Annoying auction behavior

[LeeD]

Originally Posted by Samueltbaum

I think there is some post through this thread where they said maybee 100-1000 or 10%, I don't remember and don't want to go through everything again.

They do have a valid opinion, and I don't want to discredit it. But I agree with you that it is a free market.

The problem with establishing minimums for underbids is that it would have the effect of restricting the number of cards being auctioned, and that would be bad for the game. It's a lot better to have, say, four cards being auctioned for 10,000-9999-9998-9997 than to have one card being auctioned for 10,000 and three other players waiting for that card to sell before offering their own.

Most of us don't have time to check in every other minute and near-instantly respond to the buying and selling of every card, so what you'd see instead is lots of in-demand cards being unavailable because the potential sellers haven't yet realized that the "blocking card" has sold and that they can now offer their card for the same or nearly the same price.

[Samueltbaum]

Originally Posted by LeeD

The problem with establishing minimums for underbids is that it would have the effect of restricting the number of cards being auctioned, and that would be bad for the game. It's a lot better to have, say, four cards being auctioned for 10,000-9999-9998-9997 than to have one card being auctioned for 10,000 and three other players waiting for that card to sell before offering their own.

Most of us don't have time to check in every other minute and near-instantly respond to the buying and selling of every card, so what you'd see instead is lots of in-demand cards being unavailable because the potential sellers haven't yet realized that the "blocking card" has sold and that they can now offer their card for the same or nearly the same price.

Thanks for post!

I want to be clear. I am happy with how the system is right now, and want nothing to change from it. I simply referenced in last post what the purpose of the post was.

I thought it was a valid discussion topic, as there are some that don't like the current structure, and would like to see a change (not me), and wasn't my post to start.

I liked how you explained a valid point on why it shouldn't change. I haven't played enough to know the structure of card shop. Thanks for giving extra insight!

I hope the person who originally made the thread sees your response to help clarify why it is the way it is.

[Samueltbaum]

Was hoping to hear a rebuttal or thoughts on BDAWG from my last posts. Seems like after I called BDAWG out, he has stopped posting since then.

[Ty Cobb]

"You have already defeated Admiral Kirk. You do not need to defeat him again."
"But he tasks me! He tasks me and I shall have him."
—Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (original)

Understand the literary allusion here...

[bdawg]

Originally Posted by Samueltbaum

Was hoping to hear a rebuttal or thoughts on BDAWG from my last posts. Seems like after I called BDAWG out, he has stopped posting since then.

It certainly seems like you've made a lot of assumptions. Here's another one, indicating there might be some correlation that I stopped because you "called me out." Naw, I stopped coming on here because I stopped playing. When you don't care about a game anymore, there's no need to really pay attention to the forums, right? Jumped on to check out opinions of Perfect Team mode in 2025 and to see if any changes were implemented. Doesn't sound like it. I've always loved the regular game mode, but wanted to put my thoughts into how to make PT better, which is where this forum post came from.

Looking back now, I'm not really sure why you had it in for me so much to make 6 straight unanswered posts (read the first a few min ago, then started the second and gave up when I saw there were so many more without a reply, then came to the end and saw this post). Not just that, but it sounds like you actually went and researched all of my posts to use against me in some way? Admittedly, I used your quote right back at you on another topic if I recall correctly. Even had someone mention how it was toxic for me to use that quote (the irony) - so I guess I can understand. You have to admit, it must have been a bad comment if having it put back to you felt that demoralizing that you thought you had to go to war with me.

Enjoy the game and best wishes, to you and to TyCobb (who seems to want to keep poking the bear). No issues with either of you, and honestly don't care about either of you. It's just a game, and this is just a web forum. TyCobb expressed how his wife died of cancer, how tragic. Definitely puts things in perspective - why fight about a game? Why does anyone have to feel like they won in something so meaningless as an internet argument over suggested changes in a video game? If you want to feel like you won, then you won. Hopefully, it makes life better for you (but if wisdom has taught me anything, it won't - but who am I to tell you that, best to attain that wisdom on your own). I'd shake your hand if I could, because I'm sure you're a wonderful human being who had nothing but the best intentions with all of your posts. Best wishes!


“It may well be that we will have to repent in this generation. Not merely for the vitriolic words and the violent actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence and indifference of the good people who sit around and say, "Wait on time.”
― Martin Luther King Jr.