The key difficulty is of course knowing what to lock out. Keep in mind there is a ton of removal that hits the gargoyle. I too like the idea but did not sufficiently develop it to matter. I think one thing would be echoing truth and another the new jelly fish, I mean wizard. Those four cards create some synergy together. Then you can toss in Stonecloaker to protect your lock creatures and also to take out graveyard recursion. So thats 20 cards. 16 to go.
I would like to add that a lot of those bots that sell higher and buy lower than others often advertise "best" prices, thereby compounding the unethical behaviour with deception.
Fine read and a really great topic for discussion here.
One quick point if I may...
I don't for a second accept this idea that it's OK for bot chains to buy singles at lower prices and turn around and sell them for higher prices. I don't see where the added value is. "Mass inventory" is not an acceptable argument to me because there are enough players online drafting and cracking packs, that I believe cards are reasonably easy to find. We're not driving hundreds of miles to find cards as you alluded to. There are two "distribution centers" online if you will, and those are the WotC store and the classified section, which everyone has equal access to. The bottom line is these bot chains are exploiting players in trades too. Competition drives their revenue, and they are feeding off the negligence of players. This is not ethical to me.
Hopefully v4 will have a better classified section with some kind of buying/selling bot or function that everyone can freely use, without having to jump through any hoops for.
hmm i'd like to say it is an interesting debate, but it isn't. The article itself is provocative, the fanboi's of the process are one eyed. Where does that leave us?
Do we have a responsibility to other people? yes. Foolish, childish, selfish if you rip someone off.
For that reason there is no chance I would ever trade with a human. I have enough good mates that if I want a card, I am generally given it, or it is lent to me with the option to return at some point, and the same goes for them. This is not paper, sadly, as above trading in paper is a hobby in itself. Online? no.
Trade your way to $1,000... geez. Just get a job, and stop ripping kids off.
values of cards aren't fixed ... it would be impossible to have a trade hold equal over any amount of time period ... you could be up $10 today and down $20 in the trade a year from now ...
Because traders are moving cards around, they are 'stealing' packs from wizards of the coast. Let's take your title to it's final conclusion. Every trade made means one less pack gets opened. Oh and YMMV.
There are three types of traders online:
A1.) Bots -- only in it for money
B2.) People who rip off people -- essentially intelligent bots
C3.) People who just want card X -- either they know how much X is worth or they don't
You think A1 is fine because their margins are lower than B2, and that 'adds value' to the community. Some A1's like this website actually do add value, (a smart marketing loss-leader) but most don't. A1's are generally polite and forthcoming because it's good business, and in a vacuum I will deal with PureMTGO above any other bot since they DO add value to the community. More B2's are bombers -- they go rude to try and get better trades.
C3's (See these!) only want what they want, and your position is it's fine for a C3 to deal with bots or other C3's, but not B2's. B2's will definitely rip C3's the hardest, but that's because C3's DON'T CARE -- they only want what they want.
Your conclusion is A1 is better than B2 because B2's are simply better at brokering deals. You are fine with any trades between C3's. Essentially you hating on B2's for being 'good' bots in that they put in more personal (human) time than automated systems for better results. I find this absurd. C3's are willing to trade money for time (card availability), and this article essentially proposes a kind of magical communism where every trade is within a certain bound of subjective 'fairness', a metric that isn't even defined, nor can it be defined, since part of it involves unknown future trendlines.
That said, I personally only deal with A1's on MTGO these days. B2 bombers annoy me, and it's not time-effective find C3's (who generally only hit up A1's too) because of how badly the marketplace is structured.
...dude! Another great article! Really man, thanks for not going too far into bits and pieces. With the complexity of MTG it is quite nice to have a simple idea explained and demonstrated, rather than lost amongst jargon and card talk. Kudos bro. peace.
Looking at voidstone gargoyle made me think of a total lock down deck with like the gargoyle and declaration of naught, not sure what else is legal that stops all of one card but that's a good start.
Well this is a very good tips to share in here. actually the only big thing that comes up in this topic is that how you can approve your income profits.
One this in here is that you really had a great time doing it in a good manner or in a good thing that you may be able to increase your money in an instant.
Pack to Power - or How to Steal a Thousand Dollars - is actually is not actually stealing money, your actual definition or lets say direct explanations is that on how you can easily exert efforts and be able to make money on the spot.
