"The" Rares List Guide - Do not ask about new UR's!

[Goostarion]

Personally at this point second poll needs to happen with some sort of progression. We're good for discussing ideas but ultimately figuring out if an ideas is worth it on a site spectrum should be more important otherwise discussing hypotheticals which won't go into place is just wasting time.

And unfortunately for those who end up talking on this thread when August / September comes around, if things aren't clean by then; talks of the UR updates would probably need to be cut clean for a few months like the UR Peach is already and that will cause more problems with users pointing fingers to this thread and showing of "incompetence." And by their mind it's completely justified when even in discussions there is back and forth talk of 2 steps forward, 1 step back; one step forward, two steps back.

In a way I'm also a bit over having to try and justify the threads incompetence on the FTT over and over again and get sent hate mail over it. (I ain't reporting the kids who do send the hate mail because if I was a kid I would do that too.)

But that is really helpful information about the rarities of the store pets. Definitely keep them archived as well because that conversation needs to take place.

I also am aware of the tone I am using here, I've been pretty chill throughout the last 4 months but this is starting to get ridiculous. Gotta be honest kind of sick of the two step forward one step back thing going here. I haven't bothered updating the original discussion thing archive in the other thread because only one thing has really changed so far and that's the result of the poll. Nothing else has changed. Hell, even the same users are posting in again and unless you scream and shout and do essay long replies calling problems out you are probably going to get ignored.

A schedule of stuff changing needs to be made up. Something like:
March: focus on user feedback
April: working with user feedback to generate ideas
May: developing the list to meld with user feedback
June: fixing the list / making the new thread with active discussion on this thread still.
July: organising the layout after serious discussion to include all information in a nice neat and orderly manner, not like it is now with snippets and stuff of paragraphs of random quotes and stuff.
August: open the list for other users posting and start discussion of UR pets on that thread after allowing 3-4 pages for the thread owner to host.
September: continuous discussion on ur placement while discussion and working of list finer details happen (FAQ which is actually a FAQ with at minimum 1-2 sentence replies and general math and other things.)

Something like that. Because otherwise Dec 18 rolls around and we need to wait months again to get it sorted. Plus months are needed for users (CS staff too) to relearn the list.

There are so many problems here I can list them out clearly later when I am not on mobile but if this whole thing is going to happen it needs to happen sooner rather than later.

I don't apologies for being stern. I am just cutting through all the crap and highlighting future problems and the clear observation of how problematic this whole list change thing is if it doesn't happen soon. I don't want to be associated with those who aren't doing much action wise and are sitting on their ass tacking about stuff.

No offence but discussions of specific things can come later. Get the feedback forst and see where it sits then talk about it. Give it a month to get it complete and satisfying to most users and off you go.

[lil rascal]

I'm a bit confused about the backtracking in regards to what to do with the list, I was under the impression everyone had decided on a rarity list & Lya was working on it?

Yes we have been discussing side issues with the way the list breaks down currently but I thought the main issue of what to to with the list had been settled.

Why the sudden backtracking?

@ Solloby, the idea of using the archives snapshots to fill in the blanks regarding rarity changes to make the rarity list more accurate is a fantastic idea

[DrinaLestrange]

Honestly, the only poll I could think of doing would be about the store pets, to see if the community wants them separate from the list. As far as I knew, a rarity only (or as close as possible to it anyway) was decided upon and in the works.

[Goostarion]

Honestly, the only poll I could think of doing would be about the store pets, to see if the community wants them separate from the list. As far as I knew, a rarity only (or as close as possible to it anyway) was decided upon and in the works.

I can bring you up to speed a little. A main problem of this thread is that still a selected number of users are making decisions based off the entire community which is why the poll suggestion was brought in.

The only poll that has happened though is the first one which had the answer of "Rares list is hard to understand because of demand." Nothing else in addition, so ideas thought of to correct that happened and the answers are Rarity list. But the list is a community thing so even if the rarity list is best off otherwise through this discussion, the users on CS who use the list need to know what the rarity list includes and decide if it is a good idea or not. Same with the store pet removal. That decision isn't up to 10 people on this thread discussing it. It's about the community who has to deal with it as a whole.

