✨ Trading New OMGSRs Discussion

[Solloby]

^ The Rares List was removed for good reason, it had some *serious* issues. But the Non/MA system that replaced it is much worse imo. Rares List was supposed to be replaced by the Rarity List. Except rarity has gotten harder and harder to understand due to rereleases and such, so it turned into large groups of pets clumped together that didn't swap evenly for each other, so it was too hard to understand as a trading guide. So that's how we ended up here, at least that's my interpretation. That's why I feel we need a new trading guide, and why I think so many people want one. We just have to make sure we work together to make one as fair as possible, and try our best to avoid the issues the rares list and non/ma system have.



In relation to the demand discussion, maybe instead of this:

Tier 1
UR Fluffy, UR Fluffless, Sparkle Sparkle Dog, Pumpernickel Dog

Tier 2
UR Googly Eyed Rock, UR Frypan, Wholemeal Dog, Sourdough Dog, Sparkle Sparkle Rat

These pets are lower rarity than other pets in their sub tier, because they have been moved up into this tier due to their higher demand.
These pets are higher rarity than other pets in their sub tier, because they have been moved down into this tier due to their lower demand.

We could do this:

Tier 1
UR Fluffy, UR Fluffless, Sparkle Sparkle Rat , Pumpernickel Dog

Tier 2
UR Googly Eyed Rock, UR Frypan, Wholemeal Dog, Sourdough Dog, Sparkle Sparkle Dog

These pets are considered by the community to have high demand, so they may trade for a higher amount.
These pets are considered by the community to have low demand, so they may trade for a lower amount.

There are different ways we could manage demand in a new trading guide. For such pets I would want there to be good evidence that there actually is high and low demand, and we wouldn't want many pets to be marked with such colours, only the very serious outliers. We could make a few statements about species (e.g. fruits) rather than targeting them all specifically. Or, we could use sub tiers for this... if we have a July 08 tier for example, we could put the dogs in sub tier 1 and the rats in sub tier 2 to accommodate the demand. We could do it a number of ways. I think demand will need a lot more conversations.

[Inactive.]

^ The Rares List was removed for good reason, it had some *serious* issues. But the Non/MA system that replaced it is much worse imo. Rares List was supposed to be replaced by the Rarity List. Except rarity has gotten harder and harder to understand due to rereleases and such, so it turned into large groups of pets clumped together that didn't swap evenly for each other, so it was too hard to understand as a trading guide. So that's how we ended up here, at least that's my interpretation. That's why I feel we need a new trading guide, and why I think so many people want one. We just have to make sure we work together to make one as fair as possible, and try our best to avoid the issues the rares list and non/ma system have.



In relation to the demand discussion, maybe instead of this:

Tier 1
UR Fluffy, UR Fluffless, Sparkle Sparkle Dog, Pumpernickel Dog

Tier 2
UR Googly Eyed Rock, UR Frypan, Wholemeal Dog, Sourdough Dog, Sparkle Sparkle Rat

These pets are lower rarity than other pets in their sub tier, because they have been moved up into this tier due to their higher demand.
These pets are higher rarity than other pets in their sub tier, because they have been moved down into this tier due to their lower demand.

We could do this:

Tier 1
UR Fluffy, UR Fluffless, Sparkle Sparkle Rat , Pumpernickel Dog

Tier 2
UR Googly Eyed Rock, UR Frypan, Wholemeal Dog, Sourdough Dog, Sparkle Sparkle Dog

These pets are considered by the community to have high demand, so they may trade for a higher amount.
These pets are considered by the community to have low demand, so they may trade for a lower amount.

There are different ways we could manage demand in a new trading guide. For such pets I would want there to be good evidence that there actually is high and low demand, and we wouldn't want many pets to be marked with such colours, only the very serious outliers. We could make a few statements about species (e.g. fruits) rather than targeting them all specifically. Or, we could use sub tiers for this... if we have a July 08 tier for example, we could put the dogs in sub tier 1 and the rats in sub tier 2 to accommodate the demand. We could do it a number of ways. I think demand will need a lot more conversations.

