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

[Solloby]

The old store pets values seem really out of date, do we know when their last values are from? A high demand OMGSR store pet that will never be rereleased should be worth heaps more than a July 08 dog by now surely, but some of them are listed as under 1 which seems really off. I'm guessing the valuations are from years ago before they went OMGSR? Maybe store pets should be given either a sliding value (with a set increase per year), or have their values dated so that people can see when the values are too out of date to use?

[fιяєfℓу]

The old store pets values seem really out of date, do we know when their last values are from? A high demand OMGSR store pet that will never be rereleased should be worth heaps more than a July 08 dog by now surely, but some of them are listed as under 1 which seems really off. I'm guessing the valuations are from years ago before they went OMGSR? Maybe store pets should be given either a sliding value (with a set increase per year), or have their values dated so that people can see when the values are too out of date to use?

It feels like old store pets value is increasing solely out of demand. The raven and dragon cat for example, have been continuously rising while others like the androids or punk dogs have been stagnant for so long I can't even remember when they last changed. I don't think they should increase by a set amount each year, at some point they will just be too highly valued for what people are willing to pay, depending on each pet.
Honestly, if people are willing to value androids, for example, at a solid 0.5 nons and there's enough supply for them to keep going for that much, I don't see a reason to inflate their value if it's stable. If we get to a point where many more people want them vs the quantity circulating then the value will rise naturally and that's when we should update their value. That's just my opinion though!

[sunka]

i agree with firefly. i think what we see with the raven (and likely with the cerbs if i’m reading the room right based off their current high demand) is just a lack of availability which leads to increased demand which leads to overpaying strictly because people really want them and less because they are more valuable so to say. i think increasing the value of store pets on a sliding scale will open the door for more demand/value pushing since they already won’t be released again, but adding additional value to them beyond that only feeds the demand issue. the androids and punks straight swap with sorbs and balloon dogs (and likely other normal demand .5 non pets) so i don’t think they need to be adjusted. i do think adjusting the value higher for anything that’s currently fluctuating will only cement the value at higher ranges. where as if we let things cool off, we may eventually see them come back down to a reasonable value level.

[lil rascal]

The old store pets values seem really out of date, do we know when their last values are from? A high demand OMGSR store pet that will never be rereleased should be worth heaps more than a July 08 dog by now surely, but some of them are listed as under 1 which seems really off. I'm guessing the valuations are from years ago before they went OMGSR? Maybe store pets should be given either a sliding value (with a set increase per year), or have their values dated so that people can see when the values are too out of date to use?

I find this odd too. Older, rarer stores like the androids, punks, Clydesdale, Arabians, Basilisks etc are still listed at the same values they traded for 5 years ago despite having been OMGSR for some time now. At the very least they must be worth at least a non by now based on pure rarity, not even accounting for store demand. I find it baffling that they would be left at the same value as 5 years ago while far more common pets are listed as being worth 3-16 times their assigned values.

[sunka]

The old store pets values seem really out of date, do we know when their last values are from? A high demand OMGSR store pet that will never be rereleased should be worth heaps more than a July 08 dog by now surely, but some of them are listed as under 1 which seems really off. I'm guessing the valuations are from years ago before they went OMGSR? Maybe store pets should be given either a sliding value (with a set increase per year), or have their values dated so that people can see when the values are too out of date to use?

I find this odd too. Older, rarer stores like the androids, punks, Clydesdale, Arabians, Basilisks etc are still listed at the same values they traded for 5 years ago despite having been OMGSR for some time now. At the very least they must be worth at least a non by now based on pure rarity, not even accounting for store demand. I find it baffling that they would be left at the same value as 5 years ago while far more common pets are listed as being worth 3-16 times their assigned values.

this is where the demand issue comes in, though. while rarity wise i agree with you, demand wise they’d never trade for that much and that’s almost the exact issue with the ur foods and additional pets that don’t trade easily for their listed value. if they have the rarity but not the demand, they don’t match up to let’s say the dragoncat pps. in all reality, most of the omgsr advent pets should be worth more than it based on the rarity alone. but the advents will sit in trade groups and not move for months where the same dragoncat could be traded three times in one day because people want it enough. unfortunately, demand is the killer when it comes to high value trades and to me it’s taken more into account than rarity almost always because no matter how rare a pet is, if it’s not wanted as badly it won’t trade as easily. what i could see happening, if additional value is assigned to pets like the clydesdale, is it’ll end up like the nick unickorn. its worth 1 non, listed at 1 non, but you’ll have a hard time finding someone to pay a non for it because its value does not meet its demand.

