Strixhaven, Commander 2021 (Page 2 of 2)

UPDATE

Scryfall has now implemented its solution, which is honestly one I didn't even think of: They kept the etched variants part of the main Mystical Archives edition, but gave them unique (made-up) collector numbers (as in, not printed on the physical cards) by appending an "e" to the number. E.g. You have Counterspell #15 (for regular and foil) and Counterspell #15e (for foil-etched).

As a purist, I dislike this solution for the same reasons I dislike appending "(Foil Etched)" to the card name a la TCGPlayer, or creating a fake edition like Mystical Archive Foil Etched. However, as a pragmatist, I can see how this solves the problem without causing any practical issues.

Unfortunately, Deckbox's current database schema doesn't support non-integer collector numbers. This has caused Sebi problems in the past, notably in the edition Unstable, which featured a LOT of cards that had the same name and collector number, yet had different rules text / flavor text / artwork. Same is true for the cards I mentioned before, like ZEN and BFZ basic lands (should have e.g. both #250 and #250a) and Tahngarth, Talruum Hero (should have #74 and #74★). Sebi's solution for Unstable was to append parenthetical indicators to the card's name (not preferred long-term). In contrast, his solution for ZEN basics was to use "made-up" collector numbers beyond 249, while for BFZ, he did not do this, so the versions get mixed up upon CSV import.

I still believe a foil-etched flag, that can be linked to a pricing source, is the best solution. Scryfall doesn't utilize flags in this way, so the solution they came up with is likely the only one that would work for them. That said, if Sebi finds adding the foil-etched flag to be too difficult in the current database setup, then using "made-up" collector numbers would be an acceptable solution. Changing his database tables from INT to VARCHAR for the collector number would be more ideal long-term, but again, if that would present too many difficulties, then utilizing collector numbers beyond what Wizards uses (so #127 - #252 in the case of Mystical Archives) would still allow CSV imports to differentiate between the variants, unlike what happens with BFZ basics.

TL;DR — A foil-etched flag is still the best solution for Deckbox's unique interface, but implementing unique collector numbers like Scryfall has done can work too. If Sebi wants to do it like Scryfall, then he has to change the collector number's data type in his database. Otherwise, he will have to use collector numbers outside of the official Wizards ones.

As far as people setting items as etched even though such a thing doesn't exist is already an issue with any other tag. I can set my revised cards to foil if I want.

I do like etched tag as a solution as long as the connection to various pricings can be figured out.

As an alternative, someone was saying that the cataloging system doesn't like alpha characters. How about decimals?
Card 56/250 is the regular printing while Card 56.1/250 is the etched version? You could have up to 10 different versions of the card by using one place value after the decimal, 100 if you use a second place value 56.01/250. Preparing for when Wizards completely goes overboard and starts etching random letters in the flavor text or something....

I think sebi is MIA currently, no update since april

Sadly we are missing the new secret lair and more

I don't envy you Sebi. Has the DB at least behaved through the upgrades? Many a weekend have I spent babying a DB that decided to throw tantrums....

As I said before, that will get the job done, since it will allow for differentiation on a CSV.

My main concern is still with ease of identification when scanning lists of cards (whether in trades or one's own inventory). Most other card identifiers are easier to identify at a glance. Language, condition, foiling, and edition all have identifiable icons. The closest parallel are cards with variant artwork in the same set -- there's no way to tell them apart just by glancing at the table row; you have to hover to see the card image. However, it's worse with the etched variant, because the artwork is the same. We will have to hover over the edition icon in order to see the collector number, and then you'll "just have to know" that the little appended e means etched.

So. I shall be the etched flag flag-bearer till the bitter end.  ;-)

To be clear, I'm actually very happy to hear you proposing to change collector numbers to strings, as that could fix the other bugs I've mentioned (BFZ basics, Tahngarth). It's a good solution to implement. I just don't think that happens to be the best solution in the case of etched foils.

If you do indeed go with unique collector numbers a la Scryfall rather than flags, might I make a UI request? Could you add Collector Number as an additional optional column for card listings? Then at least I could see the collector number when scanning, and won't have to waste time hovering.

Agreed. There's definitely "solutions" within the current system to represent proxies, at least to your own eyes. Just do what works for you. Like, I have actual alters, so I can't use that flag... but I could just use "textless" or "artist proof".

However, those types of hacks have a couple drawbacks. The main one pointed out in the thread I linked to is that the cards are still included in the inventory's valuation. If my real cards are worth $5k (at least per Deckbox), but I proxy a full set of duals, some Cradles, a Mox Diamond.... it shouldn't suddenly say my inventory is worth $20k or whatever. Sure, you can filter out whatever flag it is you used to represent proxies, then view Total Set Value for the filtered listing.... but that's just hacky.

