Idea to add another rarity between VR & OMGSR? (Poll added)

[nickjr]

(edited to emphasize something that several users missed)

Hope you don't mind if I dissect your post; can't figure out how else to do it (you'll see why in a moment)
No hard feelings intended

I'm sorry, but I don't support this. This would get to complicated and confusing for us players, and that would make OMGSR even harder than it already is, because you'd have to get the pets between the VR and OMGSR, and who knows how long that would take.

False if the simplest possible implementation is used:
Nick has already told us that how rarities are calculated is based on the ratio of pets on active accounts to active accounts (for brevity, I'll just say "pets" and "accounts"). So for illustration purposes (my numbers are pulled out of thin air!), let's say that right now, these are the divides:
a pet is OMGSR if there is fewer than 1 pet per 1000 users
a pet is VR if there is 1 pet per 500-1000 users
a pet is R is there is 1 pet per 250-499 users

The simplest implementation:
a pet is OMGSR if there is fewer than 1 pet per 1000 users
a pet is VR(high) if there is 1 pet per 750-1000 users
a pet is VR(low) if there is 1 pet per 500-750 users
a pet is R is there is 1 pet per 250-499 users

Look at it carefully to understand, since that should be faster than if I just type out what I did. If you're still confused, feel free to ask! I'll type it out if you need me to. But you should see that a pet will travel to OMGSR at the same rate and leave R at the same rate

You'd also have to get multiple.

Multiple what? I'm not following

This would make things way to complex and confusing, even though having another rarity seems quite nice, it would make rarities change around, and practically everything would change.

See above for why this should be false

I know there are lots of people saying and ranting about them agreeing, and why this should be added in the game, but my rant is just an tad bit different. There would be new lists, URS and other things, making people's dream goals practically be impossible unless they got hundreds of rare pets.

Why? The simplest possible implementation should not affect any rarities except for VR. OMGSC, VC, C, UC, R, and OMGSR should be unaffected.

And if they wanted a UR, they would have to get many pets ranging from rare- the rarity between the VR and OMGSR.

I'm not following you here but I suspect that you've got your terminology mixed up. Can you clarify?

This would take a lot of coding too, adding new pets into the game and making the rarities of the pets between the VR and OMGSR.

False if the simplest possible implementation is used. I highly doubt that this takes more than adding a new rarity field and changing the numbers that are the ratios. Nick's smart and has been doing this for years and I've only been in the programming world (which is really just an algorithmic problem-solving world) for a few years. Teach me, senpai!

I'm not too sure, but when they do decide to add this into the game, you who have agreed would have lost interest in the game.

That might be true, given how Nick is swamped with stuff to do, but if this takes a long time to get implemented, it won't be because of coding reasons. It'll be because its priority will apparently not be that high.

[PikaPerfect]

This thread got heated fast now didn't it? :') Ah yes, the Internet. Anyway, just to give a more visual example as to why this should happen, have a look at this:

- OMGSC = Incredibly common pets. Nothing more to say.
- Very common = Very common pets. Worth slightly more than the OMGSC pets, but not confusing.
- Common = Common pets. Worth a tad more than the VCs, but still not confusing just yet.
- Uncommon = Quite a bit rarer than a common, but not so rare people obsess over it. Starts to get a little
confusing here because uncommon is worth a significant amount more than a common, while a common is
worth just a little more than a very common. Not too hard to understand, just kind of odd.
- Rare = A lot rarer than an uncommon. There are several groups of rares, however there are two basic ones:
old rare, and new rare. Old rares are worth a lot more than new rares, but new rares are still worth a lot more
than most uncommon and below-s. Things get a bit confusing here, and it can take a bit of thinking to figure
it out if you're new.
- Very Rare = These range from a lot rarer than a rare, to almost IMPOSSIBLE to trade for if you don't have the
rarest pets on the site. I can't even begin to describe all of the groups of very rares. There are old VRs, new VRs, store VRs, list VRs, upper list VRs, lower list VRs, etc., etc., etc. This can get seriously confusing to new players, so it's best to stay away from this group for a little bit.
- OMGSR = Really, really rare pets. With the exception of the UR Tiger dog, these have similar worths, which are just a lot of rares, and I mean a LOT of rares. Relatively simple to understand this, really.