[Pastel-Axle]

I second sunka and firefly, just because the value of these old stores has been stable doesn’t necessarily make it incorrect, it would only be incorrect if it weren’t reflective of what people are willing to trade them for. Value pushing and fluctuation mainly seems to occur for the very highest demand stores - like people have mentioned the raven, PPS dragoncat, kitsunes, cerbs - because they are so highly sought after even among high demand stores. Thrusting that onto every old store just because they’re old and not taking into account the current state of the actual trading landscape doesn’t make sense to me.
(Not to mention rarity wise, the punks and androids went OMGSR at the same time as the OMGSR advent dogs and iirc the 0.5n sorbs, so it’s not like they’ve become as ‘objectively’ rare as a non??)

[Solloby]

Back in the day, Androids and Punks were high demand though? That's why I'm confused.

Store pets are never rereleased so their supply will continually reduce compared to other pets. So they theoretically become slightly rarer than other pets once per year. That's why I think their valuations need to be dated, so it can be recognised if they have gone through multiple rereleases since they were last looked at vs the valuation was recent.

Androids & Punks going OMGSR at the same time as the Advents doesn't mean that they are the same rarity because their change was the result of a rarity system update. So it wasn't a natural timed change but a batch change, meaning we can't assume all of the pets that changed during that update have similar rarities in the same way we can during a natural timed change. We have also had a couple of rereleases since, but not too many yet.

-----------

Honestly I'm not sure giving pets numerical values for trading is really the right way to go, but that would be another discussion I suppose. Sometimes I wonder if we should be splitting rarity and demand out and when evaluating trades, looking at both factors separately so that people can make decisions for themselves about how they want to trade, rather than rolling rarity and demand into one single number like a non or a ma. We have some pretty solid demand data now after the popularity poll, so it would be a doable thing. That would address the earlier discussion about the Black Advent vs the Banana, wouldn't it?

-----------

EDIT: I just noticed that UR Peas is still incorrectly listed as low demand on the front page, the popularity poll proved this to be untrue. Can this please be fixed? It looks like Squid and Avocado have been fixed now which is great c:
Unfortunately I think Red Boa Rat needs to marked low demand, it got such a low rating on the poll. Poor ratty.

[Pastel-Axle]

Part of it is simply changed trading habits over time too. I remember the punks being really high demand, and they’re still well liked now, but I think they’ve gradually just settled into being ‘good stores’ as opposed to nearing the peak of demand. Again they’re not disliked and they’re still easy to trade, but I see them get swapped around for ‘normal’ sorbs without hesitation widely and if that’s what most people are willing to pay… then that is what they go for, what they’re worth in the average trader’s eye. The gulf between strong store demand and extreme store demand is vast even though all of the pets involved are well liked and easy to trade. Not every store can be the Raven, that can’t be forced.

[Solloby]

Exactly, their demand is fine and their rarity is OMGSR, so why aren't they considered more valuable is my question.

Perhaps I am undervaluing the 08 dogs in comparison. I was under the impression that the Zebras and UR pets were intended to be the rarest and most valuable pets on the site. Given how many rereleases the 08s have been through, I am not sure if the July 08 dogs should really be up there amongst the URs anymore, but I guess they've been there so long that people would not agree with this take.

I guess what it all comes down to is, the question of why an OMGSR store pet that will never be rereleased is worth less and not more than an OMGSR regular month dog that will be rereleased. Have their rarities not come close enough for that yet? I wish the OMGSR rarity label had tiers, it's become a really wide label.

[sunka]

i agree with the point that if pets were assigned a rarity, but then also some sort of scale or number showing where exactly they fall within that rarity it would help. for example, let’s say there’s 100 pets within the omgsr bracket, the orange cerb being an older 09 store pet would fall closer to 1, being the most valuable pets based off of how many exist. where as a pet such as the non swirl may fall closer to 60, meaning while it is omgsr, there are more of them available than those closer to 1. something to actually help understand what the exact rarity is. which would help set a value.

i fundamentally disagree with making store pets harder to obtain just because they will not be released again. i understand the fact they won’t come around, but a stable value has no reason to move. the punks and androids would have the same demand to me as a sorb and balloon dog and i have swapped them effortlessly. pushing the value up simply because they are store pets with no basis as to why will only add to the greed and value pushing. really what is necessary is an overhaul based off of trading data. that’s really what helps. more than polls, more than discussions, hard facts on what exactly pets are going for and which pets need to be adjusted to a more appropriate value.