Since Magic also is played by people under legal-age (in which case they are not expected to fully grasp aspects of economics), and people above legal-age who don't expect to be taken advantage of (there are no formal warnings from Wizards on 2nd hand trading when it comes to the economical aspect), Pete Jahn is RIGHT.
Fair traders in MtgO and PaperMarket are good for the whole community, especially the LARGE dealers - since they show what fair trades are like - at any given time.
At the end of a lot of unbalanced trades in a persons favor there is the converting of cards to money, which also is illegal by law when not paying tax.
The play-part of Magic involves out-smarting your opponent, which sadly carries over to some players/traders also wanting to out-smart others in trades. It acts as a soothing of their conscience.
"I have played Magic for 10 years and have put alot of money into Wizards pockets, and such DESERVE to hustle some newer players in trades."
One of the local stores I used to go to was a shark infested pit when it came to trades. Basically people wouldn't trade unless they saw at least a 20-30% value on their trades, if they weren't getting over it just wasn't happening. They'd race to shark all the new and especially the younger players. New players would get a harsh lesson on the nature of humanity, and young players pretty much didn't have any chance at all and just got hammered. I remembered evening up a trade one time for a guy who was trading me 4 figures, and I still came ahead a little bit(likely less than 5-10% but he knew). I had traded him unopened packs for the figures at roughly the same value they were being moved for in the store, but it didn't really come out even so I threw in some stuff I knew he was looking for. Afterwards one of my friends just shook his head and couldn't figure out why I would have done that when the trade was looking so good for me(even though technically, it still ended very slightly better for me). Still, I was open to further trades with that guy and I certaintly wouldn't have been if he thought I deceived him.
The sharks are still sharking people as far as I know, but the sharks don't have much time to get the fresh blood before everyone warns them not to trade with them. Unfortunately, modo can't have that natural set of checks and balances and really needs some changes made to the interface. I do think some sort of rating system isn't necessarily a bad idea if implemented properly.
it is ethical if people are up front about it. MTGOTraders say up front that they buy at wholesale, and sell at retail. They have to make more profit to maintain a full store and massive inventory. The tradeoff is that they almost always have whatever you need. Again, a discount or mismatch between buy and sell, or a mismatch between values in a trade is not unethical - it is SAYING THAT THE TRADE IS SOMETHING IT IS NOT is the unethical part.
A dealer who says "I can/will pay $x for that" = fine. A trader saying "I'll give you this for it. I'm coming out slightly ahead, but I don't need it that badly." - also okay. "This is about even" when it is not - that's unethical.
The value of an article like this is not so much the absolute substance; rather it is the ability to provoke discussion on a controversial issue. Had this article not been written, I would never have read Medina's articles or as Felorin says, learned about Pareto Efficiency.
Another important aspect of ethical debate is that it challenges each reader to examine themselves and their actions and determine if they are ethical or not. Not everyone will and not everyone cares, but at least the challenge has been made.
As someone who is not a hardcore capitalist, I think ethics should play a central role in economic exchanges and every other facet of human interaction. A lot of the discussion on ethics can be rebutted by logic and reason, but I don't want to live in a world wholly regimented by logic and reason. Doing what is right is usually more difficult, or takes more energy, than doing what is wrong (such as going back and getting the person to change the price on the donuts), which is why most people don't follow strict moral or ethical codes.
That said, once you are an adult, I think you have an ethic of responsibility. I agree with those who say it is the responsibility of the traders (both) to know the value of their own cards. Although I don't like sharks, I also don't care for those who are irresponsible enough to let the responsibility of knowledge fall onto someone else's lap. If you just cracked a Koth at your local brick and mortar store, and you trade it immediately to a shark, then yes, you are irresponsible. Instead of waiting, going home, and checking the price of your mythic, your need for instant gratification means you either a) asked someone else the value (thereby shifting responsibility to someone else) or b) didn't care enough and trusted your own judgement. Either way, the irresponsible trader also is, to me, a little "unethical" (lazy or wants instant gratification).
Thanks Lythand. I've now managed to build the full deck, and it's good. It needs work, but it's good. Skithiryx is the bomb I expected it to be, Putrefax wins fast, and Hand of the Praetors is great, especially in multiples. Grasp works well, though I had a trouble with a Sphinx of Magosi against a mono blue deck earlier (where was Brittle Effigy?)
