Rarity system updated to add 4 new categories!

[Lunacorn]

It's like going on an easter egg hunt coming back here and sorting my pets cause there's so many uncommons in my normal groups that have become rares now jippi

[marmoris]

Why are people complaining about all the new OMGSRs? Obviously there’s a lot more people here now than in 2008-9, so certain pets are inevitably going to become rarer.

well, i think theres a common misconception with this idea of pets becoming more rare because of december 18th. the concept of dec 18th is to keep older pets from becoming virtually unobtainable whilst stuck on dead accounts or nft groups. it keeps things in circulation- but i think people want to ignore & downplay the idea of pets becoming rarer and more valuable, even despite something like the 18th, because it is just not what they are used to. i think it's also easy to place the OMGSR title on a pedestal because it's the highest rarity a pet on here can be. so it feels or looks or seems far more important or special than it really is.

i honestly see this rarity update being about as chaotic as the removal of the old "Rares list" from before horrors came around or worse. but i think longterm it too, will have upsides! i know for me personally i've just had a lot more fun trading with it & it's even rekindled my interest in the site.

[Cavus]

Even if a pet's rarity says it should be worth 100 09 rares, if the majority of the playerbase agrees that it's ugly and nobody likes it, it is valued at a lot less than what it's worth, because nobody except the outliers of rat-lovers and diehard collectors actually want to trade for it or are willing to offer even a fraction of its "real worth".

I think the thing we fundamentally disagree with is that i don't think any pet should be worth 100 rares. I think the site's user-run trading function has been so broken for so long people think it's normal to demand overpayment on stuff that probably isn't that rare overall, and the intentional obfuscation of lording the list over people scares a lot of people (including me, who owns a lot of older and desired things since my account's from 2008) away from touching trades at all. If you don't know the "value", and it's intentionally scattered around in the forums and none of it is actually hard data, how can you ever trust that someone offering you something is even worth what they claim?

The only people I can trust to be fair are my friends. That's a problem.

This was worded so beautifully. I had to quote it to make this opinion show again cuz this I think is the problem with CS.

[Cavus]

I thought with the new rarity system, trades would become something like this-

Them:
My pet is two stars, please add a two star pet.

You:
I have added a two star pet, our trade is now equal. Thanks for trading.

Not like this-

Them:
My pet is four stars which is basically five stars, so you pay with three store pets. Mine used to be a five star so it counts.

You: Cancelled trade.


------------- end scene ----------


I thought the new rarities were supposed to make things as simple as possible, not make things more vague; based on could, probably, be Very Rare.

Quoting this too because this is legit CS trading scenarios LOL

[Bilaz]

I made an attempt to visualise why I think New OMGSRs are likely not that far from old ones.
I've previously tried to explain myself in words but I feel like it was difficult to make sense of it this way.
So here goes my ugly graph, but hopefully it explains a little (this model does not include store pets)


I used old rarity values simply to make it easier to draw.
So my guess is that the admins have placed something of a ceiling on how rare a pet can get. This is why we have rereleases after all, so no pets become unobtainable. For this model I've chosen the Moonswirl as an example for a pet I imagine to be close to the ceiling, after all it has been one of the rarest since the site's beginnings.
For the very rare -> recent OMGSR pet I have chosen the WWA

First I drew the state as it would be January of any given year. The Moonswirl and WWA have a certain rarity gap.
Then throughout the year, accounts go inactive and pets become rarer. I've drawn this as an arrow with a new rarity marker, the gap in rarity should still be around the same. This is the situation in December, the second image.

Finally in the third image I've drawn the effect of December 18th. The Moonswirl is brought back beneath the OMGSR ceiling, bringing it back to it's original rarity. The WWA however, was nowhere near it, so it's released in such an amount that it's allowed to gain rarity over time.
And thus, the gap between the Moonswirl and the WWA becomes a little smaller.
Now repeat this over many years and I think this is how we've gotten to the point we are today: 2009 pets are reaching the OMGSR threshhold!

[moon gem]

Even if a pet's rarity says it should be worth 100 09 rares, if the majority of the playerbase agrees that it's ugly and nobody likes it, it is valued at a lot less than what it's worth, because nobody except the outliers of rat-lovers and diehard collectors actually want to trade for it or are willing to offer even a fraction of its "real worth".

I think the thing we fundamentally disagree with is that i don't think any pet should be worth 100 rares. I think the site's user-run trading function has been so broken for so long people think it's normal to demand overpayment on stuff that probably isn't that rare overall, and the intentional obfuscation of lording the list over people scares a lot of people (including me, who owns a lot of older and desired things since my account's from 2008) away from touching trades at all. If you don't know the "value", and it's intentionally scattered around in the forums and none of it is actually hard data, how can you ever trust that someone offering you something is even worth what they claim?

The only people I can trust to be fair are my friends. That's a problem.

This was worded so beautifully. I had to quote it to make this opinion show again cuz this I think is the problem with CS.

i totally agree with this. i think a user run rares list that people so heavily reference as if it is the end all be all when it comes to trading is what starting the problem that trading is today. it makes it discouraging to even try and understand values when people demand that their pet is worth more than another simply because a list states so. i liked trading much more when it was as simple as i like this pet if yours, you like this pet of mine, the rarities match and we are both happy with the trade so it’s good. now it’s so hard to trade even lower value pets because of the greed, in my opinion.

[ShadowKatto]

I thought with the new rarity system, trades would become something like this-

Them:
My pet is two stars, please add a two star pet.

You:
I have added a two star pet, our trade is now equal. Thanks for trading.

Not like this-

Them:
My pet is four stars which is basically five stars, so you pay with three store pets. Mine used to be a five star so it counts.

You: Cancelled trade.


------------- end scene ----------


I thought the new rarities were supposed to make things as simple as possible, not make things more vague; based on could, probably, be Very Rare.

Quoting this too because this is legit CS trading scenarios LOL

This is why I’m afraid to trade with ppl

[starswater]

Ohh. I'm seeing this notice a bit late, since I haven't been trading this month due to some life things. I love these changes, though! I noticed the bar had changed style, I thought it was because I'd swapped to the Halloween theme and hadn't bothered to verify that yet.

It looks like everyone's already been discussing the impact on trading, which I was wondering about. I'll have to take some time to read through.

[ZacadicInterruption]

Time to redo all my rarity groups!!! I would sure love to know why some of my pets that used to be rare are now "extremely uncommon"

[kamado.]

I thought with the new rarity system, trades would become something like this-

Them:
My pet is two stars, please add a two star pet.

You:
I have added a two star pet, our trade is now equal. Thanks for trading.

Not like this-

Them:
My pet is four stars which is basically five stars, so you pay with three store pets. Mine used to be a five star so it counts.

You: Cancelled trade.


------------- end scene ----------


I thought the new rarities were supposed to make things as simple as possible, not make things more vague; based on could, probably, be Very Rare.

also quoting this for accuracy.

ever since the new rarities have been implemented it feels like the user-run trading system has exploded in craziness. i've had more rejected fair trades now than i have ever had in my long tenure with chickensmoothie & that's very disappointing. honestly it's turned me off of trading entirely & i've had to accept that my wishlist is more like an entire list of dreamies & will never be attainable.

i can really only trade with my sibling because i can't trust anyone else to be fair. i don't think the site should ever be that way.