[🐝] Guide to Trading Every Pet on CS --- **being updated**

[Cloverstream]

-

[Miladux]

CS is almost 16 years old. I do agree at this point it's quite unrealistic to use the 2:1 rule for rares. A 2009 would be 2 2010 rares, sure semi reasonable. But that would be hundreds of recent rares, which is just ridiculous. They are the same rarity after all. I do believe older rares should mantain a higher status so, I have a suggestion (unsure if this has been suggested before).
We could group rares into different groups, for example:
2008-2011 - Old Rares, Highest Tier, could be like Gold Tier for example (saw this idea somewhere before for lists I think)
2012-2015 - Semi-Old Rares - Silver Tier
2016-2019 - Semi-Recent Rares - Bronze Tier
2020-2023 - Recent Rares - Cooper Tier
Rares in same tier should be able to swap without problem. This is not the same as the "3 year rule", as I do not agree with it. By saying you can trade rares if their difference is less than 3 years you could theoretically trade a 2023 rare for a 2008 rare with just a few trades ( 2023 for 2020, 2020 for 2017 and so on). By keeping the tiers, this grants the older rares which are more likely to turn vr sooner a higher status than recent event pets.
So a Gold Rare could be worth 2 Silver rares, 4 Bronze rares or 8 Cooper rares. Seems way more realistic than a 2008 rare being worth thousands of 2023 rares.

I also agree with the general idea of this system, obv needs more finetuning, but the premise is good.
This could also help with list trading, just like we valued lists in 2009 rares we could now value them in Gold Rares.

this is the best suggestion ive seen. Breaking things down a little without being a ton of rarity math/ confusing. If I have to start using graphs or equations i'm not trading, this is straight forward and reasonable to me.

[SolarSonnet]

I made a revamp to that above thing because I cannot group 2008 pets with 2009-2011 pets, and I cannot group 2009 pets with 2010-2011 pets.

If someone's expecting even swaps between 2008 and 2011- even just regular rares- I think that's extremely unrealistic and a little ridiculous.

"If I have to start using graphs or equations I'm not trading" also feels unrealistic.

If I don't have to use equations or reference fair trading threads for trades, then I'm not trading.

It's literally why I'm on CS.

I've proposed so many methods at this point, valuing pets anywhere between 23 2023 rares for an 09, all the way to 8 2023 rares for an 09.

Ngl, I think 8 is my lowest. Even in terms of C$, 8 2023 Rares is not worth an 09. (5 C$ per 2023 rare x8 = 40 C$, 09s are 50 C$, so by that logic an 09r would be 10 2023 Rares.)

I also see a lot of claims of "the vast majority of players" dont want to do maths for their trades.

Where are these 'vast majority' of players? The polls sure as heck didn't reflect that.

Because the majority of people with actual ownership of old pets seems to be in some kind of agreement that we need/want rarity maths. And everybody who just wants those pets but doesn't have the means to get them seems to be in the position where they just want to trade low-value stuff for people's high-value stuff. When you're suggesting methods, you have to think "If I had the high-value pet, would I accept this? As well as, "If I had the low-value pet, would I accept this?"

Cloverstream and Inactive, you joined in 2011 and 2012. I'm specifically calling this out because Inactive, you have a golden gacha dog that you want 300 C$ for. Yet you're also out here saying you don't want to use rarity math. Would you be okay with a 1:1 swap of a random 2023 rare for your gold gacha dog?

Cloverstream, the most value you have on your account right now are 2009 very rares and some old stores, along with your warriors collection (which, nice)

Would you be willing to take a 1:1 Swap of a 2010 or 2011 R/VR/ER for one of your warrior cats, if they were for trade?

If not, then neither of you actually agree with that above chart. It just looks nice in theory for things to be so simple.

Granted, there's demand involved that this chart also doesn't take into account, but it is what the chart is suggesting.

[Cloverstream]

Yes I think the 2008 - 2011 tier would need to be broken down more, obviously 2008 pets are worth a lot, but I meant the concept of breaking it down into /something/ like that makes sense to me. If we decided a 2019 rare was fair to swap for a 2020 personally it wouldn’t bother me. I do think grouping that in easy to follow ways is for the best.

Of course there will also be outlier pets that are valued higher, but that’s true of horrors list too. Lots of rares are MA+ because of demand / more than their “regular year” rarity.

[Miladux]

I made a revamp to that above thing because I cannot group 2008 pets with 2009-2011 pets, and I cannot group 2009 pets with 2010-2011 pets.