By all accounts nothing should be confirmed until a poll has gone up about something no matter how good that idea is. Whether on this thread or on FTT before staff obtain it.

[kee;]

@Drina- I thought so as well. Unless I've forgotten, which is possible since my memory isn't the best, no other options had really been suggested. It seemed like there was some minor disagreement over what exactly would be included in a rarity only list, just rarity or something such as availability included as well, but I think generally it was decided. If this is true, as I thought it was, I think it makes sense to start working on a preliminary rarity list.
Even if it was decided later on that the store pets should be removed, we could still start working on the new list as we discussed the store pets. I don't think it should put a stop to the development of a new list.


@above- I think the main counter argument to a new poll was that it seems there's only one option to put on it, the rarity only list. Are there any other practical options that would actually have a chance to help the problems that were brought up to put on the poll? If no, it seems that another poll would be useless.

-kee

[Goostarion]

Who said that the poll need other options for the poll? It could have it like this:

Title: Last poll showed us that the rares list was hard to understand because of demand. What if we remove the demand from the list as a whole and make t a rarity only list?
- Yes
- No
- More info? (Hyperlinked to a Q and A which is regularly updated)
- Unsure
- Need help understanding (PM 'insert users here')

That way at least there is open transparency on the idea as a whole. One of the biggest complaints is that there want any allowance for users to make contributions in a way on the Understanding the Rare's list guide thread. 100s of users voicing concern in paragraphs over how they haven't contributed before because they didn't feel like they were welcomed to. And it's going back to that again. That's why these polls are needed.

Bang, done. Wait two weeks see the results and discuss along the away. After discusssions finish, start the changes with all the stuff solloby was bringing up about pet values.

[ElementalInsanity]

I'm a bit confused about the backtracking in regards to what to do with the list, I was under the impression everyone had decided on a rarity list & Lya was working on it?

Yes we have been discussing side issues with the way the list breaks down currently but I thought the main issue of what to to with the list had been settled.

Why the sudden backtracking?

@ Solloby, the idea of using the archives snapshots to fill in the blanks regarding rarity changes to make the rarity list more accurate is a fantastic idea

That was my feeling?

As Solloby said, a couple pages ago some people voiced that they didn't want a rarity only list. However, it was after we had already made the decision to go ahead with it, hence why now there's a bit of delay again.

Honestly, at this point, it seems like we need to come to the first decision of if we are going to have a poll or not. I thought the poll idea had been shot down and we were going to just go ahead with the rarity list, but now I read that it's a possibility again?

Once we all have a clear answer on if a poll is going to happen again or not, personally I feel it shouldn't as the first poll already answered for us what we need, then we can continue on and if no one has voiced anything about a different type of list then we can move forward with our rarity list.

-snip-
I think we are trying to tackle too many issues at once and it's causing multiple small topics about how to handle every issue and distracting us from focusing on one. I do feel they're important topics to talk about, but I personally feel that figuring out what to do with the List should be the first and biggest thing we should talk about just so we can hopefully start actually making decisions. It also might help with figuring out what to do with the other issues as well.

**although all of this does show that there are several areas that could use some work so we should absolutely remember those for the future!

For my personal preference on the List I still feel that it should become a Rarity-Only List with the Store Pets taken off and put on their own List.

I'm with you on this. We seem to backtrack on what we do with the list, even though we had already come to a decision, and then talk about how bad demand is and the FTT and etc. Which are problems, don't get me wrong!
Like Imabox said, though, if we're working on this list and taking the course of the rarity list, that could possibly have an effect on our other issues couldn't it? I'm also still in favor of a rarity list with a separate store pet list. Store pets are not like normal pets, so why should they be grouped with the rarest of the normal adopt pets?