I like the deck a lot. Like I said, it still needs tweaking, but it's definitely got something.
I beat a fairly well tuned Pyromancer's Ascension deck just now, I was too fast for it. Okay that's a sample size of two games, but it felt good just the same.
Beat Eldrazi ramp earlier too. Consuming Vapors on Emrakul ftw.
Haven't finished reading ALL the commments, but I've seen a few that seem to make the same point I have. I totally disagree with your assessment that it is somehow "ethical" of MTGOtraders to MASSIVLY undervalue cards on their buybot, but for if a person was to do it, then that would be "wrong." I guess that hits too close to home for me. I'm not a huge fan of the process of going to mtgotraders buybot and getting my rares valued at 0.30 and then watching them sell them for 5.60. THAT totally seems unethical. Although I shouldn't really talk because buybots are how I get my cards. As you mentioned there are plenty of drafters looking to unload cards, many of whom are close friends of mine. I ask them to go see what a boybot, like MTGOtraders, would BUY, not SELL, their cards for. So they will come back and say, "They'll buy them for 4.50" and I give them 6 to make sure I keep them coming back. I get cards cheap, they get the tix they want. By yourstands, I'm being unethical. I disagree entirely. I'm just doing what the big sellers would do. But I guess since I'm an individual, and not a huge store, I guess I'm the bad guy right?
I think infect will get better with the sets released. Right now, I am not sure its there yet. I am looking though to see if I can prove myself wrong. I really like the idea.
I hear you. The prerelease was just 'meh'. I too won the first match with a deck that wasn't very good and found myself playing much better decks in round 2 and 3. The only reason I went 2 and 2 was because my opponent for the last match didn't have a chance at prizes and conceded both games.
I'm surprised that you didn't do better with the Sword of Body and Mind. In match 2 I won the first game, but lost the next two entirely because he had the sword and all my answers were in my deck, then in my graveyard after a couple attacks with the sword.
The most disappointing part of the event was that out of 7 packs opened, the only Mythic I wound up with was the Wurmcoil Engine Promo Card. I hate Mythic Rarity and they know it by staying away from me. Talk about a kick in the nads.
I'm glad someone brought up (if indirectly) the important notion that a given card does not have the same value to all people. I never heard the term "Pareto Efficiency" before, I learned something today.
If the current market prices are $1.00 for Coughing Dragon, and 70 cents for Sneezing Vampire, some might say trading them one for one is an "unfair trade". But let's say I opened the Vampire, and I don't care for it at all. To me, the Vampire is worth 25 or 50 cents at most, and I know I'll never play it or look at it and go "wow, cool art" or anything. Its value lies mostly in the fact that I know it's a rare and I can trade it for something I actually like. But Coughing Dragon is so cool in my mind I feel like it's worth 2-4 bucks worth of fun easy. If I paid full retail for a booster and the only card in it I wanted was the Coughing Dragon, I'd be happy I got it and feel happy with my purchase.
Meanwhile one of my buddies who's into the whole vampire thing doesn't think much of Coughing Dragon, maybe 75 cents tops, but Sneezing Vampire is AWESOME and he'd happily trade away three bucks worth of cards to get one. He doesn't buy from card dealers, he's just not into that - buying packs and trading with buddies are the only two ways he adds to his collection. Of course the booster he just picked up at the comic shop today only has a Coughing Dragon.
If I trade him my vampire for his dragon, are the market values even relevant? Especially for someone like my friend who keeps his more casual participation in his hobby totally outside the main parts of that market? Or is the fact that we both traded a card we didn't want much for a card we value way higher indicative of this being a "win-win" trade for us?
That said, I would also say any trade that is only "off" from being equal market value by 20 to 30 percent I think is a non-issue, if both traders either know, or suspect, that "this trade isn't an exact match but hopefully somewhere in the ballpark of the same value". Which is how a lot of trades are done.
As for this quote:
"If you don't know the prices of your own cards, then don't trade them."
...or you can have a community with a significant number of traders who help you out, the way I do at the two shops I play and trade at. I'm not the only one, either. If a kid tries to trade me one-for-one and their rare is higher priced, I'll tell them to take some more stuff. A number of our local players will answer questions for two traders on what a card is worth, or look it up for them on a smartphone.
