Currently, I have a rare binder with all of my rares, and the rest of my cards are broken into several boxes by color, gold/multi color, and land. The problem with this methodology is that if I have a specific card in mind that's a common, I have to search through the entire box until I find it. Is there a better way to manage by cards?
Tell me more
×
Board & Card Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for
people who like playing board games, designing board games or modifying the rules of existing board games. It's 100% free, no registration required.
|
|
||||
|
|
I have my collection primarily sorted by set. I like this method because it optimizes for the "find a given card" case. If I want a Platinum Angel, for instance, I only need to search my cards from Mirrodin, M10, M11, and M12. The worst case would be searching for something like a Llanowar Elf, while the best case would be searching for, say, Emrakul. Within a given set, I may divide by rarity, color, and type. But sorting by set is best balance of findability and re-sortability that I have come up with. |
|||
|
|
|
I think the easiest way to sort and find cards is by Block->Serie->Color, and if you're hardcore, in alphabetical order. This setup is good both for searching for a specific card you know about, vague searches like "blue cantrip" and for casual browsing. |
||||
|
|
|
I also use the Block->Set->Color->Alphabetical organization method. I can usually lay my hands on a card I want in a couple of minutes once I know that I want it. I don't try to optimize for "find a good cheap red creature", I can use Gatherer for that sort of searching and then go find it in my collection (since I also have the containing sets information on the Gatherer page). |
|||
|
|
|
I first pull out the valuable cards to go into my binder. Then I organize the rest by Block -> Set -> Alphabetical. In addition to this, I use a collection manager of some sort (currently Essential Magic, but there are plenty of options) so I don't have to go digging through the actual cards when I work on deck building. |
|||
|
|
|
I've stopped playing, but I used Color -> Creature/Non-Creature -> Alphabetical, not sorting by expansion. When I was playing all cards were equally available for deck-building; if the newer blocks/sets don't work that way then you'd want to sort by that first. I found the creature/non-creature split to help manage the volume while planning and assembling decks. (I don't know if this is typical -- I was never an excellent player -- but I tended to think about deck-building as having those two, related, sub-tasks. So I'd choose creatures, choose spells that complement that, perhaps adjust creatures, etc.) |
|||
|
|
|
I’m thinking of breaking up my commons and uncommons into 10 boxes, as follows (all the rares being in binders):
With this setup, I’ll always have my standard cards easy to find (hence grouping the core sets). Once a block cycles out of standard it’ll get distributed into boxes 4-9 (unless a card is put into the core set, then it goes into box 1). The most strenuous part of this would be picking out anything in a core set, but that doesn’t have to all happen at the same time, they can migrate into the core set box over time. I'm going to try this and I'll update to let everyone know how this turns out. |
|||
|
|
|
I found the best way to sort my cards was by:
After you sort it is this way you can easily compare the effectiveness of each card and you will be able reduce the size of your usable cards. |
|||
|
|
|
For me I have a box for: 1. Black 2. Blue 3. Green 4. Red 5. White 6. Uncommons 7. Artifacts 8. Lands Creatures are separated from non creatures. Sorted alphabetically by set. Somewhat slimmed down by eliminating cards there are 10 or more of through most of the collection. For good cards like lightning bolt, swords to plowshares, etc. I don't limit at 10. |
|||
|
|
|
There are a lot of ways to organize your cards that are efficient. What it is going to come down to, is what sort of efficiency are you looking for. Deck building efficiency - This is pretty much a non-issue if you use digital deck builders, but if you don't know exactly what cards you own, it is helpful in finding possible alternatives for cards you want to run but don't own. Because all cards are near other cards of the same color/type, it is easier to find cards to fill out your deck.
Card finding efficiency - This reduces the size of all your box divisions, making it easier to find a particular card.
Trade/Deck Idea efficiency - Separating the Rarest cards from the most common cards allows you to easily find more valuable cards, or cards that an entire deck can be built around.
Size efficiency- With many of the other sorting types, you may try to separate the individual Colors/Sets by placing them in their own box and filling up empty space with deckboxes or basic lands. When you organize for space, you need to only separate sections with index cards cut to fit card sleeves. |
|||
|
|
|
I find "by set" irrelevant. If I need a disenchant, I don't want to look through every set. Color -> alpha by first letter I don't mind flipping through all the white Ds to find something and it's easy to sort. Some letters get bun.ched together based on how many cards UVWXYZ for example in most colors. If I want to search, I search using Oracle. I have a decent idea of what I own. |
|||
|
|