Demand is definitley going to be the prevailing issue. And is something that as you said, has many solutions. Reality is no matter what conclusion is decided on. Not everyone is going to agree, the best we can do is have it as agreeable as possible.

I like the idea of highlighting pets with lower/higher demand. However I do believe pets such as Rats should not be included in the higher tiers at all regardless of rarity, as they will never go for that. Regardless of their actual scarcity. This is a place where demand being used in the construction of a list will be useful. The issues will come into play with pets that are higher demand vs lower.

Perhaps subtiers within a tier that are seperated by maybe on the highest tiers a MA, and a 09 rare on the lower tiers?

[Inactive.]

r.e. the whole "list vs no list" debacle; my experience as a heavy rares list trader who came back to find it gone (without being a part of the vote) is that trading has literally never been more complicated.

the rares list had issues, but i understood it, and so did a significant number of people who used it. people answered in FTT and whats my pet worth all the time! all kinds of people! it was way easier to grasp than a lot of people remember, imo. this Nons/MAs/09 Rares business makes absolutely no sense to me. i get the concept but i dont get the execution. and because nobodys maintaining it, it spirals out of control into subjective nonsense that nobody can agree on.

i think CS has had enough time without a rares list to prove its not really working. the amount of people calling for trading overhauls, etc etc is higher than ever and just proves this fact in my mind.

i think the issue isnt a list, its a list with not enough scrutiny. if all pets in the list were carefully evaluated, citated and even voted on, we would probably make something quite useful.

addendum: literally what the [dolphin bleep] is a non?!??! i literally have no idea! it drives me completely bonkers, haha. people dont want a list but want to value pets based on the list value of an ex list pet...? but then we have horrors list anyway? so what is it???

i think the concept that players shouldnt be able to dictate trading is absurd. trading is player dictated in the first place, its us who decide how much a pets worth, not the rarity tag, not the site staff, and not a list. plenty of pets were on the list that never fetched their theoretical price because they were in poor demand (rats, anyone?)

itd be nice to have an option where rarity tag = rarity tag but its really obvious thats not going to happen, atleast not for OMGSRs. since theyre the final tier of rarity tag, we have no clue what the upper limit might be. quite a few now OMGSRs used to be september or even advent list pets before, and now are supposed to contend with the rarest pets in the game? of course thats not going to play out, and wanting to categorize these differences is not a problem

tldr i just want the list back to be honest haha, i never wouldve voted for it to be removed had i been here at the time. trading is a nightmare currently and i see nothing wrong with properly sourced values/demand for these pets being laid out.

Also hugely agree with this. The current system isn't working. Some players have it down and thats great. But the majority of players don't. Especially our younger players. We need to look at making a list because it is so easily accessible and is a good visual medium. it requires minimal math/equations.

We as players need to accept that yes, our account values may go down, and thats fine. Because everything else is going to going down to and become more easily accessible. Its a win win.

Not having a list has created a unplayable game for the majority of players.

[musicgurl333]

I like the idea of highlighting pets with lower/higher demand. However I do believe pets such as Rats should not be included in the higher tiers at all regardless of rarity, as they will never go for that. Regardless of their actual scarcity. This is a place where demand being used in the construction of a list will be useful. The issues will come into play with pets that are higher demand vs lower.

Strongly disagree with not putting rats on the higher tiers just because of demand. Rats CAN get some pretty fair trades…it’s just much harder. Putting them on a lower tier and then ALSO marking them as low demand is going to drive demand even lower. That was one of the issues with the original rares list. Pets with poor demand, like rats and bunnies, were put waaaaaay lower than they should have been, based on rarity. I don’t think repeating that would be a good thing.

I DO like the idea of highlighting which pets in a tier have higher/lower than average demand…with the trade data to back it up. That’s good info to have! But I DON’T like the idea of putting some pets artificially low, just because of demand.