See what I mean? Even rare can be a bit of a confusing rarity with its two different groups, but very rare is a whole other story. If, say, this was the rarity chart, this is what I would like it to look like with the new rarity:

Rarity - Amount of pet/Amount of users (NOT TO SCALE)

OMGSC = 1/10
Very Common = 1/80
Common = 1/170
Uncommon = 1/400
Rare = 1/765
Very Rare = 1/1800
[New Rarity, maybe Crazy Rare? :'D] = 1/3600
OMGSR = 1/5000

The issue that I see is that Very Rare seems to cover WAY too much of the rarity spectrum. Looking at my fake chart, very rare easily covers the most of the high rarities if the new rarity isn't there. The only other option I can think of aside from adding a new rarity would be to make OMGSR cover more of the spectrum because right now the worth gap between VRs is just unmanageable. The fact that a first tier advent list pet is the same rarity as a above the gap mainlist pet? That alone should tell you how big the worth gap is.

While yes it could be confusing, in the long run it would really help. I plan on staying active on this website until it closes, and if this ever happens I will be unbelievably happy.

[Shian]

Here ya go.

There's no point PMing anyone about it - it's already posted here where we can see it fine. ;3

There probably won't be new rarity tags added for quite a while, as we already had one big rarity shift when the OMG so common rarity tag was introduced and currently the system is working reasonably well with the ones we currently have. People will always want more rarity tags to narrow things down further and further - we could have a thousand listed rarity levels and there would still be a wish for more. However, the rarity tags aren't meant to be precise markers of exactly which pet is worth what, especially since demand features so heavily in trading, and are more just for very general assessment of value.

List pets aren't necessarily rarer than non-list pets - they're just valued higher because there are fewer of them in circulation, which makes them functionally rarer even though there may be just as many of them as a less popular pet. The Black Advent and BMD are good examples of this, as they're no rarer than any other Advent but are vastly more popular and harder to find than most of their 'siblings'. The reverse is also true, as there are some pets that by rarity alone should be high on the list and yet aren't even on it due to low demand. Really, any pet that's a VR should probably be a list pet, and the only thing that keeps that from being true is availability, which is partly due to demand and partly due to age, as older pets are more likely to be in permanent homes instead of up for trade. There's no way to measure availability, and so listed rarity and functional rarity will almost always be different no matter how many rarity levels there are visible, and adding more levels might just make it more confusing. For example:

Person 1: "My dog has a rarity level of 80, so it must be equal to your 80-rarity dog, right?"
Person 2: "NO!!!!! My 80-rarity is equal to a 150-rarity because it's got a popular line edit. Yours is only worth a 50-rarity because everyone got tons of that dog during its event, and that was the common one of its litter, too."
Person 1: "But... they're both 80s?"
Person 2: "Rarity number doesn't factor in demand - go look at the rares list."

See my point? Adding more rarity tags when value is so heavily influenced by other factors wouldn't really fix the issue, and might just cause more confusion and irritation because it would look more accurate and yet you still couldn't trade 'VR for VR' or '80 for 80' because rarity isn't the same thing as value.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1804985&p=55932732&hilit=added#p55932732

[acura,]

Hope you don't mind if I dissect your post; can't figure out how else to do it (you'll see why in a moment)
No hard feelings intended

I'm sorry, but I don't support this. This would get to complicated and confusing for us players, and that would make OMGSR even harder than it already is, because you'd have to get the pets between the VR and OMGSR, and who knows how long that would take.

False if the simplest possible implementation is used:
Nick has already told us that how rarities are calculated is based on the ratio of pets on active accounts to active accounts (for brevity, I'll just say "pets" and "accounts"). So for illustration purposes (my numbers are pulled out of thin air!), let's say that right now, these are the divides:
a pet is OMGSR if there is fewer than 1 pet per 1000 users
a pet is VR if there is 1 pet per 500-1000 users
a pet is R is there is 1 pet per 250-499 users

The simplest implementation:
a pet is OMGSR if there is fewer than 1 pet per 1000 users
a pet is VR(high) if there is 1 pet per 750-1000 users
a pet is VR(low) if there is 1 pet per 500-750 users
a pet is R is there is 1 pet per 250-499 users

Look at it carefully to understand, since that should be faster than if I just type out what I did. If you're still confused, feel free to ask! I'll type it out if you need me to. But you should see that a pet will travel to OMGSR at the same rate and leave R at the same rate

You'd also have to get multiple.

Multiple what? I'm not following

This would make things way to complex and confusing, even though having another rarity seems quite nice, it would make rarities change around, and practically everything would change.

See above for why this should be false

I know there are lots of people saying and ranting about them agreeing, and why this should be added in the game, but my rant is just an tad bit different. There would be new lists, URS and other things, making people's dream goals practically be impossible unless they got hundreds of rare pets.

Why? The simplest possible implementation should not affect any rarities except for VR. OMGSC, VC, C, UC, R, and OMGSR should be unaffected.

And if they wanted a UR, they would have to get many pets ranging from rare- the rarity between the VR and OMGSR.

I'm not following you here but I suspect that you've got your terminology mixed up. Can you clarify?

