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

[Larkspur1678]

Would ultra rare/ultra common/ect. be a better alternative? From my perspective at least it signifies being more than very and is less clunky than extremely or incredibly.

[bigwig.]

I can understand this; yes pets will always be on the line between one rarity or another. But I don't think this is novelty. Between really popular pets where demand is pretty much the same in the VR category, the sheer range of rarity of things in the VR category is quite large. There's a very real reason why a VR 'low list' is no where near in 'value' to a 'high list' VR pet, and that is because the gap is just too vague and huge in information we currently know about these pets. Even if these pets will sometimes sit on the line for their categories, having some levels in between to even out this gap without the need for guessing based on when something turned VR like 8 years ago I'm sure will be appreciated by many.

unfortunately the info gap is always gonna be there to some degree since we'll never know the exact numbers of each pet in circulation. like I said, I'm just skeptical problems like this won't start cropping up again once people get used to the new rarity system - especially on the higher end of the spectrum where people are more interested in splitting hairs over which pet is technically rarer than another. but that's just my thoughts on the matter of course; I could very well be wrong

@Feather <3's post, the whimsical names are cute but from what I understand the issue is that the language becomes too vague. It's not immediately obvious what the rarity difference between 'scarce' and 'elusive' or 'abundant' and 'very common' is or which one is less rare than the other. a bit difficult to parse, especially for new users or anyone who's been away for a long time (whoops lacuna already said that)
my previous suggestion was to just do away with the labels entirely (I think that would honestly be a benefit) and use a star system or numbers or whatnot, but since that's probably not gonna happen anytime soon I will say I am in the camp of not liking the 'very uncommon' label. I think something like 'scarce' could potentially be used?

[Feather <3]

@Feather <3 - I totally understand where you're coming from and appreciate the work you've put into your post, but I really am not sure that the whimsical naming would be user-friendly, especially when viewed in isolation (someone just saying "elusive pet for auction" doesn't really tell you much). Personally, I think there is a lot of value in the 11 names only having 3 base categories for better understanding.

With your list adding the 4 new categories and completely renaming everything, I think the upheaval and change would just be too significant. Users would have nothing to go on except the colors being similar (since those are also changing to accommodate more). I'm not sure those you quoted would like the change to whimsical labels more than just keeping the current naming structure, though of course, they are all welcome to chime in. Remember that most of the time you're not going to see them all lined up, but randomly scattered around groups.

Whimsical or not, the names are a reflection of the relative value of a pet compared to others, and I don't think that that's a bad thing. It's what the rarity system is for. If people want to trade solely based on pet design or similar, they are already welcome to do so.

As for the discussion about super vs. incredibly vs. extremely, maybe it is my bias as a native English speaker or something but super just does not differentiate for me.

I totally understand! I actually think the ambiguity is a feature, not a bug - it may be healthier for the site if the granular rarities reminded people that nothing is really precise when it comes to rarities.

"Elusive pet for auction" (note: there might be better words to use instead) I think tells you just the right thing -- this pet isn't all over the site, but it's also not extraordinarily rare... so if that sounds interesting to you based on the ballpark rarity alone, open the thread, check out the pet, make an offer!

If you see "Extremely Uncommon pet for auction", the first thing I might think is -- do I have any extremely uncommon pets for trade? Will this person get mad at me if I offer several Very Uncommon pets? Would I be a fool to offer a Rare pet? Maybe it's better if I just avoid this and not offer at all.

Edited to add: I think it's also very important that the labels come with a sliding scale (the filled up stars, or a notched bar) so we don't *actually* lose any information about the rarity of the pet. The names just make the whole system fit the vibe we want the site to have, and that we want people to feel when trading.

That said, this is purely my opinion and I would love to hear what others think. Maybe the absolute value at-a-glance is something more users find valuable and don't feel it's stressful when trading :)

[Lacuna]

Would ultra rare/ultra common/ect. be a better alternative? From my perspective at least it signifies being more than very and is less clunky than extremely or incredibly.

I like Ultra but on CS UR already stands for Unreleased and I think that would cause confusion especially if a pet like the UR butterwolf that has UR as a tag on its cocoon isn't actually UR (Ultra Rare).

[clouds-move-on]

Proposed naming-------------Whimsical naming-----------------------Whimsical unique*
*with unique starting letters for all one-word labels

OMG So Common ------------ Universal -------------------------------- Pervasive
Extremely Common ---------- Abundant -------------------------------- Abundant
Very Common --------------- Very Common ---------------------------- Ordinary
Common -------------------- Common --------------------------------- Common
Uncommon ------------------ Uncommon ------------------------------ Uncommon
Very Uncommon --------------- Scarce ----------------------------------- Scarce
Extremely Uncommon ---------- Elusive ----------------------------------- Elusive
Rare -------------------------- Rare ------------------------------------ Rare
Very Rare -------------------- Very Rare -------------------------------- Fabled
Extremely Rare --------------- Legendary ------------------------------- Legendary
OMG So Rare ---------------- Mythical --------------------------------- Mythical

-snip-

I really like the whimsical names you came up with!! I definitely supports those names!

Seconding this, I think it'd be nicer if they changed the names themselves! The suggestions here look vry fun.

