Rule Changes to Address Misleading Trades +Spam Guide Update

[Birdy]

If Horror lists a pet at 1H and you personally want more for it, you would present that as a personal value rather than modifying the guide unit. In that situation, you can still use MA/Non informally, since they are not banned for personal use.

If you want a basis for what MA/Non mean in your own trading, many players already use the Successful Trades thread as a reference point for that, rather than tying it to a specific guide.

Hi, there! Asking this in good faith, apologies if it in any way comes across as rude. Could you explain further what "present that as a personal value" refers to? Are we talking pet names? Or trade messages? Or what's in your trade rules? Or what's in your trade thread? Or all of the above?

As for the 2nd point, could you explain what the difference is between someone previously saying "I personally value a green toxic at 1.5n" and someone now saying "I personally value a green toxic at 1.5H"? I'm honestly still struggling to see how this in any way prevents people using the guise of their "own personal values" to their advantage?

[barbwirebrat]

yeah, i apologize Winx, im not sure if its on me for not communicating it properly or not, but i dont feel my concern is being understood. ultimately my concern is this: with the banning of MA/Non in guides, MA/Non will become obsolete and not mean anything, and users will not have any metric to determine personal value in things such as pet names. you keep saying we can value things personally, which is great, but you still did not give me an example of how i am supposed to do so without MA/Non being a factor. i understand what you're trying to say, but it does not answer my problem nor my concerns about what i think is going to happen. the FTT and successful trade threads are not going to continue using MA/Non if it cant be referenced to something, they will move to Horror's new value, or something similar. MA/Non only means something because its backed up by years of empirical trade data where players used it as a valuing system.

maybe im wrong, maybe users will somehow figure out how to telepathically convey MA/Non values to one another without any form of central guide(s) to convey what they mean or what pets are worth in relation to eachother, LOL. but for now, im not optimistic, and am just annoyed. but thanks for your time, i wont take any more of it. i still stand my ground that this decision was extremely poorly thought through, and i doubt that will change. cheers.

took the words right out of my mouth. i’ve been on this site for over a decade and unfortunately in that time i’ve only ever been witness to the complete disconnect between the staff and their playerbase. it truly is a shame, especially because i, and many others, were looking forward to some positive changes after viewing the roadmap from tess. i wouldn’t even know where to start when it comes to repairing the relationship between staff and players, but i know this update is not gonna help haha. it’s kind of bizarre to drop such an abrupt and potentially game breaking update and then expect the user base to comb through 40+ pages of posts and decipher all these confusing, vague and conflicting responses

[reaptherisk]

@ TANKMEN - i read your post about RRs, but i think what winx said should clear that issue up

thank you for your nicely articulated explanations winx! i think players being able to use MA to signal a personal value makes sense. i suppose when horror inevitably includes a little message about the new unit on their post, they could work in something about that.

before i read winx's reply i also thought that maybe people can use a "HP" term or something to incorporate their own ideas about the value of a somewhat ambiguous pet, but also stick with the general framework of horror's guide. now some might argue that then nothing would change with the MA situation, i disagree, i think something like that would make it far clearer that someone is just making up their own value and players could read it and exercise caution.

besides, im spreading the word of oreozhere's script multiple times a day lol i link it under every quote in the trading advice thread and to a lot of my trading partners. if everyone used it then everyone would be able to clearly see what the UNIVERSAL value for a pet is and decide for themself if they agree with a certain user's adjustments : ) it's not a scam if everyone is making informed decisions!!! i am willing to overpay all the time when the situation calls for it. because every trader and set of pets is different

[himarry 124-Item-Bin]

If Horror lists a pet at 1H and you personally want more for it, you would present that as a personal value rather than modifying the guide unit. In that situation, you can still use MA/Non informally, since they are not banned for personal use.

If you want a basis for what MA/Non mean in your own trading, many players already use the Successful Trades thread as a reference point for that, rather than tying it to a specific guide.

Hi, there! Asking this in good faith, apologies if it in any way comes across as rude. Could you explain further what "present that as a personal value" refers to? Are we talking pet names? Or trade messages? Or what's in your trade rules? Or what's in your trade thread? Or all of the above?