[Goostarion]

All pets that are the same rarity should be straight swaps. 08’s shouldn’t be seen as rarer than a 18 (I get true date bonus but fundamentally the pets are valued the same. How can one tell if a 18 ER has the same amount available than a 08 one for instance.)

Saying any OMGSR = any other OMGSR is the one place where the new rarity system absolutely can't be trusted. We know rarity is ranges, right? Like, 100k+ = omgsc | 50k-100k = extremely common - common | 20-50k = uncommon - euc | 1-20k = rares | <1k = omgsr. But less than 1k means everything from 999 to 1 (technically, there's the the same problem on the other end but omgsc trading is way lower stakes), and you shouldn't trade one of our hypothetical 5 UR cottonballs for one of 239 sourdough dogs. People want to know how to trade their omgsrs with other omgsrs, and "eh, probably all about the same" is not a good answer. Would that be easier for 12 year olds joining for the first time? Yeah, sure, but like you said, there's an awful lot of adults here who know better. I don't mean to sound harsh, but collectively deciding that we're gonna take the knowledge we have, throw it out, and choose to let people be cheated is a real shaky moral stance to take. Justifying it by saying the kids can't figure out anything more complicated and therefore we shouldn't try to make a tool to help each other out because said tool may not be 100% perfect is not making it sound better to me.

That’s the thing, we don’t know rarity ranges. Those ranges were with the old system, before the rarity update and those numbers being from 2009. And honestly numbers that shouldn’t been released for the new set of rarities.

Using that logic, what is a ER? We cannot answer that and I hope the admins never release those numbers because having the freedom to trade without getting mathematician and scientific is a joy freedom to have.

This is the only site that you need to study a commerce degree to understand. Again the adult v child discussion is hella valid because it’s not going to be adults joining the site, it’s kids. Those kids should have a chance to grow like we did, and get to have the nostalgic feeling when they come back.

It seems what I’ve suggested is “significantly radical” because if you’ve spent your time trading for so long you’ve been conditioned to believe in “this is the only way.” Where there are other options, specifically of significance. Regarding making a tool that’s not 100% perfect but trying anyway, I appreciate your tenacity. I would expect this conversation will happen again in a year (s) from now, again; a colloquial “we got it wrong let’s try something else.”

The admins have given us a gift, to actually start again.

Also, the knowledge we have is significantly wrong. It’s been wrong before

^ The Rares List was removed for good reason, it had some *serious* issues. But the Non/MA system that replaced it is much worse imo. Rares List was supposed to be replaced by the Rarity List.

I strongly agree with both. Whenever the system was touched it was made worse, but nothing made it better than originally speaking.

[Animall]

I'm on mobile right now, but Goostarion, your approach to pet values just is not set in reality. The rarity tiers have their own set parameters. Some pets are extremely rare (but are closer to being very rare), and some pets are extremely rare (but are closer to omgsr). This is an innate truth to how CS functions.

We will never know pets true values. Tess and Nick are so opposed to releasing numbers because CS is designed to function this way. They know what pets are the rarest, what pets are crap, etc. I'm sorry, but CS is just not designed to function as a "same rarity swap" game. It removes the entire novelty of the game, and ruins the economy. The reality is that some ERs are rarer than other ERs. Some OMGSRs are rarer than other OMGSRs. I personally will not be ignoring those facts, even if we as a community aren't given all the information to be entirely correct with placements. CS provided this rarity update to give us more information on pet values. The update told us we were wrong about some things -- and that's okay, because the game is designed for us to not know everything anyways.

Edit to add: I also don't think this is a kids game :/ Yhe internet is not for kids, period. Chicken Smoothie holds a safe space for children, but that doesn't mean it's for children.

[lil rascal]

I like the overall structure, but honestly, Im really tired of demand being included in the lists at all. When we call something a rarity list, and include demand, youre just creating a list that is terminal. That is the exact reason why all the previous lists are undesirable by most people, and the exact reason why The Rares List was disbanded. Even if its just a lil highlight like in the above example... YOU are the one thats deciding what is popular and what isnt. Popularity is subjective. People deserve to see evidence rather than blindly following the opinions of the person that makes the list. Rarity and popularity should be kept entirely separate. Demand should also be allowed to fluctuate, and marking something as popular on a rarity list prevents that from happening.

