Let's do some math and compare prices.

  • Many prices have nothing with supply and demand, their final price is based 100% on speculation. For example, Voice of D'endrrah was going for 300-400p at release, went up to 400-450p after Reanimator was rediscovered as viable deck, but we haven't seen much of it at any point of Doombringer meta, thus demand was close to non-existent. Yet, at certain day price has skyrocket from ~400p to 800p, and multiple pages of card posted for ~400p vanished at same time. First tries weren't succesful and after thrid try price was manipulated for more than few days, and it established at 900+p. Obviously, no speculation can continue for eternity and Voices are around 600p now. We can only wonder, if it was manipulated by some individual, or group of individuals (e.g. a card shop).
  • MealyMouth wrote:

    I don't see how comparing the power level of a MTG card to a Hex card/counterpart plays into the price.

    You need to look at the value of a card based on it's peers in the same offering.

    If Boltwing is in Set X that has 50 total rares of which 35 of them are heavily involved in the meta, it's price would be way less than if it were in Set Y with 50 total rares where only 10 of which were constructed viable.

    Look at Primal Dawn as an example. You had High Infinitrix, and Hierophant as the clear leaders in terms of power in a pretty weak set overall. Hierophant was 1500 at it's peak for a rare which was almost triple what any other rare had gone for up to that point. Mirror Knight and Crocosaur are the only ones I can think of that even broke 500 up until then.

    Bride from Scars of War is another example. It was setting records for price of a legendary because all the others of the set didn't compare. Poet, From the Ashes, were alright, but that was really it.

    I know even numbered sets like the 2 above will generally have higher prices than odd numbered sets cause the supply is less due to less exposure to limited formats.

    However, if there were a ton of good cards in those sets, the prices for the highest outliers would be way lower. If all the rares were playable and overpriced, you could just open packs and sell the rares off for a profit and the market would correct itself.
    that is fair cards should not be evaluated in a vacuum. But would you agree rekindling is a chase card in mtg and part of a tier 1 mtg deck? Boltwing is not on the same level when you look at its place in the meta, so why is it more expensive than the converted rekindling price?
  • First things first: yeah, the AH is trash. Prices are so far removed from reality at times that I find it hardly believable. Ghostblade Duelist has a buyout of 143p currently (101p for the AA and there's a whopping 2 of those available). Why? It spiked (i.e. got bought out by people trying to make money) alongside a bunch of cards after the last ICS when Yotul made top 8 (congrats Morwath) and most people don't bother listing spare commons that never sell. A lot of AAs are stuck at 101p. Get rid of price floors (why does this even exist) and let me list stuff indefinitely. Or at least for a very long time, like a month. Otherwise anything that isn't a chase card will randomly be priced exorbitantly on the AH. Shit like this really makes me appreciate MTGO with its bots.

    I still agree with Nero that the cards are too expensive. I don't like the TCG model, and haven't liked it ever since I found out how much Vintage decks cost in MTG. To me it only serves to make players feel bad and second guess their purchases or lack thereof, while artificial scarcity slowly makes older card cost ludicrous prices. But at least those Black Lotuses have retained their value, right? It says a lot about both Hex and MTG that I like them in spite of this. I treat Hex like a game, and I'd find it incredibly hard to justify spending more than ~50€ on a game, and Hex asks me for way more. Well, it did until the new Signature Decks. Shame we didn't get a control variant among them, but I'll take what I can get.

    It doesn't matter that the market arrived at a price. The majority of people in the demographic this game should be targeting have more time than money, not the other way around. For the most part, those who are willing to spend as much money as competitive Hex decks cost are going to spend that on MTG instead. You'll notice that all the CCG that sprung up after Hearthstone have made it easy to get a decent deck going without having to spend money. That's because you can't compete with HS on gameplay alone, and MTG is similar in that regard. Hex can be the best game in the world, but everyone will go to Magic unless you can offer "MTG, but cheaper". It'd be awesome if Hex could offer better value than playing Pauper on MTGO, where some competitive decks go as low as ~25$ and most don't go above 50$, and you get Leagues for on-demand play in which going 3-2 gets you slightly ahead.