As for the 2nd point, could you explain what the difference is between someone previously saying "I personally value a green toxic at 1.5n" and someone now saying "I personally value a green toxic at 1.5H"? I'm honestly still struggling to see how this in any way prevents people using the guise of their "own personal values" to their advantage?

I am not sure if this is accurate or not so please someone correct me, but if someone uses lingo from specific guides I don't think they are aloud to value the pet differently then the guide? or is it that they have to specifically state in trades now that its worth x according to x guide in the trade message?

(EDIT: a lot of ninjas would send trades with their pet named 3 ma when their pet was only worth 1 ma, so i expect that its to have a more concrete trail of "bad faith" trading)

[Birdy]

If Horror lists a pet at 1H and you personally want more for it, you would present that as a personal value rather than modifying the guide unit. In that situation, you can still use MA/Non informally, since they are not banned for personal use.

If you want a basis for what MA/Non mean in your own trading, many players already use the Successful Trades thread as a reference point for that, rather than tying it to a specific guide.

Hi, there! Asking this in good faith, apologies if it in any way comes across as rude. Could you explain further what "present that as a personal value" refers to? Are we talking pet names? Or trade messages? Or what's in your trade rules? Or what's in your trade thread? Or all of the above?

As for the 2nd point, could you explain what the difference is between someone previously saying "I personally value a green toxic at 1.5n" and someone now saying "I personally value a green toxic at 1.5H"? I'm honestly still struggling to see how this in any way prevents people using the guise of their "own personal values" to their advantage?

I am not sure if this is accurate or not so please someone correct me, but if someone uses lingo from specific guides I don't think they are aloud to value the pet differently then the guide? or is it that they have to specifically state in trades now that its worth x according to x guide in the trade message?

(EDIT: a lot of ninjas would send trades with their pet named 3 ma when their pet was only worth 1 ma, so i expect that its to have a more concrete trail of "bad faith" trading)

I'd still like to hear what winx/the staff have to say, but I'll reply as though this is the case^^

Let's say "H" isnt a specific guide's unit. Let's say it's mine, and in my trade rules I say 1H=1N. Or let's say I abandon any attempt at a new unit altogether, since it's been made clear people can still use those terms for their own personal use. Now I am still presenting a trade offer that I likely know is unfair, but am technically allowed to do because I'm using my own unit rather than a guide's unit. Is the unsuspecting/uninformed trade partner any less likely to accept an unfair trade? If so, how/why?

[Pandora!]

Kinda feel like at this point it would be easier and less confusing just to get an admin-confirmed ratio of the rarest pets categories.

^this x1,000,000. it's 2026, we have the technology. just release some concrete data about pet rarity, users have been asking for more than a decade. release some tangible data, create an official CS trading guide, or let users nurture their own trading culture in peace. how will this decision even realistically be enforced, what disciplinary action could be taken for someone who wants to continue using the MA/NON system? if I forgot to change the value on one random pet in my trade group will I get banned, or my pet revoked? I know I'm being hyperbolic but really, this seems like a bad faith approach to dealing with bad faith scammers who are well known but not dealt with by CS mods for one reason or another.

I don't think the MA/NON terms will reasonably ever be phased out if they're always going to be used a yardstick to any new terms. 1NON = 1 pompom, 1 MA = 1 bonbon, 1 pompom = 10 bonbons, etc. it's just going to be the same system with a new coat of paint slapped on top.

I have been on this site since 2008. I look a large hiatus, got scammed out of an orange cerb for crying out loud, only to be told by CS mods that there was nothing they can do despite pretty obvious evidence it was ninja'ed. Horror's guide and the MA/NON system was what saved me from being scammed out of more valuable pets. not saying that it's perfect by any extent of the imagination but it was meticulously crafted in conjunction with real trade data and user input. I applaud the CS team for announcing they are going to crack down on scammers but it's a day late and a dollar short for many of us.

this seems like a ridiculous, unasked for, and difficult to moderate rule change to control CS user thoughtcrimes. how is this more important than any of the quality of life improvements that have been asked for and acknowledged in Tess's post here?

