and worse for purchases because the market isn't as competitive due to the lower amount of sellers.
I can't imagine there isn't a better solution to monetizing the site than the market. I understand the need to monetize, but why would you think it would be successful if in the process you alienate a good portion of the user base you've been building for six years?
Anyway, I haven't been here long enough or done enough trades that my opinion carries much weight. I will say the reason I switched to Deckbox from other trading sites was how easy it was to balance a trade. I think with that gone and this new farce of a pricing system I'm going to put trades on hold for a bit. Hopefully you guys come to your senses and figure out a better solution.