✨ Trading New OMGSRs Discussion

[Clayflower.]

@Lil Rascal - I agree, we can absolutely design a framework with smaller gaps. I know it will cause a value squish, but the community already did that once after the rares list was ended. So I think they might tolerate another one. CS has been around so long that the values have naturally been squished a bit by the rereleases, I think. I'm glad you like the idea of starting from scratch. This new rarity update is the perfect chance to do that <3

@Clayflower - cusp means the pets are right on the border of two rarity tags. The standard set of mid advent dogs have always been assumed to be the same rarity, but now half are ER and the other half OMGSR. So this suggests we were either wrong about their rarity in the past (unlikely given their rarity history), their rarity has now changed for some unknown reason (a hoarder could be blamed for 1 pet in a litter, but probably not for half a litter), or the pets are on the rarity cusp (most likely, but not necessarily certain).

So let's say 1 - 999 pets is OMGSR, 1000 - 2999 is ER for example (unrealistic numbers, just using them as an example). We might have a litter of dogs we believed to be the same rarity, but they have different rarity tags because there are 997 blue dog (omgsr), 999 grey dog (omgsr), 1000 green dog (er), 1002 red dog (er). So they have different rarity tags, but practically speaking, they are essentially worth the same as there are about the same number of them on the active accounts. This is all based on an assumption of course - we don't know for sure that that's the case, as we have no way of knowing how many of those dogs there actually are.

ERs will almost certainly need to share the guide with OMGSR, I agree. I think we will end up with tiers of mixed high ER/low OMGSR pets, and ones who will fluctuate up and down based on rereleases.



So here's a concept example of what information a new high value pet trading guide might collect and display. The formatting obviously needs a lot of work, but this is just a quick mock up to show what I was thinking about:

Diamond Tier

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

High URs - OMGSR

Pets
Items
C$
Info
Gap
Trades ....

UR Fluffy, UR Fluffless, Sparkle Sparkle Dog, Pumpernickel Dog
Cardboard Box Set
C$ 2500 - 3000
Pet Rarity & Demand Information
Pets within this tier trade equally, or with a maximum gap of 1 High ER (Bronze tier)
A B C

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The gap between these sub tiers is 1-2 High ERs (Bronze tier)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mid URs & High July - OMGSR

Pets
Items
C$
Info
Gap
Trades ....

UR Googly Eyed Rock, UR Frypan, Wholemeal Dog, Sourdough Dog, Sparkle Sparkle Rat
-
C$ 2200 - 2500
Pet Rarity & Demand Information
Pets within this tier trade equally, or with a maximum gap of 1 Mid ER (Copper tier)
A B C

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The gap between these sub tiers is 1 Mid ER (Copper tier).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Low URs & Low July - OMGSR

Pets
Items
C$
Info
Gap
Trades ....

UR Cottonball, Rye Dog, Squeaky Rat
Upside Down Lantern
C$ 2000 - 2200
Pet Rarity & Demand Information
Pets within this tier trade equally, or with a maximum gap of 1 Low ER (2010)
A B C

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

The gap between Diamond and Platinum tier is 1 Bronze OMGSR to 1 Copper ER.

Platinum Tier

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Pet Rarity & Demand Information (or whatever we call it) link would contain information like this, only more detailed, better worded and formatted properly:

UR Fluffy - released 3000, OMGSR since release, very popular pet, often swaps for UR Fluffless
UR Fluffless - released 3002, OMGSR since release, very popular pet, often swaps for UR Fluffy
Sparkle Sparkle Dog - released 3003, mostly OMGSR since release but was VR in 2018. It is less rare than other pets in its sub tier, but it is very high in demand so many people will pay more for it, so it was bumped up into this sub tier.
Pumpernickel Dog - released 3000, OMGSR since 3004 and has never returned to VR. it is the rarest pet from its litter and has consistently traded for very high pets. In the past it has swapped for UR Frypan, but after UR Frypan went down to VR and Pumpernickel remained OMGSR, people started paying more for it.
Cardboard Box Set - released 3006 in very limited quantities, this is the rarest item on the site and very hard to find. For that reason, it trades for extremely valuable pets like UR Fluffy, or even more.
Sparkle Sparkle Rat - released 3000, it went OMGSR at the same time as Sparkle Sparkle Dog, but is much less sought after due to being a rat. For this reason it has been bumped down into its current sub-tier. While it has less demand than Wholemeal Dog, it went OMGSR many years earlier which suggests that it is much rarer than Wholemeal Dog.

I absolutely adore the way you explained the tiers! I like how you even described which pet is popular, definitely a good detail to include for newerplayers. And thank you for breaking down cusp pets, I get it now!

[Animall]

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.

I need and want a list that is stable and rarity-based only. When we mark pets as popular, you are inherently creating a biased list, and flexing power over the trading economy. Its not purposeful, youre well-intentioned when trying to provide ALL info to players at once... but it just doesnt play out that way.