If players who aren't "into" the hobby enough to do actual work to make trading fair learn that there are people they can trust and trade with... They have more fun, and the community thrives and grows. If that's not the case and their local game store is a sharkpit... The community shrinks and is generally less friendly and trusting and laid back.
That said, I think people often, often will want to make "unequal" trades even when they know the prices, because they don't care that match about how much "better" they could optimize their results if they spent hours wheeling and dealing, ebaying, watching dealer price lists, etc. And two bucks isn't a big deal to them. They want that $3 rare for their deck, and they'd rather have it NOW so they can use it tonight. Somebody else is happy to give them what they want for a $5 rare they don't like and don't play - they're fine with giving up two dollars of "value" that they would never do anything to take advantage anyway. They don't even want to pore through the other guy's three binders and try to find a buck or two of other cards that they might use someday. They just want that Polkadotted Wombat, and they'd just as soon get it in a 3 minute trade rather than a 20 minute trading session and use the extra 17 minutes hanging out and chatting with their best buddy. Because their time has value to them too.
I agree that lying or deceiving by omission are ethically questionable at best, and downright exploitation at worst. But many times people know they're making uneven trades and are fine with it, I've often done that myself. Sometimes it's a really close friend and I place some value on knowing they got a card they really like & will have a lot of fun with it, and that more than makes up the extra value for me. I've come out ahead on trades too, but always knew the other person was happy and felt they got good value from the exchange, and I've never been dishonest with anyone, so I don't feel bad about any of those trades either.
One of my first trades on MTGO, the guy threw in a bunch of extra stuff even though I would have taken a lot less, he wanted to help me out because I was new. Also he gave me a bunch of his extra unneeded commons and uncommons afterward, so I could have more stuff to build decks out of. It may be rare on MTGO, but it can happen even there.
Though to be fair the fireslinger is what you meant, the fire eater is almost functionally the same and it is easy to confuse the two. (Hence my initial consternation.)
@Belt, I am not too surprised as one of my former irc teammates lives there. Great bunch of guys those kiwis (Their term). Glad you liked the presentation. The sidebar is actually fairly easy to do and if you want we can discuss it in game sometime.
@Levi, No worries I will still occasionally post my scribblings here and there. Just got into the whole "Hey lets make our articles look nice bandwagon! Which for me started with your contest. Again thanks for the opportunity there. :D
2 things
1) Public perception of moral standards and personal perception of ethical obligations are very different things. Ask 10 people their opinions you will get 10 answers (or maybe 20 if you ask the right people.) Ask people their observations of customary social morals though and most people within a particular society will answer similarly.
2) Just because you can personally justify something to yourself by saying that you worked for it, therefore you have a right to it, does not make it so. That is called rationalization and it is something honest and dishonest people do alike. The difference between the two is the honest person will acknowledge that the other parties may not agree. My point is thieves work hard for their living the same as business owners. (Even if they think they won't have to when they get started.)
Point 1 is merely a reminder as I think the two things are getting a little blurry here. Point 2 is a rebuttal of your statement that you are entitled to gain your advantage morally by the work you put into getting it. Ethically speaking that may be true for you but if you rip someone off (with a huge difference in trade) most people will see it as a rip off if told about it. They might be OK with you ripping people or not but that is what it will seem like.
I do like the fact that you will tell people if asked that you are trading up/trading for value and that it is in your favor. That speaks to your honesty. I also agree that if a person is happy with their trade and you've been forthright then as long as you are OK with it ethically you are fine morally too.
On the other hand Ive experienced a dozen or so tricks that people pull in trades to pressure their partner to give up value in a decidedly unethical manner. In some cases I've called them on it, started a brew and then blocked them as things wound down. Other times I've played their game but gave them no quarter. Almost never has this resulted in any trade whatsoever. One guy even called me a tough trader after such a situation. *shrugs* so be it.
All in all though, knowing that people are only out for themselves and to make a quick buck has made online trading with humans largely untenable. At least as far as I am concerned. I sometimes will accept a trade request with a "Newb" but I am wary even there and will quickly end a trade I think is not on the up and up.
The myr tribal deck is great. I really like the addition of tempered steel that really makes the Myr just that much more powerful.
