NEW POLL CS Community Wants YOUR help on Trading Guidelines!

[Solloby]

I was only planning to use the image rather than linking the pet with the rarity tag showing, if that helps? I find a lot of older and thus higher rarity pets are plainer so more suitable to use. But happy to swap out any of those pets for newer ones, just trying to prioritise "plain and white" to try and keep them all uniform looking. They also won't be in the google survey itself (not really an option if we do the grid question layout) but in the thread to just remind people about what each pet looks like.

Yes please do help, I don't think I have time to look through any more today unfortunately! But I will try to chip away at it as we go. It's a fun side task to do while we wait for more results from our rarity polls c:

But if anyone wants to talk about another topic in this thread, please don't be afraid to interrupt! Happy to listen to all opinions about all sorts of related topics <3

[Screemnigcheesepuff]

For most of the images would it be possible pets from recent birthday events, they tend to have most (possibly all) of the linearts with the same colours. For pps im not sure if this would work but can always just use the earlier growth stages (but wouldn’t have pps tag)

2023 & 2018 do this^

[musicgurl333]

I was only planning to use the image rather than linking the pet with the rarity tag showing, if that helps? I find a lot of older and thus higher rarity pets are plainer so more suitable to use. But happy to swap out any of those pets for newer ones, just trying to prioritise "plain and white" to try and keep them all uniform looking. They also won't be in the google survey itself (not really an option if we do the grid question layout) but in the thread to just remind people about what each pet looks like.

I think IDEALLY it would be nice if they were lower rarity pets, but I think ER and OMGSR pets are probably okay as long as they're not highly recognizable. Like, I don't think everyone would immediately identify the bunny you posted as an OMGSR, but I think a lot of people would know and love the white February, just as an example.

As far as not having the images in the google survey, I feel like that might be another barrier to people for answering. I think people would be less likely to look back and forth between the two. I do like the idea of the grid view, but I wonder if it would be better to have a separate question for each line art, so that people could see the pet next to the question? Just throwing out ideas!

For most of the images would it be possible pets from recent birthday events, they tend to have most (possibly all) of the linearts with the same colours. For pps im not sure if this would work but can always just use the earlier growth stages (but wouldn’t have pps tag)

2023 & 2018 do this^

That's a good idea!

[Solloby]

For the lineart survey, having the lines in the survey itself would be useful for sure. I definitely don't have the patience to set up something like that though, so someone else would have to volunteer to put the survey together in Google forms once we have all the images assembled.

As for white feb dog, I don't get the fuss over it personally. I would probably like it more if it had a more interesting eye colour. Given it will also be accompanied by a regular flop eared dog, I think it might be ok? Otherwise we should come up with other suggestions for specific dogs to use, but I think we need both an up ear and a flop ear design for dog. We don't have to do all tail variations, but I do think we should represent both major ear styles. Maybe two littermates. Isn't there a fairly plain cream dog litter somewhere?

-----------

In regards to C$, I've come up with a new chart for everyone to review, incorporating the latest round of suggestions. It's not following the pet trading guidelines the surveys are helping us build though. The big problem is the valuing of a recent rare at 5C$. You just can't math with that, it would put EUCs at 2, VUCs at 1, UCs at 0.5 and Cs at 0.25 which doesn't really follow what people pay for these pets I don't think? C$ valuations also seem to overvalue older pets in some categories still. I think C$ have to stay detached from actual pet trading values unfortunately. Not what we wanted, but it's not really a solvable problem if we want to try and accurately reflect what people actually pay for these pets. I guess it's because people have always traded C$ differently to pet trading.



For the 2008 VRs, the only pets in this category are: (rip I don't know all their proper names)

Blue Moon October
Light Faced October PPS
Dark Faced October PPS
Tropical Swirl
Tropical Star
Camouflage October
Card Dog - King of Spades (ER cusp pet imo)
Card Dog - Queen of Hearts (ER cusp pet imo)
Blue Stripe Rat

I tried to find trades for these but struggled (possibly because I don't remember their names). I found card dogs went for 150C$, and the rat for 75C$, so I used those as boundaries. Also, I bumped the value of 09 VR top boundary up to 150 since some people seem to pay that for the sitting cats.

