Making a case (again) for adding Legacy numbering

[Spivster]

I know I’ve brought this up before in direct e-mail, but figured I’d suggest it here as well, specifically adding a way to track legacy numbering. This is becoming more of a thing, as DC has decided to add legacy numbering as part of their “All In” initiative.

To give specific suggestions on how it could be added (says the guy who doesn’t code, so I don’t know how easy/difficult this would be):

• Add to either the Main or Details screen (or the Personal screen, as it can be argued tracking legacy numbering is a personal choice) a box for “Legacy series,” which can then be populated with a series name, such as “Batman” or “Amazing Spider-Man.”
• Then there would be a separate field for the legacy number. For instance, Batman vol. 3 153 is legacy number 919.
• These two fields should be user editable, as not every series that can be legacy numbered has been officially or semi-officially tracked, and we can update any fan / self-determined legacy numbering when an official numbering is released–or when the publisher goofs (which has happened).
• Checkboxes would allow us to indicate if we want the legacy number to show on the title screen, and whether we want to show legacy numbering in stats. The last one is so that when we go to the Stats screen, the bar we see is not for how many issues we have of Batman Vols. 1, 2, and 3, but how many issues we have for Batman as a whole. (Saves us from having to do the math ourselves, particularly when the legacy numbers include “side series” such as Superior Spider-Man and Renew Your Vows for Amazing Spider-Man.)

In the “Cool But Maybe too Difficult” category, it’d also be great if the system could tell us if the run is uninterrupted or if we’re missing something. Probably too much to have it list what series or issues are missing to make it complete, but maybe something like “You’re missing 32 issues of an uninterrupted run from issue number 292.”

So…whatcha think? Certainly welcome any other user suggestions. But as Legacy numbering is becoming more and more of a thing, I’d personally like it if Connect web and app had built-in ways to track it.

[glennsimpson]

Just my two cents:

As an additional step, I’d suggest that CLZ Core could store the legacy number when it’s printed on the book. And then just let people use the same field to fill in their own interpretations (which are sometimes provided by the comics) for the numbers leading up to that.

Adding the ability to fill in a sequence of numbers into a series of comics rather than the same thing into all of them would help too.

[Spivster]

Just circling back on this. Any chance Legacy numbering will be added to the system…?

[MadCrab]

+1 good suggestion

[trout]

i’d love to see legacy numbering added as a new field that appears near the issue number.

[Valeyard]

I would LOVE to see Legacy numbering included (if it appears with the actual issue number). DC and Marvel are doing it, why not CLZ?

[Rgraydonr]

I’m also onboard for the legacy numbering

[jsnyder44]

I’d really like to see this as well.

[martybee]

200 views and 8 likes. Doesn’t seem to be a popular addition.

I disagree with adding Legacy numbering for a few reasons.

1. Legacy numbering is a cop out. Marvel & DC want the sales boost of a new #1 without honouring the longevity of a loyal fanbase. They want their cake and eat it too.

2. Legacy numbering calculations are sketchy, at best. Sometimes mini-series are included, sometimes series with completely different names are included. It’s almost as if Marvel intentionally fudges numbers to reach a milestone at a particular time strategically. Heck, they got the Hulk’s legacy number wrong and celebrated issue #600 too early. Two simultaneously published ongoing Captain America series were added sequentially to make up the issue #750 legacy number. How does that work? Are we going to lump Superman’s triangle era into a single series for legacy numbering, since it was a single continuing story? Way too arbitrary.

3. Custom fields already exist. Notes. Etc. The Series Group field exists. Change your database anyway you want. If you REALLY want New Avengers mixed with Avengers or Superior Spider-Man mixed with Amazing Spider-Man, then edit your Pick List and merge them. Personally, I don’t wish to mix Ms. Marvel with Captain Marvel.

Then again, I still think Uncanny X-Men should be listed under the title in the indicia of issue #1, X-Men. My Uncanny books are under X.

I’m a firm believer that CLZ is amazing due to its customization, but I also think some semblance of standardized cataloging needs to be maintained in Core.

[Spivster]

I will grant you that legacy numbering can be a bit arbitrary, and the constant new #1s are a sales gimmick. In fact, I’m among those who can’t make sense of the legacy numbering for GREEN LANTERN. (Though a legacy numbering field in CLZ would help… ) I also agree that CLZ is an amazing tool with a significant amount of customization options. But I disagree with your disagreement that a legacy number field is a valuable add-on. To your point it doesn’t seem that popular, this post has the most views of any other recent post in this category. Fine, not a lot of likes, but that doesn’t necessarily mean there isn’t interest. And so far, yours is the only dissenting comment.

You’re right that those of us who want to follow legacy numbering can just stick it in the Notes field or whatever (putting it in the Issue Number field, as was done in the past, can be awkward and fussy). And you’re also right that Core needs to remain standardized; it’s why I suggested legacy numbering be a custom field. That said, there are still reasons for the field to exist.

The first is tracking history and our slice of it. The crown jewel of my collection is an uninterrupted run of DETECTIVE COMICS starting with #395. While yes, I can figure out I have 708 issues of ‘TEC by math, there’s nothing in CLZ that will show me how that compares to other uninterrupted runs–much less being able to compare all those runs side by side if they’re likewise split up over multiple volumes. Sure, CLZ’s charts show that ‘TEC is first in most issues I own, but that’s only for Volume 1. The next highest is UNCANNY X-MEN #1–again, Volume 1 only (and FYI, it’s not the uninterrupted run that’s second to ‘TEC; that honor falls on BATMAN, unsurprisingly). So it’s not as valuable a tool for me because it can’t track all my issues of ‘TEC, UNCANNY, etc. Yes, I could just bundle all my issues of ‘TEC in a single listing, but that could get messy in terms of adding new issues as CLZ still thinks of those as discrete volumes. But DETECTIVE COMICS is an easy one, as it continued its legacy numbering. What about AMAZING SPIDER-MAN? Or SUPERMAN (sketchy or not)?

At least half, if not more than half, of the focus in CLZ is on the value of our collection. Important to be sure, but legacy numbering helps balance the scales toward the story side of comics, which is just as important–if not sometimes more so–than how much a particular comic is worth. Going back to my run of ‘TEC, the value of the issues doesn’t matter as much to me as knowing I own a significant chunk of comics history going back to the late 1960s. (Oooo…there’s another part of a legacy numbering feature I didn’t think of: a notation of when the first and most recent issues of a run where published ) True, I know that without having a legacy number field in the app I use to catalog it, but having it just helps. If for no other reason than so I don’t have to use a calculator each time I want to figure out how big of a chunk.

And I guess that’s my overall point: Adding the legacy number field doesn’t hurt anything. Nor does setting it up in a way where it can be tracked and charted. Nothing in Core need be affected. Users can ignore the field if they want (much like I ignore all the fields on slabbing). But for those users who want to track that info–and again, I’d argue there’s quite a few of us, judging by the traffic on this topic–it’d be a great addition to an already invaluable tool.