    I'll be getting a bit off topic here, but I don't feel like making another post elsewhere and this is still tangentially related. I hit cosmic last season (my first ranked season) with this. Despite the price tag on HexPVPTools, I didn't spend any money on it whatsoever, I bought the whole thing with gold. On my way to cosmic, I faced almost exclusively PS4 players. Most of them had terrible decks, multiple had over 100 cards (one had over 300), and the ones that played something coherent were still playing budget decks like myself. Trampling these players is neither fun nor interesting, and I hope that aggresively lowering the price of constructed will get more people playing actual decks.

    To be honest, I was just about ready to forget Hex and stick with MTGO, but I decided to check out the news and the Signature Decks and Cosmic Coins got me to stick around, at least for now. Let's hope it gets better from here.
  • Sure, all the cards in HEX are inflated beyond any reasonable price.
    If you took the entire set of pack contents and compared that to trending AH prices, you will see what a average set common/uncommon/rare/legendary will cost you to buy. Hexsales.net used to do this for us....

    For example - I just did this today for Doombringer based on the data we have available....
    I subtracted at least 1 plat for each data point, to account for Price floor.
    I threw out some fishy data as well - like just averaged that commons are worth 3 plat each, overall.
    The average packs contents equate to 246 Plat (after removing a lot of fishy plat data that would have greatly inflated this number)
    (my breakdown includes: 17 Legendary @ 12% chance per pack, 64 Rare @ 88% chance per pack, 116 Uncommon, 108 Common tracked)
    Based on baseline price floors, and considering a average chest drop in a pack to be worth 5 plat each, a baseline pack should only be "worth" 120 plat.

    Average Legendary price for the 17 was: 256 Plat
    Average Rare price for the 64 was: 89 Plat

    This is nothing new, and I wasted time doing this. Everyone knows AH prices, and even AH prices that move sell for at least double what they should be selling for. Trade is inefficient. I mean, Yasi and I already did this experiment together after set2, straight up buying set2 packs from the store and flipping their contents. It's things like this that make a TCG pretty silly. Someone is always screwing someone else. People enjoy it so much, they make a game out of it, a life out of it, a job out of it. IMO, it would seem wiser digital game designers have been going CCG time and time again to avoid this headache and the interested playerbase that comes with it.
  • NeroJinous wrote:

    and add dusting cards
    Reminder that, as per Kickstarter, Crafting would be available "at game launch".

    Goliathus wrote:

    I personally don't put much importance on the "dangerous precedent" for now. If my car just got tore into half, I don't give a crap about my gearbox not working. At least that's how I see it. The game is on its Twilight Eclipse right now, it's do or die and they have to do something too because their previous months are clearly not working out for them.
    But you should be rightfully pissed if for the past year or so you've been telling your mechanic to do something about the tearing-into-half danger that you clearly saw. We are not really clear of guilt. We should have shouted more, done more, punish their mistakes more.
  • Vroengard wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    and add dusting cards
    Reminder that, as per Kickstarter, Crafting would be available "at game launch".

    Goliathus wrote:

    I personally don't put much importance on the "dangerous precedent" for now. If my car just got tore into half, I don't give a crap about my gearbox not working. At least that's how I see it. The game is on its Twilight Eclipse right now, it's do or die and they have to do something too because their previous months are clearly not working out for them.
    But you should be rightfully pissed if for the past year or so you've been telling your mechanic to do something about the tearing-into-half danger that you clearly saw. We are not really clear of guilt. We should have shouted more, done more, punish their mistakes more.
    There are five stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. I am on acceptance. I have been f***ed by too many games with potential in the past. I have come to accept this is not changing(yeah I know, they are sort of changing right now) and things probably aren't going to be a lot better. There are only so many times I can do what you say without thinking it's just a pure waste of my time.
  • NeroJinous wrote:

    Since some people think the old prices were not inflated wanted to do some math to see what the market value of cards should be. We can compare hex to magic. MTG has Rekindling Phoenix and we have Boltwing Phoenix. Boltwing is slightly weaker, but they are close enough that we can compare prices. Rekindling is about $22. Mythic rate is 1 in 8 with $4 pack price. Meaning if you open $32 in packs you will get 1 legendary. Obviously rekindling isnt selling for $32, but that is due to the other 7 packs having rares offsetting the cost. So kindling is 68% of the ratio price. Hex has a legendary rate of 1 in 9 so for $18 you get 1 legendary making boltwing in theory $12 after the 68% correction. You might ask yourself so why not just divide the price of kindle by 2? Simple because the hex legendary rate isnt 1 in 9 due to primal packs. In 100 packs you get 15 legendaries not 11. So $200 over 15 rates is $13. Then we take the 68% making boltwing when converted from an mtg economy to a hex economy $9. Now the question I have is how many of you that played mtg were willing to pay $22 for rekindling? If you were not willing to pay $22 for rekindling you should technically not be willing to spend $9 on boltwing.
    This is a joke right? I mean yea technically there is some math involved as you’re multiplying and dividing stuff but this is some of the worst logic I’ve ever come across on these forums, and that’s quite the accomplishment. I don’t even want to make some verbose explanation on why this is wrong on so many levels as that tends to go over some people’s heads so here are a few bullet points of the differences and why you can’t make this kind of comparison:

    -Different game
    -Different rules
    -Different keywords
    -Different cost (!)
    -Different textbox (!!!!)
    -Different meta
    -Different synergies with cards/keywords/champions in the decks it goes into
    -Different number of top tier decks that it fits into
    -Different importance of the card in the meta decks it does fit into
    -Different power levels between the games
    -Different power levels and composition in metas at any certain point between ANY two meta
    -Different ‘tools/answers’ needed in the meta to counteract other meta decks
    -Different competition at this cost in the meta deck it fits into
    -Different rank among most playable cards in the set and the number of playable cards in that set (Mealymouth’s VERY important point)
    -Different appeal in other formats
    -Different importance placed on and prize support dominance represented by the format in which the card is most popular in


    There’s more but I think that’s enough. Sorry to say but this whole post completely discredits you from ever being able to speak on these matters and be taken seriously.
  • Bootlace wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Since some people think the old prices were not inflated wanted to do some math to see what the market value of cards should be. We can compare hex to magic. MTG has Rekindling Phoenix and we have Boltwing Phoenix. Boltwing is slightly weaker, but they are close enough that we can compare prices. Rekindling is about $22. Mythic rate is 1 in 8 with $4 pack price. Meaning if you open $32 in packs you will get 1 legendary. Obviously rekindling isnt selling for $32, but that is due to the other 7 packs having rares offsetting the cost. So kindling is 68% of the ratio price. Hex has a legendary rate of 1 in 9 so for $18 you get 1 legendary making boltwing in theory $12 after the 68% correction. You might ask yourself so why not just divide the price of kindle by 2? Simple because the hex legendary rate isnt 1 in 9 due to primal packs. In 100 packs you get 15 legendaries not 11. So $200 over 15 rates is $13. Then we take the 68% making boltwing when converted from an mtg economy to a hex economy $9. Now the question I have is how many of you that played mtg were willing to pay $22 for rekindling? If you were not willing to pay $22 for rekindling you should technically not be willing to spend $9 on boltwing.
    This is a joke right? I mean yea technically there is some math involved as you’re multiplying and dividing stuff but this is some of the worst logic I’ve ever come across on these forums, and that’s quite the accomplishment. I don’t even want to make some verbose explanation on why this is wrong on so many levels as that tends to go over some people’s heads so here are a few bullet points of the differences and why you can’t make this kind of comparison:
    -Different game
    -Different rules
    -Different keywords
    -Different cost (!)
    -Different textbox (!!!!)
    -Different meta
    -Different synergies with cards/keywords/champions in the decks it goes into
    -Different number of top tier decks that it fits into
    -Different importance of the card in the meta decks it does fit into
    -Different power levels between the games
    -Different power levels and composition in metas at any certain point between ANY two meta
    -Different ‘tools/answers’ needed in the meta to counteract other meta decks
    -Different competition at this cost in the meta deck it fits into
    -Different rank among most playable cards in the set and the number of playable cards in that set (Mealymouth’s VERY important point)
    -Different appeal in other formats
    -Different importance placed on and prize support dominance represented by the format in which the card is most popular in