[SolarSonnet]

With how things are currently looking, I mostly like that chart.

I still think 09 and 10 go together, and 11-12 go together, then 2013 can go either with 11-12 or with 14-16.

I do think it reflects some of trading just.. not all/a lot of it. I.E. 8 C$ for a Recent Rare and 40 C$ for an 09 R gives us that 1 09 R = 5 2023-2025 Rares. Which kind of works for what I'm personally going for.

Tbh, I'd do a 5-year gap from 2020-2025 but that's just me.

I'm going to recreate it in my thing real quick with actual values for the Commons and under in "X Pets for 1 C$", as well as my version with what I mentioned above.

Solloby's Chart with exact valuations for Under Commons (Assuming a 2:1 Ratio)



My rendition of Solloby's Chart (combining 2020-2025, combining 2009-2010, except for VRs which are separated, and then making 2011-2013 a range, and keeping 2014-2016. 2014 rare's high end changed to 25 to match my change of 25-35 value for 2011-2013. Everything below that in rarity shifted around to match as well. )


I think having these C$ Charts can help with what's good for a 1:1 Swap between similar years, but not quite what's good for a more than 1:1 swap.

[Solloby]

I prefer the simplicity of the lower rarities being open ended about how many one might trade for a C$, but some people may want exact values. I don't see why we can't provide multiple charts.

Sorry to keep changing topics but I made these over lunch and thought I'd post them now. Not sure if they are useful? They are trying to demonstrate possible trade options for simple swaps over rarities.

Lower Rarities
1 EUC = 2 VUC = 4 UC
Each row is roughly equal in value.


Rare Trade Suggestions
1 Rare may trade for 2 - 3 EUCs.
Each row is roughly equal in value.


Very Rare Trade Suggestions
1 VR may trade for 2-3 Rares.
Each row is roughly equal in value.

[SolarSonnet]

I love those graphics! They're very helpful.

Honestly, with how many people who just.. won't trade Rares+ for EUC and under, I'd almost add a,

"Remember that everyone trades differently! Some people won't accept pets under Rare for their own Rares+, no matter how many you offer them. While the below is massive overpay for some, others still wouldn't accept it."

[musicgurl333]

I love those graphics! They're very helpful.

Honestly, with how many people who just.. won't trade Rares+ for EUC and under, I'd almost add a,

"Remember that everyone trades differently! Some people won't accept pets under Rare for their own Rares+, no matter how many you offer them. While the below is massive overpay for some, others still wouldn't accept it."

Although this is true, I don’t think we need to (nor can we) address every single trading scenario that might come up. Singling this one out and putting it in a guide makes it seem like this is a thing that applies to a lot of people, which might discourage others from trading down their rares if they think that most people won’t. I think it might be better to have a general note that different people value pets differently, and encouraging people to read trade rules before sending a trade.

[SolarSonnet]

Hmm.. So maybe something more like..

"Remember to read people's trade rules! Everyone trades individually and has things they prefer. Sometimes people will put these preferences in their trade rules."

-

I guess I would also argue that it does happen a lot, and it is quite a lot of people who won't trade Rares for EUCs and below, but I also wouldn't want it to become a standard, even if I, personally, expect overpay when trading my rares for EUCs or below.

[Solloby]

I think Musicgurl is right in that we need to be careful not to influence trading here, I agree that it might prompt people to not trade their rares when they may have previously. From a logical perspective there is no real reason to set EUC/R or UC/C as cut offs of any importance, but in reality some people will treat them differently.

I think an appropriate note for the rarity section could be that some people may not want to trade pets of vastly different rarities, e.g. Rare for many VCs. We already have the personal section to remind people that everyone trades differently, hopefully that will suffice?

SolarSonnet your image does make me question whether my pictures should have an equal symbol between each row. So you think it would improve the clarity of the images, or are they fine as is?

As a side note, I would like to develop more specifics and some example images for demand and age as well. But I am not as confident about how people might want to manage these. Do you think we should poll for years gaps, as in how much extra should be added? I feel like we are asking people to answer so many questions. But I want our new guide to be accurate and helpful!