We need your feedback on an update to the rarity system!

[Vulpinyo]

I think adding 4 new categories might also help with how the store pets are now always rare instead of how they used to always be very rare. I think while rare store pets are worth more than normal rares, it'd give people more incentive to actually buy c$ and support the site if they had a higher chance of more value

[Loelya]

I think adding 4 new categories might also help with how the store pets are now always rare instead of how they used to always be very rare. I think while rare store pets are worth more than normal rares, it'd give people more incentive to actually buy c$ and support the site if they had a higher chance of more value

this is an excellent point, I didn't even think of this.

[daily]

I am so thrilled to see changes being made based on user input! Even if that means my pets lose/gain value in the process, it's something that will help out the economy in the long run and I'm all for the 4 new rarities (also, new colours <3)

[SkywardtheDragon]

While I like the idea of adding new rarities, and I think it should be implemented one way or another (I personally would prefer adding a single rarity, but I see that a lot of people would love adding multiple rarities and I’m not much of a trader anyway), I think the name “very uncommon” is too clunky and doesn’t sound natural. I don’t have any other name suggestions, and after all “very uncommon” does follow the pattern of “very common” and “very rare” but I’ve never heard anyone use “very” as an intensifier to “uncommon”.

[CanisCoyote]

i think that adding 4 new categories is the best way to get a better idea of what a pets value is; while redistribution without adding any new categories is the worst one. Redistribution would change the label; but does not actually change the number of pets in circulation, so I feel like it would just lead to users trying to keep track of which pets were OMGSR before the update, and then saying they are not worth the new OMGSR pets since we knew before that there were more of them since they used to be VR. This would lead to even more chaos.

[Wiske]

I would actually go for something not in the poll.
Add extremely common and extremely rare, and redistribute around that.

Uncommon, very uncommon and extremely uncommon, after that going to rare, doesn't seem right. If something is extremely uncommon, it is rare. I realise/am guessing this V-UC is because there is something needed to redistribute the biggest middle categories, but I feel spreading the pets out to have more 'extremes' to the left, would help as much as adding an extra category. Let VC be part of the new middle, so Uncommon can actually stay uncommon-ish.

I also feel like one new category might not be enough to properly distribute the massive amount of pets, but four new ones are too many to keep track off. However, I also think the redistribution can be tweaked a little as well. Let more pets be VC/C and less UC and up.

It might also be a better way to appease to both "want new categories" and "dont want new categories" than just adding one that doesnt seem to change that much in the middle tbh



@Kurloz Makara
Its not about how many pets there need to be for the label to be given. Its about how many pets fall into that category.

There can be more Uncommon type pets than very common, while a UC pet can still have less copies than the VC pet. E.g you have 200 UC pet types, each with 30 copies, vs 50 VC types of pets with eqch 2000 copies.

[Rescue2001]

I think 4 new rarities would be cool!!

[CO1LD]

Adding FOUR new rarity categories is insane. I hardly care for rarity categories in the first place when the majority of players care for year/dates and species type.

The rarities we have now are fine.

- COLD

[MiaShuji]

Idk i just fear alot of pets that have currently high demand will loose on worth then...would be depressing after i paid an arm for some of my pets

[MyopicDinobird]

I would love four more categories! Just one more would help a lot, but I'm all for four of them :O the 'very uncommon' is especially exciting to me. I feel like we frequently have one outcome of the month that every second person in the swap thread is looking for, and at the end of the month, it becomes one of five uncommons. I would love to see the scarcity a little better reflected in the rarities Also, in my opinion, would make trading up or down feel easier and more fair. I would not trade two regular uncommons for one rare as it is now, but if I knew these were the scarcer uncommons, I would be up for it. It would add more transparency and more flexibility in trades, and I am all for that. Four new rarities all the way for me!