As an example, my least favorite pet on this website is the damn UR bee. Why? Its only worth 1 non, yet because the lists mention that its "popular", it has remained constantly at a 3 non value. Does anyone actually like the bee THAT much? I really dont think so. It was popular upon release, people keep calling it popular, and now people think its genuinely worth 3 nons. Its only worth 1 non.

Snip.

I actually do genuinely like the Bee but feel the same way about many other so called popular demand pets. For example it’s how I feel the about the UR Lion. I’m a lion lover in general but agree with the old opinion that it is far from the nicest Lion on the site and therefore it’s old 2 Nons valuation made sense. However somewhere along the line someone decided that if a rerelease is worth 2 Nons their TD is worth 2.5. Then someone decided that if someone can get that for a TD they wanted that for their rerelease and so the cycle goes until now we have people claiming they are worth 3-4+ Nons. For a Lion people didn’t even like that much?

I definitely agree with you that peoples personal likes and dislikes are not considered enough when it comes to higher rarity trading and I think that’s why so many pets aren’t traded.

For example if I was making a list of my current personal preferences (completely ignoring rarity changes and leaving out a lot of pets here) it would look more like this:

UR Zonkey = Blue Malk Dragon PPS = UR Cat = UR Holly Dog = UR Bengal = UR PPS dragon = Rainbow Mane = UR Longma/Kirin = UR Galaxy cat = UR Bee

Sunjewel = UR Tiger = Moonswirl = any of the zebras = UR Phoenix = UR Lion = UR Aussie = UR Fox = UR Malk Dog = UR Peas = UR Peach = UR Flower = UR Butterbun = UR Pastel Dog = UR Flamingo = UR Foal = White Malk Dragon = Grey Malk Dragon = CEG = Coontail

July PPS = Sunback = Dogtag = Nontag = Nonswirl = Nonjewel = Noncoon

UR Cinnabun = UR Avocado = UR Orange Tree = Mint Tess Horse

GWJ = Other OMGSR Buns = UR Ice Cat = UR Bwolf = UR S'more = UR Strawberry Shortcake = UR Pumpkin Pie = UR Squid = BEG = all sorbets = all toxics = 09 UR Dog = Joker

Unickorn = UR Banana = Pineapple = UR Pickle = UR Grapes

UR Rat = Light Speckled Rat = Medium Speckled Rat = Heavy Speckled Rat = Flower/Toxic Rat = Lime Ice Rat = Light Pawprint Rat = Dark Pawprint Rat = Light Heart Rat = Dark Heart Rat

Obviously I don’t expect everyone to trade by my personal preferences but for some reason everyone else is expected to trade by the preferences of just a couple of people. I have met people who think the UR Cinnabun is the best pet on the site, others who love the UR Cucumber or UR Rat or even the Pineapple. It is a big site and there are many more opinions than the few proclaiming a certain pets popularity.

We are told to use the successful trade thread to decide on current demand and values but most values in there are just numbers arbitrarily placed on the pets. There is no way to know that the person on the other side looked at the trade and thought “my UR Donkey is worth 4 Nons and their UR Pegasus is worth 2.5 Nons and UR Toad is worth 1.5 Nons so this is fair” they might have thought “Gee someone’s offering me these cool pets for this pet I don’t really like! I would have been happy with get rid of it for the Toad, this is amazing!”. If one of the above Pineapple lovers shares a trade where they paid a Sunback for a pineapple they would be told they overpaid and the trade is an outlier. But what if 5 other pineapple lovers share similar trades? Does that then mean that the rest of us have to consider the pineapple high demand and pay or charge similar? This is not me being facetious, this is genuinely how we are currently setting values and determining the demand price people pay. A couple of trades where there is no way to know what both side were thinking.