A way around this, so users know what pets trade for, is by linking other threads onto the rarity list and making it very clear that its ONLY a rarity list. I think it would be really cool if where you have "pet rarity and demand info," you link the VR/ER/OMGSR Successful Trades Thread searches of the pet, and the OMGSR Popularity Poll. All active (and successful) list traders do this already, I think its a hidden secret to newer players that we should be teaching them to do.

Just my two cents! Feel free to do as the community has voted for though, obviously. :) That is whats important.

[LaceWhiskey]

This may be an unpopular opinion, but as much as I love the format of Soloby's suggestion, the whole Diamond then Plat in terms of materials honestly makes me confused. It would make more sense to me to do say Diamond and then say Gold. Thinking about what precious materials are used in other games/their rarities, and also real world values.

[Inactive.]

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.

I need and want a list that is stable and rarity-based only. When we mark pets as popular, you are inherently creating a biased list, and flexing power over the trading economy. Its not purposeful, youre well-intentioned when trying to provide ALL info to players at once... but it just doesnt play out that way.

A way around this, so users know what pets trade for, is by linking other threads onto the rarity list and making it very clear that its ONLY a rarity list. I think it would be really cool if where you have "pet rarity and demand info," you link the VR/ER/OMGSR Successful Trades Thread searches of the pet, and the OMGSR Popularity Poll. All active (and successful) list traders do this already, I think its a hidden secret to newer players that we should be teaching them to do.

Just my two cents! Feel free to do as the community has voted for though, obviously. That is whats important.

The issue is not including demand at all renders a list useless, as whats the point in referencing it if your never going to be able to trade for where the pet is placed?

I believe demand should be taken into account to a degree. But not to the full extent we see it now, as there is a huge boom in demand on most pets.

My belief is that demand over the lifetime of the pet needs to be evaluated. Pets that have maintained a steady demand for over a decade (Joker/BA/BMD/BEG/CEG.ECT) should have that taken into account. I would however not place them on the tier of their current value, and would look at putting them about 25%-35% below their current market value to keep in mind overt inflation.

[Goostarion]

7. We as a community need to build a sensible tier list
I think we need to start from scratch. We need to step back and look at the intent of pet rarities. We need to consider that Dec 18 resets rarities and fixes cusp issues like sorbets. We should consider demand in some way, but not get into the trap of encouraging massive demand-based inflation. I know most lists only include rarity now to stop this from happening, but maybe we could include demand in the new list only for major exceptions like Joker, and clearly mark that pet as lower rarity than its tier so that it's obvious it has already been boosted and doesn't need to go higher. Alternatively we can just put it in its rarity/intended spot and highlight it as higher demand.

I think the goal of these tiers would be to group similar value pets, but also to define the maximum gap that might exist between such pets. This would give traders some flexibility - they could do straight swaps within the tier, or say I like my pet more, please add an ER, or mine is way better so please add the maximum gap of an OMGSR 3 tiers below which would be an advent.

I think we could use example trades for each tier as well, to show variances in trades. This could help to demonstrate flexibility.

We can use rarity history to guide the tiers, but given how many rereleases most of these pets have been through, at some point that history stops mattering so much. This is why I think we need to weigh intent more heavily.

8. The Non/Sorb/MA/09R system is confusing and wrong
It was probably a good idea at the time, but I see a lot of people are confused by it, and he poll on the other thread clearly shows that for many people, easy to understand is a very high priority for any new trading guide or framework.

Where the current value system falls apart is, people are starting to value sorbets differently to each other, so what's a Sorb, the MAs are now above and below the rarity tag cusp so which type of MA does this even refer to anymore, and 09 rare doesn't mean rare anymore, so does it mean VR or ER? It's way to confusing to use and very user unfriendly. We need a new valuing system and guide to go along with it, and we need it before Dec 18.

9. ERs need a guide too.
People will get ERs in Dec 18 and not know how to trade them. I know there's a lot of ERs. But we can do something together surely.

11. We need to revamp C$
The new prices, plus oldest store pets being extremely hard to find anymore, mean we need to take a fresh look at these values.

Sorry for the big thoughts dump, but I'd love to hear some feedback on these things. Do you agree, or disagree because I've not considered something important? Do you want to go a different direction? How can we work together it move forward? Thank you for reading my novel =p

I enjoy reading a novel.

And am by far not a fan of creating a new rares list, the previous one caused problems. We got rid of it. Community tried filling that void again and it caused the admins to legit step in and make new rarities because of how controlling and unplayable trading became.

Forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=4899188&p=142982090#p142982090

This one theoretically has less tiers and still is equally inaccessible because there’s so many pets and they’re justified to be here because of things like “age of pet” and my personal favourite “demand”

Yeah nah, no thanks 🙏

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.)

Ur’s should be worth a little more than that

Store pets should be worth more than that again if the tier they are sitting on rarity wise.