[reaptherisk]

If Horror lists a pet at 1H and you personally want more for it, you would present that as a personal value rather than modifying the guide unit. In that situation, you can still use MA/Non informally, since they are not banned for personal use.

If you want a basis for what MA/Non mean in your own trading, many players already use the Successful Trades thread as a reference point for that, rather than tying it to a specific guide.

Hi, there! Asking this in good faith, apologies if it in any way comes across as rude. Could you explain further what "present that as a personal value" refers to? Are we talking pet names? Or trade messages? Or what's in your trade rules? Or what's in your trade thread? Or all of the above?

As for the 2nd point, could you explain what the difference is between someone previously saying "I personally value a green toxic at 1.5n" and someone now saying "I personally value a green toxic at 1.5H"? I'm honestly still struggling to see how this in any way prevents people using the guise of their "own personal values" to their advantage?

I am not sure if this is accurate or not so please someone correct me, but if someone uses lingo from specific guides I don't think they are aloud to value the pet differently then the guide? or is it that they have to specifically state in trades now that its worth x according to x guide in the trade message?

(EDIT: a lot of ninjas would send trades with their pet named 3 ma when their pet was only worth 1 ma, so i expect that its to have a more concrete trail of "bad faith" trading)

precisely the first thing, just to be in accordance with the guide they are using and expecting others to use so that they keep things fair. cause some people like to over/undervalue pets for personal gain, and scam without punishment under the guise of a personal system.

but what a lot of people here don't seem to be mentioning, is that horror's guide is basically the only one used right now. i don't know who is out there finding success just trading randomly according to entirely their own values or some obscure guide (not talking about personal beliefs about RRs that aren't covered by the guide like tankmen explained, that's a different story) but ive NEVER met someone who follows something other than horror's guide (unless they just don't know anything about cs trading). so basically the grand effect of this rule is that 1 MA will become 1 H, and like you said, ninjas will no longer be able to cheat and lie in broad daylight

[Pawesome]

yeah, i apologize Winx, im not sure if its on me for not communicating it properly or not, but i dont feel my concern is being understood. ultimately my concern is this: with the banning of MA/Non in guides, MA/Non will become obsolete and not mean anything, and users will not have any metric to determine personal value in things such as pet names. you keep saying we can value things personally, which is great, but you still did not give me an example of how i am supposed to do so without MA/Non being a factor. i understand what you're trying to say, but it does not answer my problem nor my concerns about what i think is going to happen. the FTT and successful trade threads are not going to continue using MA/Non if it cant be referenced to something, they will move to Horror's new value, or something similar. MA/Non only means something because its backed up by years of empirical trade data where players used it as a valuing system.

maybe im wrong, maybe users will somehow figure out how to telepathically convey MA/Non values to one another without any form of central guide(s) to convey what they mean or what pets are worth in relation to eachother, LOL. but for now, im not optimistic, and am just annoyed. but thanks for your time, i wont take any more of it. i still stand my ground that this decision was extremely poorly thought through, and i doubt that will change. cheers.

i believe what winx is trying to say (please correct me if i'm wrong, winx </3) is that users who make guides can still use MA/Non etc terminology to disclose what the values are based on, but the list itself will be required to use their own terminology

users will not be allowed to refer to refer to that pet's value with a certain list's units unless it is THE value that the list holds it at, but they can still use the MA equivalent for personal value. if 1ABC = 1MA on a list, but User123 values a pet on the list as 2ABC instead of 1ABC, they can list that pet for 2MA and it's essentially the same. the only difference is that they will be punished if they mislead other players by listing their pet as 2ABC instead of simply 2MA, since MA is a broader term that does not belong to a specific list as winx described above. so it's not exactly obsolete, it still means the same thing

in theory, horror could just keep everything the exact same and replace every instance of "MA" with "glooby" and say one glooby = what was previously 1MA, so users can just switch out "glooby" for "MA" in trade advice threads or personal values. now, when "glooby" values change on the list, users still understand that this is equivalent to what users understand as "MA"

how this would work is basically:

• Blue Dog is worth 1MA right now.
• MA is exchanged for Glooby. 1MA = 1Glooby.
• Blue Dog worth rises to 2.5Glooby. since we already know 1 glooby = 1 MA, we know that Blue Dog is now 2.5MA.
• when giving trading advice, users can still refer to this pet as being worth "2.5Glooby according to Popular Guide" or simply just "2.5 MA"

it sounds extremely convoluted when i explain it this way since explaining is not my strong suit so i sincerely apologize for that LOL but i hope that makes a little more sense

(granted, that's not what is guaranteed to happen, although that makes the most sense to me if it did since it would be allowed)

[TANKMEN]

-snip-
how this would work is basically:

• Blue Dog is worth 1MA right now.
• MA is exchanged for Glooby. 1MA = 1Glooby.
• Blue Dog worth rises to 2.5Glooby. since we already know 1 glooby = 1 MA, we know that Blue Dog is now 2.5MA.
• when giving trading advice, users can still refer to this pet as being worth "2.5Glooby according to Popular Guide" or simply just "2.5 MA"

it sounds extremely convoluted when i explain it this way since explaining is not my strong suit so i sincerely apologize for that LOL but i hope that makes a little more sense

(granted, that's not what is guaranteed to happen, although that makes the most sense to me if it did since it would be allowed)

thank you for trying to explain, i do appreciate it. i want to be really clear that my issue isn't with that i dont understand Winx's explanation, is that they are not answering the question i am asking.

the question is this: how do we signify personal value of pets WITHOUT using MA/Non, and WITHOUT using a guide's value system?

i asked to be given a solution, but was not provided one. the reason i am asking this, is because i do not believe MA/Non can still be, or will still be, used after this change has been fully made. thus, we are left in a scenario where there is no personal valuing system we can use, and trying to convey personal value with Horror's value system, or any other guide, is bannable. so how do i tell you that i want more for my TD pet, if i'm not allowed to use Horror's terms, and MA/Non no longer means anything? MA may not be equal to Horror's value forever, and we shouldn't expect it to stay the same, either. the staff want the term to eventually stand on its own, so we cannot forever say that 1 H = 1 MA. that is the scenario that i am afraid of.

considering that noone else has thought of a solution for this, and i cant think of one either, i think this ultimately proves my point that the change was poorly thought through. i hope you can understand what my grievance actually is. i promise that i understand what's being said, i am arguing that MA/Non will not be suitable to use for valuing in the future.

[Kaliyana]

I'm still blown away by the crack down on this.
No other pet site/sim I've encountered cracks down on player based economy like this, not even the "ninja trading".

Player based economy is exactly that, player based, its not an official rule or policy, so banning certain things without having an official rule or policy in place to replace it doesn't make a lick of sense.

And then you have the whole ninja trading issue, which, while I understand the premise for why everyone is so upset about it, doesn't make sense from an official standpoint because its not the same as outright scamming someone. Now before you all come for my throat let me explain. Outright scamming someone would be if I said that your pet is worth 1MA and offer you 1MA value when in reality its worth 5MA, that is a flat out scam. If I just make an offer to you, no words exchanged, no discussions on values and you accept that offer point blank, that is not a scam. It sucks, yes, but that is not a scam.

Every other pet site/sim that I play has some form of "ninja-trading" in the sense that if you screw up and don't check the values of your own pets/items before you trade them away you're just SOL because all values are player based and not official. You just have to accept the loss and deal with it. This happens on Lioden, Wolvden, Aways, Wajas, Flight Rising, FelisFire, Alacrity, Dappervolk etc etc. This even happens in real life when you consider collectibles such as Pokemon cards, Magic the Gathering cards etc - If you don't do your own do-diligence and make sure you know the value of your item you're gunna get ripped off.

To put it bluntly, Chickensmoothie has a weird 'half ass' approach to ninjaing. Either its exactly the same as scamming (even though, technically its not) and you ban the people doing it, or its not scamming and you allow the player base to have their player made economy and values where its the responsibility of each player trading to make sure they know the values of the pets/items they are trading. Removing the player based economy/values without implementing an official alternative while also not banning legitimate scammers doesn't make sense. You can't have it both ways.