I like the idea of highlighting pets with lower/higher demand. However I do believe pets such as Rats should not be included in the higher tiers at all regardless of rarity, as they will never go for that. Regardless of their actual scarcity. This is a place where demand being used in the construction of a list will be useful. The issues will come into play with pets that are higher demand vs lower.

Strongly disagree with not putting rats on the higher tiers just because of demand. Rats CAN get some pretty fair trades…it’s just much harder. Putting them on a lower tier and then ALSO marking them as low demand is going to drive demand even lower. That was one of the issues with the original rares list. Pets with poor demand, like rats and bunnies, were put waaaaaay lower than they should have been, based on rarity. I don’t think repeating that would be a good thing.

I DO like the idea of highlighting which pets in a tier have higher/lower than average demand…with the trade data to back it up. That’s good info to have! But I DON’T like the idea of putting some pets artificially low, just because of demand.

I also disagree with moving pets up or down just due to demand. History has shown that, even with big disclaimers that demand has been taken into account in their placement, people will just see the words high or low demand and add or subtract even more. I personally think if there’s going to be a new list/guide/whatever it’s going to be called it should have these pets just highlighted. Rats might not be the most popular pets on the site (I readily admit to not liking the lineart despite loving real pet rats) but they are still valuable to “gotta get them all” collectors or rat lovers.

[Vulpey]

I strongly agree and disagree with too many points here to list them all, haha.

My opinion is that while it would be "nice" to have something that clearly values pets and their values (including demand), we run the risk of people treating it like the Rare's list and the MA/Nons nonsense (i'm used to it becuase you have to be if you're a trader, but I don't love it). It doesn't make sense, as often my non's don't always trade for a pet that's supposedly worth a non because "oh well its a non, I'm looking for X pet that has better demand" 9 times out of ten.

The focus should be to make a guide for users to understand as accurately as possible what their ER and OMGSR pets are worth/can swap for. Values should be placed as accurately as we can, and demand noted with special exceptions (again, we need to try and move away from "all rats have bad demand!!").

I'd absolutely trade more for rats, if I correctly understood what they were worth. Rats and Bunnies are all still suffering from their treatment on the rares list, and the only reason I do not trade for them as often is because I know I will have to face "sorry demand bad". They've been so mistreated.

I am getting into store pets a bit (a whole other issue on its own!), but take a look at the Skelebun. Back when it was still VR - it was on the Advents list!!! (!!!) and easy to trade for. The minute it became one of the first OMGSR Store pets and people realized how few of them there were, it SKYROCKED up to its insane value it has now (demand and value!). I can't think of very many people who wouldn't want to trade for such a pet.

We cannot overlook the "low demand" pets and forsake their value. Listing pets lower than what their worth will only cause more poor assumptions and avoidance to trade for them. If we all found out tomorrow that the UR tiger is actually one of the most common OMGSR (obviously not likely), would this not affect it's value and how others trade for it in the long run? While demand plays an important part of all trading, it is personal to each and every trader. Actual value/rarity should be the main purpose to guide people to make their own judgments.

Personally, I value Store pets above all other pets, as they will not ever be released. I am sure this is not an uncommon take. There are others who don't care for them as much, and won't be as likely to pay more for one over a regular OMGSR released pet.

I am very much looking forward to contributing towards this endeavor, and as a user since 2012, I have seen many different stages on this site. I am hopeful we will all come to an agreement that helps this community, and provides a better way for new users to understand trading.

[Loelya]

^ The Rares List was removed for good reason, it had some *serious* issues. But the Non/MA system that replaced it is much worse imo. Rares List was supposed to be replaced by the Rarity List.

I strongly agree with both. Whenever the system was touched it was made worse, but nothing made it better than originally speaking.