    There’s more but I think that’s enough. Sorry to say but this whole post completely discredits you from ever being able to speak on these matters and be taken seriously.
    Have you adjusted your prices yet?
  • NeroJinous wrote:

    Bootlace wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Since some people think the old prices were not inflated wanted to do some math to see what the market value of cards should be. We can compare hex to magic. MTG has Rekindling Phoenix and we have Boltwing Phoenix. Boltwing is slightly weaker, but they are close enough that we can compare prices. Rekindling is about $22. Mythic rate is 1 in 8 with $4 pack price. Meaning if you open $32 in packs you will get 1 legendary. Obviously rekindling isnt selling for $32, but that is due to the other 7 packs having rares offsetting the cost. So kindling is 68% of the ratio price. Hex has a legendary rate of 1 in 9 so for $18 you get 1 legendary making boltwing in theory $12 after the 68% correction. You might ask yourself so why not just divide the price of kindle by 2? Simple because the hex legendary rate isnt 1 in 9 due to primal packs. In 100 packs you get 15 legendaries not 11. So $200 over 15 rates is $13. Then we take the 68% making boltwing when converted from an mtg economy to a hex economy $9. Now the question I have is how many of you that played mtg were willing to pay $22 for rekindling? If you were not willing to pay $22 for rekindling you should technically not be willing to spend $9 on boltwing.
    This is a joke right? I mean yea technically there is some math involved as you’re multiplying and dividing stuff but this is some of the worst logic I’ve ever come across on these forums, and that’s quite the accomplishment. I don’t even want to make some verbose explanation on why this is wrong on so many levels as that tends to go over some people’s heads so here are a few bullet points of the differences and why you can’t make this kind of comparison:-Different game
    -Different rules
    -Different keywords
    -Different cost (!)
    -Different textbox (!!!!)
    -Different meta
    -Different synergies with cards/keywords/champions in the decks it goes into
    -Different number of top tier decks that it fits into
    -Different importance of the card in the meta decks it does fit into
    -Different power levels between the games
    -Different power levels and composition in metas at any certain point between ANY two meta
    -Different ‘tools/answers’ needed in the meta to counteract other meta decks
    -Different competition at this cost in the meta deck it fits into
    -Different rank among most playable cards in the set and the number of playable cards in that set (Mealymouth’s VERY important point)
    -Different appeal in other formats
    -Different importance placed on and prize support dominance represented by the format in which the card is most popular in