I am happily playing around with a variety of Necrotic Ooze ideas. I look forward to seeing yours. :)
The key difficulty is of course knowing what to lock out. Keep in mind there is a ton of removal that hits the gargoyle. I too like the idea but did not sufficiently develop it to matter. I think one thing would be echoing truth and another the new jelly fish, I mean wizard. Those four cards create some synergy together. Then you can toss in Stonecloaker to protect your lock creatures and also to take out graveyard recursion. So thats 20 cards. 16 to go.
I would like to add that a lot of those bots that sell higher and buy lower than others often advertise "best" prices, thereby compounding the unethical behaviour with deception.
Fine read and a really great topic for discussion here.
One quick point if I may...
I don't for a second accept this idea that it's OK for bot chains to buy singles at lower prices and turn around and sell them for higher prices. I don't see where the added value is. "Mass inventory" is not an acceptable argument to me because there are enough players online drafting and cracking packs, that I believe cards are reasonably easy to find. We're not driving hundreds of miles to find cards as you alluded to. There are two "distribution centers" online if you will, and those are the WotC store and the classified section, which everyone has equal access to. The bottom line is these bot chains are exploiting players in trades too. Competition drives their revenue, and they are feeding off the negligence of players. This is not ethical to me.
Hopefully v4 will have a better classified section with some kind of buying/selling bot or function that everyone can freely use, without having to jump through any hoops for.
hmm i'd like to say it is an interesting debate, but it isn't. The article itself is provocative, the fanboi's of the process are one eyed. Where does that leave us?
Do we have a responsibility to other people? yes. Foolish, childish, selfish if you rip someone off.
For that reason there is no chance I would ever trade with a human. I have enough good mates that if I want a card, I am generally given it, or it is lent to me with the option to return at some point, and the same goes for them. This is not paper, sadly, as above trading in paper is a hobby in itself. Online? no.
Trade your way to $1,000... geez. Just get a job, and stop ripping kids off.
values of cards aren't fixed ... it would be impossible to have a trade hold equal over any amount of time period ... you could be up $10 today and down $20 in the trade a year from now ...
why sweat the small stuff?
Because traders are moving cards around, they are 'stealing' packs from wizards of the coast. Let's take your title to it's final conclusion. Every trade made means one less pack gets opened. Oh and YMMV.
There are three types of traders online:
A1.) Bots -- only in it for money
B2.) People who rip off people -- essentially intelligent bots
C3.) People who just want card X -- either they know how much X is worth or they don't
You think A1 is fine because their margins are lower than B2, and that 'adds value' to the community. Some A1's like this website actually do add value, (a smart marketing loss-leader) but most don't. A1's are generally polite and forthcoming because it's good business, and in a vacuum I will deal with PureMTGO above any other bot since they DO add value to the community. More B2's are bombers -- they go rude to try and get better trades.
C3's (See these!) only want what they want, and your position is it's fine for a C3 to deal with bots or other C3's, but not B2's. B2's will definitely rip C3's the hardest, but that's because C3's DON'T CARE -- they only want what they want.
Your conclusion is A1 is better than B2 because B2's are simply better at brokering deals. You are fine with any trades between C3's. Essentially you hating on B2's for being 'good' bots in that they put in more personal (human) time than automated systems for better results. I find this absurd. C3's are willing to trade money for time (card availability), and this article essentially proposes a kind of magical communism where every trade is within a certain bound of subjective 'fairness', a metric that isn't even defined, nor can it be defined, since part of it involves unknown future trendlines.
That said, I personally only deal with A1's on MTGO these days. B2 bombers annoy me, and it's not time-effective find C3's (who generally only hit up A1's too) because of how badly the marketplace is structured.
...dude! Another great article! Really man, thanks for not going too far into bits and pieces. With the complexity of MTG it is quite nice to have a simple idea explained and demonstrated, rather than lost amongst jargon and card talk. Kudos bro. peace.
Looking at voidstone gargoyle made me think of a total lock down deck with like the gargoyle and declaration of naught, not sure what else is legal that stops all of one card but that's a good start.
Well this is a very good tips to share in here. actually the only big thing that comes up in this topic is that how you can approve your income profits.
One this in here is that you really had a great time doing it in a good manner or in a good thing that you may be able to increase your money in an instant.
Pack to Power - or How to Steal a Thousand Dollars - is actually is not actually stealing money, your actual definition or lets say direct explanations is that on how you can easily exert efforts and be able to make money on the spot.