I have to slip in really quickly and may offer a counter-point to this, as I agree that we need a better system and I'm hopeful to see that we might be moving in that direction, but I disagree with the non/ma/etc being worse than the rares list.

the "rares list" had these two significant problems that I personally struggled with before the first major rarity overhaul in 2019, that I felt were at least alleviated by the non/ma system if not fully solved:

1) completely incomprehensible to new traders. the way the tiers worked and added up had no real "metric" to go by; the tiers simply existed and were named/noted by pet names rather than by anything that could feasibly add up. (i.e, a "non-balloon +a toxic = X." but there was no real sense of how those two things added up (or what "X" equaled), just that they did, and if how you valued them together was "wrong," there wasn't any easy way to explain what the "right way" was. the only answer anyone could ever give you was that you were "wrong." you just had to have been around and have picked up on the subtext of different values, there was nothing you could study or memorize to learn the system.

2) because of rarity math, the pets at the top of the old rares list, like the sunjewel or the UR tiger, were considered "worth" something like 10,000 rares. ten thousand rares.

the way the non/ma system changed that was:

1) there were three tiers. each one had a rough ballpark of how much they were "valued" at in terms of numbers. each worked as a slightly different currency term - "non" at the highest value, "MA" at the mid value, and "09 rare" at the base value. you could go, okay, a "non" is valued at 10-12 "MAs," an "MA" is valued at 7-8 "09 rares," so a "non" is "worth" 80-100 "09 rares." there were 3 values, each with a rough definition, that could denote the value of other pets & function as a mathematical system to some degree.

2) because we were able to say hey, a "non" is valued at 100-ish rares, and those old pets like the sunjewel, tiger, etc - no one's gonna pay more than 5-6 nons for those (roughly) - so those old pets that were nebulously valued at 10,000+ rares were able to be discussed and re-considered at values more like 500-600 rares. being able to give a numerical understanding to our value system that didn't rely on simple doubling allowed room for coming-back-to-reality sorts of discussion on old pet values.

now this isn't to say that there aren't problems with the non/ma system (the terms themselves are confusing and rely on specific pets, for one thing), and I'd love to see new trading systems move away from those problems. but I'd like to implore that we not return to something "like the old system" because imo it was much worse than non/ma, and the perspective of "well, it wasn't great, but it's better than what we have now because people actually understood it" worries me deeply because to my knowledge a lot of people didn't understand it at all, and I have the concern that it might even be nostalgia factoring into that rather than actual useable metrics that can help old and new traders alike understand whatever system ends up being put into place going forward.

[Pyromaniacal]

I've been lurking on this thread for a while so I thought I'd finally put my two cents in regarding rarity/demand — why not just use the system established on Horror's list, with pets put on tiers reflecting their actual rarity, with strong demand exceptions marked as such? I don't do a lot of high-value trading myself, but that system seems like the best of both worlds, no? I would rail against placing pets based on demand because that led to the whole "applying demand twice" thing that was one of the big failures of the original rares list.

I do sort of wonder what upper limit there is with OMGSRs if we take re-releases into account (obviously there is no upper limit for store pets, but that is a separate discussion). Even pets we know have been OMGSR for a long time may not actually be *that* much rarer than newer OMGSRs after a few rerelease cycles. The admins can control how much of what pet gets released, and it wouldn't make much sense for them to let certain (non-store) pets become infinitely rare when the whole point of December 18th is to keep pets from becoming unobtainable. That doesn't necessarily mean all OMGSRs are worth the same, but it's definitely a lot more ambiguous that it looks at the outset, and difficult to take into account when making any sort of guide/list/etc. If Simon woke up tomorrow and decided to make the Buckskin PPS the rarest pet on the site by never rereleasing them ever again, we would have no idea — and the inverse is true; they could release enough Sunjewels to outnumber the Nonjewels while staying OMGSR, and we wouldn't know unless we counted (and most attempts to do that sort of thing have failed before collecting any meaningful amount of data).

I dunno if I really have a point to come out of this other than that A) making a rigid, specific Tier List Of Pets is probably doomed to be innaccurate without having concrete pet numbers, and B) any guide for OMGSRs needs to take the inherent ambiguity of it all into account.