A second concern is with universal recognizability when it comes to those "anything in my inventory is available to trade, just ask" type posts. Without an actual proxy identifier, people will think your Taiga with an altered flag is just that -- an altered Taiga -- and propose a trade for it, wasting both their time and yours. "But meldon," you say, "it's as simple as explaining it in your profile or post." Well, nothing is as simple as it should be when it comes to real-life interactions with human beings. People don't read. People will misunderstand. You'll forget to add it to your post. And so on. Can it work? Sure. But is it the most ideal UX? No.

I don't have any personal investment in the discussion, as I don't see any point in listing proxies in my inventory. But for the overall betterment of the site, I would propose a dedicated proxy flag that hooks into the pricing as the ideal solution. And since Sebi might have been looking into flags anyways, just thought it was a good opportunity to bring it up.

Not sure, I did not yet deploy the changes on live.

I'll make a post in announcements when I'm sure about the deploy.

@sebi

Since we have your attention on the tread right now I kinda wanted to bring up the issue of card prices. Now I know deckbox has its own way of calculating pricing for cards and I have heard of the issues with TCGplayer in the past and everything. I get it. However the prices here compared to the rest of the collection universe has been exponentially increasing and since all the recent card spikes and such has just exacerbated the issue.

Currently on deckbox my collection is worth $51,000 which is exciting to see, but I also have my collection in the DelverLens app since it allows me to see other price structures and according to the app my collection, with TCG Market pricing, is only worth $40,000. That is over a 20% increase in value here compared to the rest of the world. A 20% difference is extremely hard to justify as some sort of variance between systems. This is a very well known issue and because of this many of us go to TCG player to check prices before making trades here because we just can't rely on the prices. This is just extra overhead which makes using deckbox a little less desirable.

It also does not seem like prices are really updating nearly as much as they should be or not in the best way possible.

I have a Mythic Edition Jace, the Mind Sculptor. You can see in my inventory today that it is $313.37. According to TCGPlayer it is about $180 ($210 mid). According to MTGGoldfish it is about (which uses TCGMid for prices) it has not been over $300 since January 2019. That seems to be about the last time I saw the price of the card change on deckbox was about 2 years ago.

I also get the other side of the coin too. Right now my highest priced card is a foil 7th edition Strands of Night at nearly $600. There is no way in HELL that card is $600. It was steady at about $36 until some smacked-asses decided to up the price of TCG Mid (and probably thus their collection's price) by putting them up for $600. Same thing happened with Magistrate's Veto a few months back when one guy put them up three of them up for between $1500 - $2000 each. I'd love to see my collection jump an extra $1500 over night, but when the card is really worth like $5 ... moral of the story never use TCG Mid for pricing.

I would LOVE someone to want to make a trade for my Strands and give me $600 in value for it, but I would not even feel right accepting it because I know that price is inflated by 1500%. Since I know it is obviously erroneous I then have of go check another website for a price and since I have to compare apples to apples I have to check all their card prices which just takes a lot of time to even out a trade that way. Then their is always the issue of the other party not using that scale for price or seeing a trade that appears uneven because of deckbox pricing and making it seem like I am trying to rip them off in some way. Where as if everything was just more inline with the rest of the world that kinda thing is just eliminated.

I have not made a trade with just deckbox prices in a year and a half maybe? I have had to check other websties for prices because everything is just so off from reality overall. I'd like to get back to the point where I feel I can trust deckbox a little more on pricing again.

I would like to say that if you are willing to follow Scryfall's lead with the etched foiling that maybe you could use Scryfall for pricing. Their prices are not an fluid as TCG obviously, but they seem fairly consistent with actual real prices. And then in that case you could even incorporate the scryfallid into your database and maybe make it available for exporting thus making it even easier for everyone to cross reference between systems since it is such a common identifier these days. Just and idea on that front.

I tried to use the Mass Input option, and it did add all the cards, but even though I selected "one of each" it added two of everything to my inventory. Why is everything listed twice?

Late reply to this thread - it doesn't look like the "foil etched" issue was ever resolved - is that correct?

Gotcha - I ran into the Secret Lair exceptions. I didn't see a way to enter etched foil cards for SLD 305-309, 325-329, or 590. There certainly might be more. @sebi, is addressing this on your roadmap?

Last edited by franklesniak (2022-06-03 14:40:19)