    There’s more but I think that’s enough. Sorry to say but this whole post completely discredits you from ever being able to speak on these matters and be taken seriously.
    Have you adjusted your prices yet?
    Hahah LOVE IT! More ad hominem attacks when your points were completely shut down. @Dinotropia I told you this would happen, what are you going to do?
  • I dont believe the issue is as easy as saying the market price is the market price due to supply and demand. The prices are too high for a new player looking at a game that has very few players. There very might be market manipulation that throws everything out of wack. Due to limited supply and ah inefficencies the market is easy to manipulate.
  • Bootlace wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Bootlace wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Since some people think the old prices were not inflated wanted to do some math to see what the market value of cards should be. We can compare hex to magic. MTG has Rekindling Phoenix and we have Boltwing Phoenix. Boltwing is slightly weaker, but they are close enough that we can compare prices. Rekindling is about $22. Mythic rate is 1 in 8 with $4 pack price. Meaning if you open $32 in packs you will get 1 legendary. Obviously rekindling isnt selling for $32, but that is due to the other 7 packs having rares offsetting the cost. So kindling is 68% of the ratio price. Hex has a legendary rate of 1 in 9 so for $18 you get 1 legendary making boltwing in theory $12 after the 68% correction. You might ask yourself so why not just divide the price of kindle by 2? Simple because the hex legendary rate isnt 1 in 9 due to primal packs. In 100 packs you get 15 legendaries not 11. So $200 over 15 rates is $13. Then we take the 68% making boltwing when converted from an mtg economy to a hex economy $9. Now the question I have is how many of you that played mtg were willing to pay $22 for rekindling? If you were not willing to pay $22 for rekindling you should technically not be willing to spend $9 on boltwing.
    This is a joke right? I mean yea technically there is some math involved as you’re multiplying and dividing stuff but this is some of the worst logic I’ve ever come across on these forums, and that’s quite the accomplishment. I don’t even want to make some verbose explanation on why this is wrong on so many levels as that tends to go over some people’s heads so here are a few bullet points of the differences and why you can’t make this kind of comparison:-Different game-Different rules
    -Different keywords
    -Different cost (!)
    -Different textbox (!!!!)
    -Different meta
    -Different synergies with cards/keywords/champions in the decks it goes into
    -Different number of top tier decks that it fits into
    -Different importance of the card in the meta decks it does fit into
    -Different power levels between the games
    -Different power levels and composition in metas at any certain point between ANY two meta
    -Different ‘tools/answers’ needed in the meta to counteract other meta decks
    -Different competition at this cost in the meta deck it fits into
    -Different rank among most playable cards in the set and the number of playable cards in that set (Mealymouth’s VERY important point)
    -Different appeal in other formats
    -Different importance placed on and prize support dominance represented by the format in which the card is most popular in


    There’s more but I think that’s enough. Sorry to say but this whole post completely discredits you from ever being able to speak on these matters and be taken seriously.
    Have you adjusted your prices yet?
    Hahah LOVE IT! More ad hominem attacks when your points were completely shut down. @Dinotropia I told you this would happen, what are you going to do?
    No I just don't want to waste energy debating with you. Choosing not to use energy on something is not the same thing as being incapable of doing something.
  • NeroJinous wrote:

    Bootlace wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Bootlace wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Since some people think the old prices were not inflated wanted to do some math to see what the market value of cards should be. We can compare hex to magic. MTG has Rekindling Phoenix and we have Boltwing Phoenix. Boltwing is slightly weaker, but they are close enough that we can compare prices. Rekindling is about $22. Mythic rate is 1 in 8 with $4 pack price. Meaning if you open $32 in packs you will get 1 legendary. Obviously rekindling isnt selling for $32, but that is due to the other 7 packs having rares offsetting the cost. So kindling is 68% of the ratio price. Hex has a legendary rate of 1 in 9 so for $18 you get 1 legendary making boltwing in theory $12 after the 68% correction. You might ask yourself so why not just divide the price of kindle by 2? Simple because the hex legendary rate isnt 1 in 9 due to primal packs. In 100 packs you get 15 legendaries not 11. So $200 over 15 rates is $13. Then we take the 68% making boltwing when converted from an mtg economy to a hex economy $9. Now the question I have is how many of you that played mtg were willing to pay $22 for rekindling? If you were not willing to pay $22 for rekindling you should technically not be willing to spend $9 on boltwing.
    This is a joke right? I mean yea technically there is some math involved as you’re multiplying and dividing stuff but this is some of the worst logic I’ve ever come across on these forums, and that’s quite the accomplishment. I don’t even want to make some verbose explanation on why this is wrong on so many levels as that tends to go over some people’s heads so here are a few bullet points of the differences and why you can’t make this kind of comparison:-Different game-Different rules-Different keywords
    -Different cost (!)
    -Different textbox (!!!!)
    -Different meta
    -Different synergies with cards/keywords/champions in the decks it goes into
    -Different number of top tier decks that it fits into
    -Different importance of the card in the meta decks it does fit into
    -Different power levels between the games
    -Different power levels and composition in metas at any certain point between ANY two meta
    -Different ‘tools/answers’ needed in the meta to counteract other meta decks
    -Different competition at this cost in the meta deck it fits into
    -Different rank among most playable cards in the set and the number of playable cards in that set (Mealymouth’s VERY important point)
    -Different appeal in other formats
    -Different importance placed on and prize support dominance represented by the format in which the card is most popular in