If someone's expecting even swaps between 2008 and 2011- even just regular rares- I think that's extremely unrealistic and a little ridiculous.

"If I have to start using graphs or equations I'm not trading" also feels unrealistic.

If I don't have to use equations or reference fair trading threads for trades, then I'm not trading.

It's literally why I'm on CS.

I've proposed so many methods at this point, valuing pets anywhere between 23 2023 rares for an 09, all the way to 8 2023 rares for an 09.

Ngl, I think 8 is my lowest. Even in terms of C$, 8 2023 Rares is not worth an 09. (5 C$ per 2023 rare x8 = 40 C$, 09s are 50 C$, so by that logic an 09r would be 10 2023 Rares.)

I also see a lot of claims of "the vast majority of players" dont want to do maths for their trades.

Where are these 'vast majority' of players? The polls sure as heck didn't reflect that.

Because the majority of people with actual ownership of old pets seems to be in some kind of agreement that we need/want rarity maths. And everybody who just wants those pets but doesn't have the means to get them seems to be in the position where they just want to trade low-value stuff for people's high-value stuff. When you're suggesting methods, you have to think "If I had the high-value pet, would I accept this? As well as, "If I had the low-value pet, would I accept this?"

Cloverstream and Inactive, you joined in 2011 and 2012. I'm specifically calling this out because Inactive, you have a golden gacha dog that you want 300 C$ for. Yet you're also out here saying you don't want to use rarity math. Would you be okay with a 1:1 swap of a random 2023 rare for your gold gacha dog?

Cloverstream, the most value you have on your account right 2009 rares and some old stores, along with your warriors collection (which, nice)

Would you be willing to take a 1:1 Swap of a 2010 or 2011 R/VR/ER for one of your warrior cats, if they were for trade?

If not, then neither of you actually agree with that above chart. It just looks nice in theory for things to be so simple.

Granted, there's demand involved that this chart also doesn't take into account, but it is what the chart is suggesting.

Chill on the attitude bud.
2008-2009 rares and a 1 year rarity difference not having a rarity gap is completely reasonable.

Gold Gachas are going for around 1-1.5 MA, equivalent to 300C$. Just because I don't like the current way demand impacts the game, doesn't mean I am naive to it. Any future system needs to be widely agreed upon, till then no I am not going to lose value for pets. Your argument is weak.

I am not by any means saying that in this instant we all in this thread need to not trade our pets for what we paid for them. It is going to take time and more than just a couple people discussing revisions of a concept idea.

I already don't seperate 08-10 rares by much of a margin at all. You do. Thats fine.

Have you not looked at some of the discussion and suggestion threads? There are alot of people who can't understand the system well enough to play it. Alot of new players who feel overwhelmed. Alot of old players returning who feel confused.

Your going at me and Clover about our collections and pricing. We aren't talking about implementing these practices in this moment right now. Your bringing up the age of our accounts, have you considered that we were around when trading wasn't like this? That maybe we are pushing for things to return to a more agreeable easy to access state that we experienced?

We are not saying rarity math needs to be eliminated. But a cohesive agreed upon list of values/demand needs to be developed, it will take months. And rarity math for lower rares needs to be modified to. Because you don't personally want to trade your 08 rares on the same level as a 09 rare doesn't mean that everyone agrees with you. You keep speaking like your way is the only way, and your demeanor is very much close ended and not allowing actual discussion.

I think your not actually anywhere near as in the loop as you think you are to the current attitude towards trading on the site.

[Herald of the Arcane]

Gold Gachas are going for around 1-1.5 MA, equivalent to 300C$.

Do you have any source such as recent successful trades that aren't auctions to confirm this value of the gacha dog? Genuinely curious because i have yet to see recent trades of those and they weren't going for that last time I got to see some in successful trades. They were going for like, a couple older rares at most, when the hype died down a little. And that'd probably be useful as in, to add the golden gacha dog to the list, if thats truly what it goes for.

[Miladux]

Gold Gachas are going for around 1-1.5 MA, equivalent to 300C$.

Do you have any source such as recent successful trades that aren't auctions to confirm this value of the gacha dog? Genuinely curious because i have yet to see recent trades of those and they weren't going for that last time I got to see some in successful trades. They were going for like, a couple older rares at most, when the hype died down a little. And that'd probably be useful as in, to add the golden gacha dog to the list, if thats truly what it goes for.

