2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • 2

    posted a message on Why pucatrade is bad.
    I have been using it for years and the number of incidents I have had can be counted on one hand. The OP apparently signed up to the site just to bad-mouth Puca Trade (every post they have made), and keeps doing so. He fundamentally misunderstands what Puca is. It is a trading site, not a marketplace. Do you go down to your local shop and expect to build a new tier 1 deck by trading with other players only?

    I also don't see how it can be inflationary. I am no economist so I am willing to listen to a cogent argument, but since the algorithm produces puca point values that are very close to TCG mid so a pp is pretty much worth $.01. Admittedly they seem less agile, but they are also not susceptible to the same kind of low availability aberrations that other price aggregators are.

    In the U.S. it is a hassle if you are just a casual seller trying to turn cards you don't use into cards that you do. Ebay and paypal really allow a lot of abuse from the buyer, you have the uphill battle of trying to get market value when you have very few sales, and the rating system for Ebay is pure blackmail. I have never bothered with selling on TCG because I just have never needed to.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 2

    posted a message on Fake cards in tournaments....
    Quote from Lakanna »

    Edited in: I notice that you don't actually try to refute that it's true...

    Why would I refute the fact that WotC have created a collectible card game? Of course prices for cards would go down if they were printed them eternally. That does not mean that WotC caused counterfeiting, greed by people who don't give a ***** about the creative works of othe people did.

    The U.S. treasury prints money and we agree on it's value, but they (or we) have done nothing wrong that justifies counterfeiting that currency. Yes, if the dollar had less value it would not be counterfeited as much, but printing more is not the right answer, nor is it right for the consumer to tacitly engage in counterfeiting by way apathy.

    There are only two parties that are the problem here, the counterfeiters and the people that knowingly buy and distribute counterfeit cards. Everything else- all this finger pointing at WotC and how they manage the game is just a smokescreen to hide the fact that such acts are wrong.

    But, whatever. Thieves are always going to try and justify why they do it and make themselves to be some kind of anti-hero. It's bull*****, but I guess they have to do something to allow themselves to loom in the mirror, right.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 1

    posted a message on [[Official]] Modern Prices Discussion
    Quote from JTMTG »
    I post this in Modern prices becasue my collection is 95% Modern based.

    So I got my first real job recently Ive finished up Uni and Ive found I really don't have time or the interest to play MTGO anymore.
    I have something like 1.3k USD worth of cards and im debating on cashing out or just leaving it all there for when I may want to play again.
    I know I will play MTG again but these days its more likely to be IRL commander with friends for the social aspect.

    I doubt I will play much this year or the next and about the only thing I can see that might bring me back in is MM2017 if it exists.

    I don't "need" the money now but money is money I guess the question is are my MTGO cards going to appreciate more then whatever I use the money to buy. If I where to play sooner then I expected I should be in a position to just drop 1k on the game. So it might be demoralizing to learn that snapcaster and co have doubled but it wont be the end of the world.

    Thoughts?

    I sold my MTGO collection that I'd had since Champions of Kamigawa in April of last year. I'd had plenty of periods where in I just stopped playing online for whatever reason, once for a couple of years, but after Modern started I gave it more attention. I was looking for deals on cards that would allow me to play archetypes that I could not yet play in meatspace, and even though I was not super aggressive with buying/selling/trading I'd amassed a decent collection, though I had no idea what the price a dealer might give me for the cards. The thing that really made me leave is that I didn't have the time to devote to playing competitive Modern (leagues had not come back yet), and even when I did it was never much of a draw for me. I play tested decks I had in meatspace a fair bit, but even then it felt like something I felt I should do rather than something I wanted to do. I didn't mind the interface as much as other folks, though my laptop is pretty old and the memory leaks were crippling at times. It was more the realization that without the social aspect the game was not as much of a draw. It felt like homework that I was doing so that I could go out to the shop, have fun playing Modern, and not get crushed entirely.

