Hi,

It seems that multisnipes can only be performed by selecting the desired items and setting a multisnipe for one price.

However, I often want to pick any one (but only one) of a number of slightly different items each of which is worth a different price.
For example, I’m trying to buy a vacuum cleaner at the moment, and there’s quite a variance in values so the current multisnipe model isn’t flexible enough. Of the 3 or so suitable items per day I can thus currently only single snipe one item.

Wouldn’t it be more flexible and still easy to use if we could set normal snipes on individual items, then add them to a multisnipe ‘group’ with a nametag (e.g. “hoover” or “tv”)?
The current system could still be the default, for example:
1. Add 3 items and set individual snipes
2. Select them and go to the ‘multi’ dialogue
3. A radio button selects between minimum bid (default, as current behaviour) and “use individual snipe amounts”
4. The colour selection dialogue also gets an optional category tag (which we set to “tv” or whatever we’re buying, or it gets assigned an incrementing number value maybe) to help differentiate between multisnipe groups since the snipe amount can differ now.

Then later…
5. Add another new item, set a snipe
6. Add it to the “tv” multisnipe group in some context menu which lists all existing multisnipe groups (when all items in a multisnipe group have finished, the group is deleted from the list).

Any thoughts on this scheme? I’d be willing to look at the code since it’s probably a big change to the existing model… but I think it’d make JBidWatcher much more flexible and powerful!

p.s. apologies if this has been brought up recently – I had a quick search and didn’t see anything :)

Greetings,
You can change (per-item) snipe values after (or before!) adding items to a multisnipe, and they will bid their individual snipe values, not the amount entered to create the multisnipe. The initial amount is a simplification; most people just want that.

Hope that helps!

— Morgan Schweers, CyberFOX!

Wow, silly of me not to realise that before… thanks for the clarification! :)