Overseas calls
Since Magic also is played by people under legal-age (in which case they are not expected to fully grasp aspects of economics), and people above legal-age who don't expect to be taken advantage of (there are no formal warnings from Wizards on 2nd hand trading when it comes to the economical aspect), Pete Jahn is RIGHT.
Fair traders in MtgO and PaperMarket are good for the whole community, especially the LARGE dealers - since they show what fair trades are like - at any given time.
At the end of a lot of unbalanced trades in a persons favor there is the converting of cards to money, which also is illegal by law when not paying tax.
The play-part of Magic involves out-smarting your opponent, which sadly carries over to some players/traders also wanting to out-smart others in trades. It acts as a soothing of their conscience.
"I have played Magic for 10 years and have put alot of money into Wizards pockets, and such DESERVE to hustle some newer players in trades."
One of the local stores I used to go to was a shark infested pit when it came to trades. Basically people wouldn't trade unless they saw at least a 20-30% value on their trades, if they weren't getting over it just wasn't happening. They'd race to shark all the new and especially the younger players. New players would get a harsh lesson on the nature of humanity, and young players pretty much didn't have any chance at all and just got hammered. I remembered evening up a trade one time for a guy who was trading me 4 figures, and I still came ahead a little bit(likely less than 5-10% but he knew). I had traded him unopened packs for the figures at roughly the same value they were being moved for in the store, but it didn't really come out even so I threw in some stuff I knew he was looking for. Afterwards one of my friends just shook his head and couldn't figure out why I would have done that when the trade was looking so good for me(even though technically, it still ended very slightly better for me). Still, I was open to further trades with that guy and I certaintly wouldn't have been if he thought I deceived him.
The sharks are still sharking people as far as I know, but the sharks don't have much time to get the fresh blood before everyone warns them not to trade with them. Unfortunately, modo can't have that natural set of checks and balances and really needs some changes made to the interface. I do think some sort of rating system isn't necessarily a bad idea if implemented properly.
it is ethical if people are up front about it. MTGOTraders say up front that they buy at wholesale, and sell at retail. They have to make more profit to maintain a full store and massive inventory. The tradeoff is that they almost always have whatever you need. Again, a discount or mismatch between buy and sell, or a mismatch between values in a trade is not unethical - it is SAYING THAT THE TRADE IS SOMETHING IT IS NOT is the unethical part.
A dealer who says "I can/will pay $x for that" = fine. A trader saying "I'll give you this for it. I'm coming out slightly ahead, but I don't need it that badly." - also okay. "This is about even" when it is not - that's unethical.
Five fireballs, sir!
The value of an article like this is not so much the absolute substance; rather it is the ability to provoke discussion on a controversial issue. Had this article not been written, I would never have read Medina's articles or as Felorin says, learned about Pareto Efficiency.
Another important aspect of ethical debate is that it challenges each reader to examine themselves and their actions and determine if they are ethical or not. Not everyone will and not everyone cares, but at least the challenge has been made.
As someone who is not a hardcore capitalist, I think ethics should play a central role in economic exchanges and every other facet of human interaction. A lot of the discussion on ethics can be rebutted by logic and reason, but I don't want to live in a world wholly regimented by logic and reason. Doing what is right is usually more difficult, or takes more energy, than doing what is wrong (such as going back and getting the person to change the price on the donuts), which is why most people don't follow strict moral or ethical codes.
That said, once you are an adult, I think you have an ethic of responsibility. I agree with those who say it is the responsibility of the traders (both) to know the value of their own cards. Although I don't like sharks, I also don't care for those who are irresponsible enough to let the responsibility of knowledge fall onto someone else's lap. If you just cracked a Koth at your local brick and mortar store, and you trade it immediately to a shark, then yes, you are irresponsible. Instead of waiting, going home, and checking the price of your mythic, your need for instant gratification means you either a) asked someone else the value (thereby shifting responsibility to someone else) or b) didn't care enough and trusted your own judgement. Either way, the irresponsible trader also is, to me, a little "unethical" (lazy or wants instant gratification).
The sword was amazing... the couple times I drew it. >.<
Thanks Lythand. I've now managed to build the full deck, and it's good. It needs work, but it's good. Skithiryx is the bomb I expected it to be, Putrefax wins fast, and Hand of the Praetors is great, especially in multiples. Grasp works well, though I had a trouble with a Sphinx of Magosi against a mono blue deck earlier (where was Brittle Effigy?)