Yeah I'll find some threads and message you, the highest I've seen it go for is 3MA.

[~SNCastiel<3~]

Gold Gachas are going for around 1-1.5 MA, equivalent to 300C$.

Do you have any source such as recent successful trades that aren't auctions to confirm this value of the gacha dog? Genuinely curious because i have yet to see recent trades of those and they weren't going for that last time I got to see some in successful trades. They were going for like, a couple older rares at most, when the hype died down a little. And that'd probably be useful as in, to add the golden gacha dog to the list, if thats truly what it goes for.

I paid 550C$ for mine.

[Cloverstream]

Also so there is no confusion I’m talking about “regular rares/ vrs ”and below when I’m talking about ways to generalize values. The 2:1 system already exists for pets not on horrors “list”- Pets that fall under that is what I’m referring too. Pets like warrior cats or the august pps already lie outside that 2:1 rule, which is what I thought we were talking about replacing. If we broke down regular rares differently I’d be fine with that. I’m not advocating for no “list” and all pets swapping evenly.

I’m only speaking for myself though, I just assumed this conversation was about regular rares?

[fιяєfℓу]

CS is almost 16 years old. I do agree at this point it's quite unrealistic to use the 2:1 rule for rares. A 2009 would be 2 2010 rares, sure semi reasonable. But that would be hundreds of recent rares, which is just ridiculous. They are the same rarity after all. I do believe older rares should mantain a higher status so, I have a suggestion (unsure if this has been suggested before).
We could group rares into different groups, for example:
2008-2011 - Old Rares, Highest Tier, could be like Gold Tier for example (saw this idea somewhere before for lists I think)
2012-2015 - Semi-Old Rares - Silver Tier
2016-2019 - Semi-Recent Rares - Bronze Tier
2020-2023 - Recent Rares - Cooper Tier
Rares in same tier should be able to swap without problem. This is not the same as the "3 year rule", as I do not agree with it. By saying you can trade rares if their difference is less than 3 years you could theoretically trade a 2023 rare for a 2008 rare with just a few trades ( 2023 for 2020, 2020 for 2017 and so on). By keeping the tiers, this grants the older rares which are more likely to turn vr sooner a higher status than recent event pets.
So a Gold Rare could be worth 2 Silver rares, 4 Bronze rares or 8 Cooper rares. Seems way more realistic than a 2008 rare being worth thousands of 2023 rares.

This could also help with list trading, just like we valued lists in 2009 rares we could now value them in Gold Rares.

After reading some of the input, I have decided to rectify my suggestion.

Just wanted to make a quick note, this guide is meant to be used for regular rares. Just like a Raven won't swap for another ER, the Gacha Dog might not swap for another rare because of demand. That's irrelevant to the discussion as this is meant to serve as a general guideline for trading and not commend to every exception. Those are up to the users to decide their own values.

Back to the topic, after reading the replies to my post, it appears a lot of people would rather see a division in the Gold Tier. I agree, I initially planned to keep 2008 and 2009 rares separate but put them in with the others as I had seen a bunch of posts suggesting that and for the sake of simplicity. So that'd be something like:

2008-2009 - Oldest Rares - Platinum Tier
2010-2011 - Old Rares - Gold Tier
2012-2015 - Semi-Old Rares - Silver Tier
2016-2019 - Semi-Recent Rares - Bronze Tier
2020-2023 - Recent Rares- Cooper Tier

As for swaps between tiers, after a bit more thought I have a new suggestion:
1 Platinum Rare equals 2 Gold Rares
1 Gold Rare equals 2 Silver Rares
1 Silver Rare equals 2 Bronze Rares
Gap
1 Bronze Rare equals 2 Cooper Rares OR 1.5 Cooper Rares

So this would be something like, 1 2009 rare = 2 2010 rares or 4 2013 rares or 8 2018 rares or 16 2023 rares with the 2:1 ratio.
Or, 1 2009 rare = 2 2010 rares = 4 2013 rares = 8 2017 rares = 12 2022 rares with a 1.5:1 ratio for bronze and cooper.
I'm aware the 1.5 swap could complicate it a bit, although it seems fairer to me. Let me know your thoughts on it! (As in, a Cooper Rare and a Cooper EU for a Bronze Rare for example)

I think the groups could be the same for Extremly Uncommon and Uncommon pets, but with all tiers with a 2:1 ratio for swaps.
Possibly something similar for under uncommon pets, but with more years grouped together and less tiers.

Sorry for the long post oop