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

[deepseaolive]

This sounds fantastic, the rarities needed an overhaul and I’m excited! At first 4 new rarities sounds daunting but when you think about it there’s so much disparity between some of the existing rarities (especially around the ‘very rare’ classification) and I think this could help with understanding for both new & old players! And it could help shake up the trading scene because it’s been feeling a bit stagnant lately outside of recent pets.

The only other way that I was thinking (that would be beneficial to players but not as overwhelming as 4 new categories) would be just 2 new rarities- ‘very uncommon’ and ‘extremely rare’ as it feels like there’s more of a gap in these existing sections.

Thank you for this news, I’m so excited to see things coming out of the suggestion thread!

[write]

I honestly can't say I'm a fan of any of these options, and I think more thought is needed to put into this if this really is the direction you guys are intent on going. I'm not saying I don't think that rarity system could use a bit of an update, but I do have problems with these proposed ideas:

My problem with the first option and second options is that that it's making VRs far too common. For the third option, while I do like the rarity distribution much better, for the most part, I'm really confused as to why UC is somehow more common than Common? Also, I really don't think we need that many new categories because that really just muddles things and makes things needlessly confusing. I can't imagine how complicated the trading system would be with that many categories...How many ECs make a VC? A VUC a R? etc, etc.

Of course, I could be completely misinterpreting how these graphs work, and if I am please someone explain them to me because I big dumb brain lol

If I had to guess, I'd say the graph represents each pet, rather than each instance of a pet? So an OMGSC pet might have 100k instances but only count as one pet? I don't know if this makes any sense as an explanation, and I haven't been in touch with the mod team or anything, this is just my guess.

[nicole]

I honestly can't say I'm a fan of any of these options, and I think more thought is needed to put into this if this really is the direction you guys are intent on going. I'm not saying I don't think that rarity system could use a bit of an update, but I do have problems with these proposed ideas:

My problem with the first option and second options is that that it's making VRs far too common. For the third option, while I do like the rarity distribution much better, for the most part, I'm really confused as to why UC is somehow more common than Common? Also, I really don't think we need that many new categories because that really just muddles things and makes things needlessly confusing. I can't imagine how complicated the trading system would be with that many categories...How many ECs make a VC? A VUC a R? etc, etc.

Of course, I could be completely misinterpreting how these graphs work, and if I am please someone explain them to me because I big dumb brain lol

From a math perspective, there will be a lot more common pets in circulation, even if there are more designs of pets labeled uncommon, because there are more of each common pet. The distribution is kind of similar to an extended bell curve/normal distribution. Adding a rarity on the lower end as well pushed the "middle" to uncommon rather than common as it is now, or one of the higher rarities as it would be if we didn't add a lower rarity.

Does this mean you guys will be adding more of the same pet or rereleasing them such as monthlies and such? I don't understand how there will be more common pets in circulation because of new rarities.

[BlossomTail]

i think this is dumb, if it's very uncommon then why even call it uncommon in the first place, just turn it into a common? i don't think there would be any benefits to adding a new rarity called "very uncommon" because it'll just change trading as it is and make things worse and then new people would have to come up with how to even try to value them because they're not at the same tier as uncommon but moreso valued as commons..

The problem is, there are so many pets, lumping them into the categories we currently have makes a HUGE scale. If the proposed naming convention is confusing, perhaps we can all discuss what would be a better term for the four new rarities.

Not to sound old, but way back when, we didn’t even have OMG so common and maybe not even very common? Adding more rarities back then helped tremendously. It will help here too!

Another edit: Keep in mind, back in 2010(?) when the new rarity system was implemented, there were only 3 years’ worth of pets on the site. Now there are 15!!! It was much easier to lump a bunch of commons or uncommons together when there were only, say 700 of them in total. Now, I don’t even want to know how many there are, lol! The system definitely needs an update to accommodate the pet number.

[grieve]

I think very uncommon is a good addition for now. There are a lot of uncommons that are very uncommon and hard to find, but not quite deserving of the rare label. Is it possible it’s okay to bring up the other three/four category additions at a later time if only the very uncommon is implemented?

[BlueEyedKite]

As someone who has been heavily apart of the trade scene ever since I joined back in 2017. I wholehearted agree with the decision to better spread out the rarities in anyway that we can. Especially with adding 4 new rarities, I think we would finally better understand a lot of certain pets and where they REALLY stand up against other very rares and omgsrs. With that being said I think it'd be a fun process to learn a brand new system of rarity and see what comes of it!

My sentiments exactly! Especially learning a new rarity system. I think it will be fun! And everyone else will be new too c: bonding!

[Purgatory K9]

So excited to see the community is being heard! I think a full revamp on the rarity system is much needed and would be great to see come to life

[Lacuna]

I honestly can't say I'm a fan of any of these options, and I think more thought is needed to put into this if this really is the direction you guys are intent on going. I'm not saying I don't think that rarity system could use a bit of an update, but I do have problems with these proposed ideas:

My problem with the first option and second options is that that it's making VRs far too common. For the third option, while I do like the rarity distribution much better, for the most part, I'm really confused as to why UC is somehow more common than Common? Also, I really don't think we need that many new categories because that really just muddles things and makes things needlessly confusing. I can't imagine how complicated the trading system would be with that many categories...How many ECs make a VC? A VUC a R? etc, etc.

Of course, I could be completely misinterpreting how these graphs work, and if I am please someone explain them to me because I big dumb brain lol

From a math perspective, there will be a lot more common pets in circulation, even if there are more designs of pets labeled uncommon, because there are more of each common pet. The distribution is kind of similar to an extended bell curve/normal distribution. Adding a rarity on the lower end as well pushed the "middle" to uncommon rather than common as it is now, or one of the higher rarities as it would be if we didn't add a lower rarity.

Does this mean you guys will be adding more of the same pet or rereleasing them such as monthlies and such? I don't understand how there will be more common pets in circulation because of new rarities.

No, this is just a general response to the question asked. So, if there are 100 different common pets and 150 different uncommon pets, but there are 10 of each common pet and only 5 of each uncommon pet, there will be more common pets total that exist (1000 versus 750). (All numbers made up.)

[wolfykins]

I think adding 4 more rarities will help stop some of the scams and cheating, especially trying to trick new players into giving up very valuable pets for stuff that isn't worth much at all.
There's something else I would like staff to consider, putting rarities and dates on items, Thank you. This idea of more rarities is Awesome!!

[RoxyTBDW]

I think that adding 4 new rarities would be awesome, especially adding little notches (but maybe make the stars on the notches, not inbetween because it might get to confusing for values)

Also the item rarities i agree with!