Side note, OM* SO [rarity] has always bothered me, both because I think it looks clunky [the same would go for extremely rare/very uncommon/ect], and for religious reasons; even if you put the 'g' to be 'goodness' most people use it to mean god. While I realize this isn't a sentiment many would have [nor am I suggesting this expression should be disallowed outside this context], it makes it awkward to try and talk about these pets without breaking religious taboo. I feel like some other religious cs users might appreciate that change, too. Plus legendary/mythical sounds cool.

[Horror]

Would ultra rare/ultra common/ect. be a better alternative? From my perspective at least it signifies being more than very and is less clunky than extremely or incredibly.

I was just typing up this exact thing LOL. I also think ultra also works nice if super isn't distinctive enough ^^ I think the only problems might be ultra common being abbreviated as "UC", unless everyone decides to adopt it as ULC or something, and "UR" confusion with "unreleased"

OMG so common (OMGSC)
Ultra common (ULC? ULT C? ultra c?)
Very common (VC)
Common (C)
Uncommon (UC)
Very uncommon (VUC)
Ultra uncommon (UUC)
Rare (R)
Very rare (VR)
Ultra rare (UR? ULR? ULT R? ultra r?)
OMG so rare (OMGSR)

[conarcoin]

As far as naming goes, if the +4 rarity tiers gets implemented would "super" be less clunky than "extremely"? Not sure if it would instinctively read as higher than "very" though.

• OMG so common
• Super common
• Very common
• Common
• Uncommon
• Very uncommon
• Super uncommon
• Rare
• Very rare
• Super rare
• OMG so rare

"Incredibly" is another option but it's a bit long too

I actually like this far more than "extremely". Sure, it's going to lead to some interesting abbreviations, like SUC for Super Uncommon, but I think the community can get over the laughs for the sake of the simplified names.

I now support super just because I think SUC is extremely funny

Jokes aside, I like this a lot:

Proposed naming-------------Whimsical naming-----------------------Whimsical unique*
*with unique starting letters for all one-word labels

OMG So Common ------------ Universal -------------------------------- Pervasive
Extremely Common ---------- Abundant -------------------------------- Abundant
Very Common --------------- Very Common ---------------------------- Ordinary
Common -------------------- Common --------------------------------- Common
Uncommon ------------------ Uncommon ------------------------------ Uncommon
Very Uncommon --------------- Scarce ----------------------------------- Scarce
Extremely Uncommon ---------- Elusive ----------------------------------- Elusive
Rare -------------------------- Rare ------------------------------------ Rare
Very Rare -------------------- Very Rare -------------------------------- Fabled
Extremely Rare --------------- Legendary ------------------------------- Legendary
OMG So Rare ---------------- Mythical --------------------------------- Mythical

My heart rate goes up a little looking at the column with all permutations of Very/Extremely/OMG Common/Uncommon/Rare and imagining managing trading that fairly. Some of those labels imply a pet is bad, others imply a pet is unattainable.
Looking at the second column makes me feel more like this is all for the sake of fun, art, & community - it's cool to have a Universal pet, not as immediately stressful thinking how many OMGSC you need to trade away to convince someone to part with the next tier up.

We preserve information for those who want to know, and you can generally sanity-check which labels imply a there are more or fewer instances of a pet on a site (ie., let's not pick random words that don't imply anything about scarcity).

At the same time, I'd feel a lot less stressed out trading a "Scarce" pet for an "Uncommon", or a "Rare" for a "Fabled" because even though you know that they are not equivalent, there isn't so much value judgement built into the names of what you're giving vs. what you're receiving in a trade. After all, a Rare could be closer to a Elusive than it is to another Rare! It's all on a spectrum, so using precise words to describe an imprecise science just makes people more stressed.

People are slightly more encouraged to choose the trading style/strictness that works well for them, without staring at a "Very Uncommon" <-> "Extremely Uncommon" trade as something that seems so objectively wrong.

I really believe making the rarity scale slightly more whimsical, slightly less regimented is a step in the right direction when it comes to reducing rather than increasing the stress people feel around trading these days... without reducing the amount of hard info we're making available to players.

Please let me know what you think!

[Arianbelle]

I personally think 4 new categories is too much, and we don't need a total of 4 common categories. I'm in favour of just adding Very Uncommon and Extremely Rare...

A possible idea for different category names, somewhat inspired by gacha games and very similar to what people have been suggesting:

C
C+
C++
C+++

UC
UC+
UC++

R
R+
R++
SR

SR = super rare

Maybe you all won't like it because the names are too different and no longer balanced but I think it might help commons, especially OMGSC to be seen as a little more valuable. Maybe this can help generate more ideas at least

If only two new categories were added:

C
C+
C++

UC
UC+
(Maybe there could be a UC++ here lol to match)

R
R+
R++
SR

I've seen the suggested cold to warm colours and circle to stars used in one of my games and I think it works well

[Yaeli]

We could still use E but say "extra" instead of "extremely"

[samiam52900]

I would like to know why my post was deleted? I was on topic and did not receive a notice of why? Does my opinion not matter or are you filtering our suggestions and opinions?


Sam