    There’s more but I think that’s enough. Sorry to say but this whole post completely discredits you from ever being able to speak on these matters and be taken seriously.
    Have you adjusted your prices yet?
    Hahah LOVE IT! More ad hominem attacks when your points were completely shut down. @Dinotropia I told you this would happen, what are you going to do?
    No I just don't want to waste energy debating with you. Choosing not to use energy on something is not the same thing as being incapable of doing something.
    So you ask me privately to share my thoughts here, I do, you get butthurt, and now you take more personal shots at me and my business and take your ball and go home? Nah, I'm not having this. Either you're properly punished for repeatedly breaking the same forum ToS or I'm done on these forums.
  • Bootlace wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Bootlace wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Bootlace wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Since some people think the old prices were not inflated wanted to do some math to see what the market value of cards should be. We can compare hex to magic. MTG has Rekindling Phoenix and we have Boltwing Phoenix. Boltwing is slightly weaker, but they are close enough that we can compare prices. Rekindling is about $22. Mythic rate is 1 in 8 with $4 pack price. Meaning if you open $32 in packs you will get 1 legendary. Obviously rekindling isnt selling for $32, but that is due to the other 7 packs having rares offsetting the cost. So kindling is 68% of the ratio price. Hex has a legendary rate of 1 in 9 so for $18 you get 1 legendary making boltwing in theory $12 after the 68% correction. You might ask yourself so why not just divide the price of kindle by 2? Simple because the hex legendary rate isnt 1 in 9 due to primal packs. In 100 packs you get 15 legendaries not 11. So $200 over 15 rates is $13. Then we take the 68% making boltwing when converted from an mtg economy to a hex economy $9. Now the question I have is how many of you that played mtg were willing to pay $22 for rekindling? If you were not willing to pay $22 for rekindling you should technically not be willing to spend $9 on boltwing.
    This is a joke right? I mean yea technically there is some math involved as you’re multiplying and dividing stuff but this is some of the worst logic I’ve ever come across on these forums, and that’s quite the accomplishment. I don’t even want to make some verbose explanation on why this is wrong on so many levels as that tends to go over some people’s heads so here are a few bullet points of the differences and why you can’t make this kind of comparison:-Different game-Different rules-Different keywords-Different cost (!)
    -Different textbox (!!!!)
    -Different meta
    -Different synergies with cards/keywords/champions in the decks it goes into
    -Different number of top tier decks that it fits into
    -Different importance of the card in the meta decks it does fit into
    -Different power levels between the games
    -Different power levels and composition in metas at any certain point between ANY two meta
    -Different ‘tools/answers’ needed in the meta to counteract other meta decks
    -Different competition at this cost in the meta deck it fits into
    -Different rank among most playable cards in the set and the number of playable cards in that set (Mealymouth’s VERY important point)
    -Different appeal in other formats
    -Different importance placed on and prize support dominance represented by the format in which the card is most popular in


    There’s more but I think that’s enough. Sorry to say but this whole post completely discredits you from ever being able to speak on these matters and be taken seriously.
    Have you adjusted your prices yet?
    Hahah LOVE IT! More ad hominem attacks when your points were completely shut down. @Dinotropia I told you this would happen, what are you going to do?
    No I just don't want to waste energy debating with you. Choosing not to use energy on something is not the same thing as being incapable of doing something.
    So you ask me privately to share my thoughts here, I do, you get butthurt, and now you take more personal shots at me and my business and take your ball and go home? Nah, I'm not having this. Either you're properly punished for repeatedly breaking the same forum ToS or I'm done on these forums.
    I didn't ask you to reply. I posted in some group chat, but I do 100% agree I should be punished for breaking the ToS. Do you think I do things without thinking of the consequences? If I do something it is because I think it is worth doing.
  • I find the whole thing laughable. This game has zero value. I'm sorry some of you all give a shit about 3rd party prices on a DIGITAL only TCG and the ship is sinking.