I like the deck a lot. Like I said, it still needs tweaking, but it's definitely got something.
I beat a fairly well tuned Pyromancer's Ascension deck just now, I was too fast for it. Okay that's a sample size of two games, but it felt good just the same.
Beat Eldrazi ramp earlier too. Consuming Vapors on Emrakul ftw.
Haven't finished reading ALL the commments, but I've seen a few that seem to make the same point I have. I totally disagree with your assessment that it is somehow "ethical" of MTGOtraders to MASSIVLY undervalue cards on their buybot, but for if a person was to do it, then that would be "wrong." I guess that hits too close to home for me. I'm not a huge fan of the process of going to mtgotraders buybot and getting my rares valued at 0.30 and then watching them sell them for 5.60. THAT totally seems unethical. Although I shouldn't really talk because buybots are how I get my cards. As you mentioned there are plenty of drafters looking to unload cards, many of whom are close friends of mine. I ask them to go see what a boybot, like MTGOtraders, would BUY, not SELL, their cards for. So they will come back and say, "They'll buy them for 4.50" and I give them 6 to make sure I keep them coming back. I get cards cheap, they get the tix they want. By yourstands, I'm being unethical. I disagree entirely. I'm just doing what the big sellers would do. But I guess since I'm an individual, and not a huge store, I guess I'm the bad guy right?
I think infect will get better with the sets released. Right now, I am not sure its there yet. I am looking though to see if I can prove myself wrong. I really like the idea.
I hear you. The prerelease was just 'meh'. I too won the first match with a deck that wasn't very good and found myself playing much better decks in round 2 and 3. The only reason I went 2 and 2 was because my opponent for the last match didn't have a chance at prizes and conceded both games.
I'm surprised that you didn't do better with the Sword of Body and Mind. In match 2 I won the first game, but lost the next two entirely because he had the sword and all my answers were in my deck, then in my graveyard after a couple attacks with the sword.
The most disappointing part of the event was that out of 7 packs opened, the only Mythic I wound up with was the Wurmcoil Engine Promo Card. I hate Mythic Rarity and they know it by staying away from me. Talk about a kick in the nads.
I'm glad someone brought up (if indirectly) the important notion that a given card does not have the same value to all people. I never heard the term "Pareto Efficiency" before, I learned something today.
If the current market prices are $1.00 for Coughing Dragon, and 70 cents for Sneezing Vampire, some might say trading them one for one is an "unfair trade". But let's say I opened the Vampire, and I don't care for it at all. To me, the Vampire is worth 25 or 50 cents at most, and I know I'll never play it or look at it and go "wow, cool art" or anything. Its value lies mostly in the fact that I know it's a rare and I can trade it for something I actually like. But Coughing Dragon is so cool in my mind I feel like it's worth 2-4 bucks worth of fun easy. If I paid full retail for a booster and the only card in it I wanted was the Coughing Dragon, I'd be happy I got it and feel happy with my purchase.
Meanwhile one of my buddies who's into the whole vampire thing doesn't think much of Coughing Dragon, maybe 75 cents tops, but Sneezing Vampire is AWESOME and he'd happily trade away three bucks worth of cards to get one. He doesn't buy from card dealers, he's just not into that - buying packs and trading with buddies are the only two ways he adds to his collection. Of course the booster he just picked up at the comic shop today only has a Coughing Dragon.
If I trade him my vampire for his dragon, are the market values even relevant? Especially for someone like my friend who keeps his more casual participation in his hobby totally outside the main parts of that market? Or is the fact that we both traded a card we didn't want much for a card we value way higher indicative of this being a "win-win" trade for us?
That said, I would also say any trade that is only "off" from being equal market value by 20 to 30 percent I think is a non-issue, if both traders either know, or suspect, that "this trade isn't an exact match but hopefully somewhere in the ballpark of the same value". Which is how a lot of trades are done.
As for this quote:
"If you don't know the prices of your own cards, then don't trade them."
...or you can have a community with a significant number of traders who help you out, the way I do at the two shops I play and trade at. I'm not the only one, either. If a kid tries to trade me one-for-one and their rare is higher priced, I'll tell them to take some more stuff. A number of our local players will answer questions for two traders on what a card is worth, or look it up for them on a smartphone.