@above discussion about the poll. I had thought the reason another poll had been shot down was because of the following reasons:
~We had obtained our answer of demand being insane to everyone and the rarity list seemed the only viable list to solve those problems
~As Kee said above, we didn't have a clear poll in mind
~Lately it's been a bit shot down because if we had wanted another poll we should have come to a decision sooner since the FTT thread is already at more than 55o pages, not a lot of time left to get a complete poll answer before the thread changes hands.
~There was also the worry that people would choose what would benefit their 'demand' and 'greed' most.

[Solloby]

For details like store pet separation we should mock up both options (included/separated) and then ask for a general consensus on the thread. If no general consensus can be obtained then it would make for a great poll on this thread. Right now though, we need to finalise the decision for which main direction we're going in since there still seems to be some uncertainty.

So far the ONLY option put forth that appears to have any support is the Rarity List. We already know "do nothing" is not a viable option because the community already voted not to do that, so having what is essentially a "no don't make a rarity list but I have no suggestions for an alternative" as a poll option is pointless. Unless another option is put forth, there is no benefits to gain from having another poll.

I posted a week ago asking for alternatives and nobody posted any that I saw (please let me know if you posted one and I didn't see it!) I asked earlier today one final time. If by the end of the week nobody has posted another one, we should draw the line in the sand and say we are doing a Rarity List, end of story. If people don't like that, then please post alternative ideas now because having a poll with only one option that would provide direction is counterproductive imo.

[Goostarion]

Looking back these were also suggested:

- Rairty list (Based on rarity not age of a pet primarily over rarity)
- Rarity list (Based of age of a pet and availability of said pet, not rarity primarily)
- Rarity list (Based off both ideas working together.)
- Grouping idea, to group the pets into groups rather than tiers to make things Moreno vague.
- Make list better represent demand. Aka take demand more into consideration. It has been brought up, show down but still brought up.
- Strip demand by eliminating pets whose demand is determining a fabricated worth.
- List operate similar to the C$ system with worth. I semi brought this one up myself because of ratio speaking it does check out in a way with mathematics more accurately than the Rare's list currently does.
- Ratio-ise pets on the list. That way it takes one 1/200 approx rarity pet to get two 1/100 ratio pets.

That's in the last 5 pages alone. It's hard going back on mobile and bringing more forward.

Also there's been three different types of rarity lists brought up. It's been weird trying to understand them but overall I think that's the general idea. One is focused on the age of a pet (Which to me doesn't make sense because re releases are a thing regardless of what happened back in the day) and the other which is using the rarity tag more than age which makes more sense to me. Then there's one with the combination of both which seems to be like what the site already seemingly is working with (list is an example of both working)

[Solloby]

^ I've reread the last 5 pages and didn't see most of those suggestions?

I did miss two suggestions on p689 though, one of which addresses demand. The idea was to remove some demand from the list but not all. I think that option is worth discussing, especially as two different users brought it up (their suggestions were worded differently but look to be the same unless I misunderstood) and it has been discussed before. If we did end up running a poll then this might be a suitable option.


Zet regarding those other options you mention:

- I don't know what you mean by "rarity list based on age of pet"... isn't that just the archives? A rarity list is based on current rarities combined with their rarity change history. If little else goes into it the list would be factual rather than an opinion list which I think is one of the big draws. Or am I missing something here?

- Grouping idea doesn't address demand issue

- The adding demand idea is off the table because too many people have raised concerns about it, and it has been proven to not work so why implement something you know will fail? High demand pets that in the past have been moved up the list to better reflect their demand have responded with increased demand, which is the opposite effect to what users wanted.

- Removing high demand pets from the list was discussed a long time ago so I don't recall the discussion around it; I thought it may be suggested in conjunction with another idea such as removing some but not all demand from the list. Can you link to the post that suggested this? Do people feel it might be worth considering as an option on its own? It would only address the issue for high demand pets and not low demand ones, so we would only be half fixing the problem which has me a bit concerned.

- "Ratio-ise the pets" doesn't address demand issue

- I didn't realise the C$ discussion was a suggestion in that way, but again it doesn't address the demand issue. We shouldn't ignore the results of the first poll.