    Though, if I'm honest, the thing that really really got me to sell it was the quote I got. I had been thinking about it so I got a quote from MTGO Traders just to see what it would be, and I was stunned. I thought it would be like maybe $600, and I wasn't sure if that was enough for me to not just come back to it like I had so many times, but (and I can't believe I forgot how much the quote was for) it was something like $3200. I read that email like 10 times thinking I'd read it wrong, and even printed it out because I knew my wife would never believe me. That was enough for me to sell out of an online game, that I played only sparingly, in a hot minute. I took something like $500 in trade credit from their brick and mortar paper card affiliate, but the rest was cash money that I was thrilled to put into family savings (I gave myself a few hundred $ to play with).

    Here is what I'd say to you: I don't think that your collection, on the whole, is going to get devalued if you leave it. If you really don't need the money and you think you might spend it anyway if you sold your collection, then there is really no good reason to liquidate it. That is if you are confidant that you won't want to play much MTGO some time in the future. You can wait to decide that, too. If you have things like Fetches, Shocks, Snapcaster, Hierarch, and Confidant - cards that will be mainstays of the format and are not likely to get significantly cheaper, then your overall $ value is not going to be going down. If you think you might want to play again next summer then I would just mothball it and decide later.

    ... was to change my password to something very complex and meaningless - the kind of password that is extraordinarily hard to crack, but you would never use if you were playing because it is obnoxious to type all the time; record that password in a secure place that I would remember and know that I'd be able to find in a year, then just walked away from the account. My son had an unfortunate experience with another online game when he stopped playing for several months in which he came back only to find someone had cracked his convenience password that was shared with a couple other things, and just took all of the gear and stuff he'd acquired. It had been done long enough from the time he found out that it was impossible to try and recover his stuff, so when I made mine as impossible to crack as I could. That might be a bit paranoid of me, though.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on [[Official]] Card Sleeves and Protectors Discussion
    Quote from Lodrrr »
    hi dudes!
    i have following question. I do love me the Ultra Pro Pro-Matte Non-Glare sleeves: http://www.ultrapro.com/product_info.php?products_id=3334
    actually i recently started to like the "normal" ones, too: http://www.ultrapro.com/product_info.php?products_id=1075

    My question now is related to the backside of the sleeves. Is the backside identic? Or are there differences on the back, too? Thank you for your answers Smile

    I have both in blue- the regular I bought a few years ago, and the matte front ones have trickled in via Puca trades. The backs of most are the same, but there are a few of the matte front sleeves that are a slightly darker blue. it is not so you would notice if the two aren't side by side, but you couldn't use them (the darker ones) both in a deck together. Otherwise I have been known to absent mindedly put them in decks without noticing until I draw that card.

    @Xenfire: I can attest that kmc perfect fits slide easily into both DS mat and KMC hyper mat. The tighter fit keeps them from sliding up.

    Re: DS opacity- all DS non-metallic color of their original product line are noticeably less opaque when empty and held up to a light. In the right light I have been able to see the card back through when my opponent is using the green and blue ones, but in most settings I can't.

    KMC makes a standard glossy sleeve in almost the same blue as DS, and I realized I had both when taking inventory of my sleeves. There was just the slightest hint of one behind darker than the other. It is enough that I could tell if they had cards them and were in the same deck, but it was really hard to tell in indoor light side by side when they didn't have cards. I finally was sorting them in bright natural light and realized that their opacities are dramatically different, which made sorting possible.

    I seem to recall that the red matte DS are as opaque as hyper mats, but I only checked once when my son bought them. I have just stuck to hyper mats so I can't say for sure on the red or any finish or metallic color.
    Posted in: Other Magic Products
  • 1

    posted a message on Harmless Offering Loading Ready Run
    Quote from Worzel »
    So I was curious to see if anyone had bothered MaRo about this yet, and searched the Blogatog for Donate. The results: a page full of posts about how he will never reprint the card (the effect, possibly, but not the card), regardless of reserve list. Enjoy.

    This should just be a lesson that MaRo is not the sole arbiter of what goes into a set, and when he comments on Blogatog it should be understood that it is not hard policy. I'm gonna guess that he was not thrilled about the card you can cast from exile either, though I'll bet the flavor in both cases was enough to keep him from working to get them left out.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on [[Official]] Modern Prices Discussion
    Quote from gkourou »
    Nahiri did not last finally, right? Huge drop during the latest days. The weird thing is that there are some Standard lists(4c-rite company) that encorporate her, in addition to Jeskai and Kiki Chord.