If players who aren't "into" the hobby enough to do actual work to make trading fair learn that there are people they can trust and trade with... They have more fun, and the community thrives and grows. If that's not the case and their local game store is a sharkpit... The community shrinks and is generally less friendly and trusting and laid back.
That said, I think people often, often will want to make "unequal" trades even when they know the prices, because they don't care that match about how much "better" they could optimize their results if they spent hours wheeling and dealing, ebaying, watching dealer price lists, etc. And two bucks isn't a big deal to them. They want that $3 rare for their deck, and they'd rather have it NOW so they can use it tonight. Somebody else is happy to give them what they want for a $5 rare they don't like and don't play - they're fine with giving up two dollars of "value" that they would never do anything to take advantage anyway. They don't even want to pore through the other guy's three binders and try to find a buck or two of other cards that they might use someday. They just want that Polkadotted Wombat, and they'd just as soon get it in a 3 minute trade rather than a 20 minute trading session and use the extra 17 minutes hanging out and chatting with their best buddy. Because their time has value to them too.
I agree that lying or deceiving by omission are ethically questionable at best, and downright exploitation at worst. But many times people know they're making uneven trades and are fine with it, I've often done that myself. Sometimes it's a really close friend and I place some value on knowing they got a card they really like & will have a lot of fun with it, and that more than makes up the extra value for me. I've come out ahead on trades too, but always knew the other person was happy and felt they got good value from the exchange, and I've never been dishonest with anyone, so I don't feel bad about any of those trades either.
One of my first trades on MTGO, the guy threw in a bunch of extra stuff even though I would have taken a lot less, he wanted to help me out because I was new. Also he gave me a bunch of his extra unneeded commons and uncommons afterward, so I could have more stuff to build decks out of. It may be rare on MTGO, but it can happen even there.
http://www.mtgotraders.com/store/UL_Ghitu_Fire-Eater.html nope uncommon and also at .05.
Though to be fair the fireslinger is what you meant, the fire eater is almost functionally the same and it is easy to confuse the two. (Hence my initial consternation.)
Hey thanks Belt and Levi :D
@Belt, I am not too surprised as one of my former irc teammates lives there. Great bunch of guys those kiwis (Their term). Glad you liked the presentation. The sidebar is actually fairly easy to do and if you want we can discuss it in game sometime.
@Levi, No worries I will still occasionally post my scribblings here and there. Just got into the whole "Hey lets make our articles look nice bandwagon! Which for me started with your contest. Again thanks for the opportunity there. :D
2 things
1) Public perception of moral standards and personal perception of ethical obligations are very different things. Ask 10 people their opinions you will get 10 answers (or maybe 20 if you ask the right people.) Ask people their observations of customary social morals though and most people within a particular society will answer similarly.
2) Just because you can personally justify something to yourself by saying that you worked for it, therefore you have a right to it, does not make it so. That is called rationalization and it is something honest and dishonest people do alike. The difference between the two is the honest person will acknowledge that the other parties may not agree. My point is thieves work hard for their living the same as business owners. (Even if they think they won't have to when they get started.)
Point 1 is merely a reminder as I think the two things are getting a little blurry here. Point 2 is a rebuttal of your statement that you are entitled to gain your advantage morally by the work you put into getting it. Ethically speaking that may be true for you but if you rip someone off (with a huge difference in trade) most people will see it as a rip off if told about it. They might be OK with you ripping people or not but that is what it will seem like.
I do like the fact that you will tell people if asked that you are trading up/trading for value and that it is in your favor. That speaks to your honesty. I also agree that if a person is happy with their trade and you've been forthright then as long as you are OK with it ethically you are fine morally too.
On the other hand Ive experienced a dozen or so tricks that people pull in trades to pressure their partner to give up value in a decidedly unethical manner. In some cases I've called them on it, started a brew and then blocked them as things wound down. Other times I've played their game but gave them no quarter. Almost never has this resulted in any trade whatsoever. One guy even called me a tough trader after such a situation. *shrugs* so be it.
All in all though, knowing that people are only out for themselves and to make a quick buck has made online trading with humans largely untenable. At least as far as I am concerned. I sometimes will accept a trade request with a "Newb" but I am wary even there and will quickly end a trade I think is not on the up and up.
Nice article, lots of topics. I like your banner, but I'm going to miss the hand drawn paintings of dragons and other random stuff.