This would take a lot of coding too, adding new pets into the game and making the rarities of the pets between the VR and OMGSR.

False if the simplest possible implementation is used. I highly doubt that this takes more than adding a new rarity field and changing the numbers that are the ratios. Nick's smart and has been doing this for years and I've only been in the programming world (which is really just an algorithmic problem-solving world) for a few years. Teach me, senpai!

I'm not too sure, but when they do decide to add this into the game, you who have agreed would have lost interest in the game.

That might be true, given how Nick is swamped with stuff to do, but if this takes a long time to get implemented, it won't be because of coding reasons. It'll be because its priority will apparently not be that high.

This is my opinion, this was just a rant about how I feel about this, so I'm not sure you need to copy and then write a message for each of the texts. Sorry, having a very bad day at the moment ;o;

[nickjr]

@Spud no worries, I understand it's just that I wasn't and still am not sure how else I would've responded to your post; I wish I knew a better way to put this: I felt and still feel that your rant was based on nonexistent or mistaken things, so I wanted to clear that up, sorta? Like I get that it's a rant, and you have a reason to rant, but that reason doesn't have a reason to exist, sorta? Argh I wish I knew a better way to phrase that ;__;

[acura,]

@Spud no worries, I understand it's just that I wasn't and still am not sure how else I would've responded to your post; I wish I knew a better way to put this: I felt and still feel that your rant was based on nonexistent or mistaken things, so I wanted to clear that up, sorta? Like I get that it's a rant, and you have a reason to rant, but that reason doesn't have a reason to exist, sorta? Argh I wish I knew a better way to phrase that ;__;

It's OK, and I am sorry that my rant was revolved around mistaken and fake facts, I guess that's a way to put it, but I didn't know how else to put it in, it's very hard to explain... this is why I don't post so often on CS Help, being afraid of getting judged and getting mistaken is a big fear of mines. (Social anxiety, I guess you could put it in)

[nickjr]

@Spud no worries, I understand it's just that I wasn't and still am not sure how else I would've responded to your post; I wish I knew a better way to put this: I felt and still feel that your rant was based on nonexistent or mistaken things, so I wanted to clear that up, sorta? Like I get that it's a rant, and you have a reason to rant, but that reason doesn't have a reason to exist, sorta? Argh I wish I knew a better way to phrase that ;__;

It's OK, and I am sorry that my rant was revolved around mistaken and fake facts, I guess that's a way to put it, but I didn't know how else to put it in, it's very hard to explain... this is why I don't post so often on CS Help, being afraid of getting judged and getting mistaken is a big fear of mines. (Social anxiety, I guess you could put it in)

I can totally relate x__x been trying to overcome it, but instead I'm now in the opposite position orz

[Pyromaniacal]

@Spud no worries, I understand :) it's just that I wasn't and still am not sure how else I would've responded to your post; I wish I knew a better way to put this: I felt and still feel that your rant was based on nonexistent or mistaken things, so I wanted to clear that up, sorta? Like I get that it's a rant, and you have a reason to rant, but that reason doesn't have a reason to exist, sorta? Argh I wish I knew a better way to phrase that ;__;

It's OK, and I am sorry that my rant was revolved around mistaken and fake facts, I guess that's a way to put it, but I didn't know how else to put it in, it's very hard to explain... this is why I don't post so often on CS Help, being afraid of getting judged and getting mistaken is a big fear of mines. (Social anxiety, I guess you could put it in)

aye that's fine c; it takes a lot of practice making mistakes to get better. Believe me, I have been mistaken many times in the help forum before.

[PikaPerfect]

quote="Sno Leopard"]

@Spud no worries, I understand it's just that I wasn't and still am not sure how else I would've responded to your post; I wish I knew a better way to put this: I felt and still feel that your rant was based on nonexistent or mistaken things, so I wanted to clear that up, sorta? Like I get that it's a rant, and you have a reason to rant, but that reason doesn't have a reason to exist, sorta? Argh I wish I knew a better way to phrase that ;__;

It's OK, and I am sorry that my rant was revolved around mistaken and fake facts, I guess that's a way to put it, but I didn't know how else to put it in, it's very hard to explain... this is why I don't post so often on CS Help, being afraid of getting judged and getting mistaken is a big fear of mines. (Social anxiety, I guess you could put it in)

aye that's fine c; it takes a lot of practice making mistakes to get better. Believe me, I have been mistaken many times in the help forum before.

[/quote]

Yeah, it's really easy get something taken the wrong way on this forum. It's okay though because it still contributes to the debate on whether it's a good idea or not c: Hopefully nobody had any hard feelings haha!

[acura,]

Thanks for not killing me, guys <3 Glad we have you guys here! I am hoping some of you become a General Helper <3 Love you guys, thanks for not hating me x3