    With that said you cannot in anyway shape or form compare MTG prices to HEX prices. They are not even remotely equal. Sure I understood it in set 1-4, but now? This game hasn't picked up enough steam to warrant comparison of prices. I've never shopped at Bootlace's store but they are free to charge whatever the hell they want for a price. Additionally, they can offer whatever the hell they want when someone ask for a cash buyout.

    I'm in favor of the decks, also in favor of turning this into more of a CCG as well, because you know this game hasn't gained enough traction doing the current and I'd prefer it not to die because a portion of the playerbase cares about the value of a card that will have nil value if the servers go offline.
  • The smaller the market the more volatile tend market prices to be. That does not mean that there is no market price.
    Things like buying up cards and relisting might happen but I still think that people hugely overestimate the occurence of that.

    I would like to see more evidence. So far I have one annecdotal evidence that the price of Voice of D'endrrah was manipulated in such a way because it spiked at one day. Maybe that indeed was the cause. I am not 100% sure though. All I have is the graph at hexprice.com and that is inconclusive evidence at best. And then it was said Ghostblade Duelist has currently a buyout of 143p. Looking at hexprice.com it sold for straight 4p pretty much all the time. And never above 44p. Whats striking is the low overall number for such a card. 274 sales in the time hexprice.com tracked the transactions of that card is not much for such a common that was once much played. Lately it has not been selling at all.

    But lets assume that some amount of market manipulation happens. What you can do to measure the market price is then to measure it on a longer time frame. Thats especialy wise with such an overall small market. It filters out the extremes (which can be quite impactful in the data with such low overall transaction numbers).

    And then I would like to repeat the fact that card sold for cash are trending downwards and are on an all time low. So those speculators are doing it to obtain more plat which then gets less and less value in terms of cash. Or..maybe..there is another explanation..

    There is a widening discrepancy between ingame AH prices and $ prices on the seconday market (at least at most occasions where you can buy cards for cash). So how is that to be explained? It seems the most obvious explanation lies in the unpopularity of the auction house.
    So they really should address that finally. It boggles the mind that it has not happened in all those years but that instead of that we get a big move by HXE adjusting the market. I understand that you are happy with the result. Fine. But there are ramifications with that. Make no mistake about it. Which again...is extra regrettable when the most obvious step is to finally improve the auction house.

    Also to repeat myself. There is no correct price. There is a market price. That can be manipulated in all kinds of ways. Most are intended (cards become more or less popular) and some are not (like auction house manipulation). Looking at the fact that prices for each sets cards where pretty much in line (thanks @Opalia) I tend to believe that unintended manipulations are not the main driving factor overall.

    Last but not least: High card prices also serve an important purpose in any tcg. They drive pack openings and therefore everything else (including revenue). A CCG works differently but as of now Hex is a tcg.

    @Swigmonkey It is more arguing about the right way than anyhting else. Also I like to argue/debate in general ;) . Cards are losing more and more the little cash value they had. And it very much might be that it is going to be zero sometime not so far away. But then again you might be right after all that it is all pointless. HXE is not talking to us anyways (which makes me even less optimistic). It is fine to argue that they should go ccg. I am not sure how that would be feasible at this point though. Maybe they do a full relaunch and finally get some press coverage along the way. Word of mouth (bottom up) alone is probably not gonna do it anymore when it hasnt been enough so far. Lowering prices or not...

    The post was edited 4 times, last by Metronomy ().

  • I was never concerned with prices of cards = more ultra super high priced cards the more fun there is to be had in opening packs (IMO).
    And I'm whatever for the changes, I stopped playing since the change to bash/clash payouts and am just checkin in on forums hoping the game will survive somehow for me to return sometimes in the future.

    But I couldn't scroll on through those illogical/dismissive statements/responses I saw from Nero in these post and the otherone that got closed.