    One factor is that we are just about hitting peak supply to play ratio. From here on out less boxes will be opened, with much of the additional copies in the marketplace coming from redemption, all the while more and more will be bought by speculators and folks like me who put them in their modern tool box- effectively removing them from existence.

    Clearly her hype spike having run it's course is also a factor, but the last one I picked up was traded at $27 in value, and I am comfortable paying that.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on [[Official]] Modern Prices Discussion
    Quote from damagecase »
    There, no more ambiguity or semantic tom****ery.

    So, define what a tempo deck is in regards to magic? Control? Archetype? These are just three that have driven me nuts in the past with people using the term and talking about very different things. What is apparent each time I do get this bee in my bonnet is that there is no established definition for many "slang" terms that the magic community has adopted. As much as I would like for there to be an official MTG dictionary that everyone goes by, or even to use the actual OED definition in some cases, people will usually just assign their own meaning and not change.

    For my part a staple is a card that season after season, or perhaps cyclically, keeps being a relevant card in the most played decks. This is a useful definition for me because it is how I separate out cards that I have put in deck after deck into two binders because it would be a pain to repeatedly have to put them back in their set binders. I can't even begin to count the number of times I have put Serum Visions into a tier 1-1.5 deck, only to take them out when I need the cards to build another top deck. That is what defines a "staple" for me. The loss of Kitchen Finks from the format would probably change it little, but even if it isn't the most relevant card right now I am confidant it will be again. I know where to look for it when that day comes.

    Nahiri does not fit this because there has not been enough time to judge it, however since I also put all of my Planeswalkers in those binder regardless (just easier to have them all in one place) it matters little.

    Oh, and I (for one) do not think that Modern would look all that different if Goyf were banned (which should not happen). It would just be replaced by the next most efficient beater in the same way that Serum Visions replaced Ponder and Preodained when they were banned. that does not make Goyf any less of a staple as far as I'm concerned.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on [[Official]] Modern Prices Discussion
    If that's the way you see it then everything Wizards makes is somehow involved in the secondary market. Printing Nahiri in SoI impacts the secondary market- both because how long they print the product impacts the price, and due to the way the meta game shifts to adapt. If you want to define it that broadly then it sort of loses meaning.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on [[Official]] Modern Prices Discussion
    Quote from itachiitachi »

    It's also Wotc being involved in the secondary market.

    The secondary market is just that- secondary. It is when product that is no longer factory sealed is sold- often in a piecemeal fashion. Wizards selling factory sealed product is the primary market by definition.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 3

    posted a message on MaRo Announces New Intro Product Planeswalker deck
    Quote from signofzeta »
    All I ask for is for 5 choices per set. As a side effect of the change to planewalker deck, we will be seeing the same planeswalker mug every 2 or 3 sets instead of having a variety of cool creatures as the cover card.

    I understand what appeals to you, but I have no doubt that this is as much of a reaction to sales as it is a creative decision. I guarantee that if intro packs sold well they would not have been dropped. I know that LGS could not care less about them, and I see leftover intro decks from previous sets on the racks at big box stores long after the next set has come out.

    Imagine that people get to play with cool planewalkers. Imagine that they had 5 to choose from, instead of 2.

    imagine that WotC runs out of PW design space twice as quickly (if you are talking about per set). Wizards doesn't want 5 for them to choose from, they want to two that will get bought. The other three are just waste. Having 2/set means that people are much more likely to buy 100% of this product each set, and they don't have to put money into producing a product that so many players ignore and let gather dust on shelves.

    As I said, one person would more likely buy the entire set of 5, but now 3 sales are lost because they already completed the set at 2..

    No, because most people (who look at this kind of product) will still only buy two no matter how many choices they have. The others would just sit on shelves. I will grant you that 5 PW decks would draw more people to buy for a bit, but as soon as WotC proved that these walkers were not going anywhere near competitive play the sales would drop off again. Very few people are going to spend the $45 extra dollars to get 3 more decks that are aimed at players who are transitioning from Duels or the free decks regardless if they have Timmy walkers in them or not. The threshold for how much the target audience is willing to spend on low level product is finite, and printing 5 choices just makes for more waste.

    Besides, psychology has shown that as much as people think they want more choices, they are actually more satisfied with the choice they make if they are given fewer options to choose from.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.