Using trades to determine where pets sit legit makes a new rares list again.
Again. The idea has never been so off putting.

The “rebuild a trading guide narrative” really doesn’t need to be repeated again. The worst part of trading is if you don’t educate yourself on guides on how to trade you can legitimately have a stoke against your name for scamming when you just want to trade OMGSR-> OMGSR. I’ve known people who have risked losing their accounts cause they wanted to do bare basic trading, trading that’s accessible.

Metaphorically this is what it feels like.

You build a house, but it’s not suited to the climate you live in and after significant time voting, the family rips the house down (rates list deleted) and then many different people go to illustrate how the house is built. (Different forums being build to explain list wealth)

They build the favourite idea house (community voted)

Years pass and you might even thrive in the house, but then you notice less family come to the house every day. (Disappearing trades persons)

You didn’t accomodate for making the house accessible (and I’m not referring to disability to be clear) and you feel lonely. No one to talk or trade or visit or… anything. (Feeling lonely trying to trade, cs users quit)

Then you are presented new building materials that can be used to enhance the house if used correctly. (New rarities)

What do you do with them?

There isn’t enough building material to redo the house again, but enough is there for you to well; make accomodations and accessible infrastructure on the house.

What should of happened this whole time… research the climate, and prepare for the climate the hosie is going to be built in. That’s it.

The climate is that this is a children’s website being run by adults who grew up and are making adult decisions which are stopping children from being able to actually access the site. And use it as it is meant to, have fun. I don’t expect a child (COPPA only works in US) to know what 2x zebra OMGSR + 1 x MA = you know?

Staunchly disagreeing with 7 and 9

Acknowledging wrong with 8 was acceptable.

11 is absolutely correct. I wouldn’t value a OMGSR over 100USD regardless what you te me and even then, that’s overtly generous.

[Bronze!]

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.

I really do hear this, but I think the list you're describing can't exist right now. We can guesstimate from past updates, and I believe ages ago somebody counted out the number of original July pets to get a sense of their rarity relative to each other, but when you throw in rereleases, we really can't know a definitive list of rarest pets. It also runs into the cusp issue Solloby was talking about with a litter of all roughly equal outcomes now being split into two lines even though they've always swapped 1:1 before. It sounds like you want Nick and Tess to just release pet numbers, and you're certainly not alone in that! But it's kind of a catch 22: if we had that data, we could just point to that instead of a list, and without that data, we can't make an accurate list.

But the thing people want is a guide, not just a list. That's what all the polls have been about: OMGSR demand, what do you value in a guide - it's about actually trading what they have. The FTT and "what is this pet worth?" thread can't keep up with the volume of questions, especially not around the 18th when it becomes most relevant to less experienced traders. People need something to reference that has immediate functionality. A guide that deliberately gives wrong or incomplete information because "all successful list traders" know to use other sources is a bad guide. Not everyone is going to be a rarity expert, but ideally people should be pretty confident in their trading most of the time. All the other resources can and should still exist and be used, especially for more complicated trades, but if you have a guide that puts, say, a BA with all the other advent dogs, you are doing the community a major disservice. It isn't just the person starting the thread saying the BA should be worth more because they like it; we all know it trades for more. Putting it there but highlighting and saying it has good demand and trades for more is better, but still not the most useful for a newbie who got this dog on the 18th and wants to know how to trade it.

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.

[Solloby]

I understand the concerns about a new Rares List, but we already HAVE a new Rares List.. it's called the Non/MA system, and it's:

1. Not easy to understand - what is a non? What if you don't have a nondog, what then?? What is 0.75 non???
2. Not easy to find - nobody made a list of all of the Non/MA values, so to find out a pet's value you have to forum search and hope the posts you find are accurate
3. Not collaborative - there is no thread where the community came together to decide on these Non/MA values, is there? They certainly aren't being maintained seeing as UR fruits from the past few years have inflated values above older UR fruits, even though they are no longer new and thus should be valued around the same.
4. Contains outrageous values - if 10-12 MAs = 1 Non, and UR Bee = 3 Nons, then we are saying 1 OMGSR (Bee) = 30-36 OMGSRs (MAs). Really?
5. Does not manage demand - the old Rares list, and the new Non/MA system, both arbitrarily decided some pets were low demand, completely ignored their rarities, then put them at very low trade values. Then people were all shocked that Advent list pets were going OMGSR before Main list pets because that's what happens when you devalue a July 08 rat to such an extreme extent. They also hyperboost high demand pets. Joker was continually bubbled up the Rares List, boosting its value again and again. When the Rares List ended, Sunback was boosted above Sunjewel despite Sunjewel being the much rarer outcome of that litter.

The Rares list had a lot of problems. I think one of the problems is that it was a strict list of pets with insufficient evidence to back up a lot of the placements. The new framework we are discussing in this thread is a group of tiers, where we try to gather up all the OMGSRs that the community thinks could be fair within an ER or two at most in terms of value difference, and put them all together as swappable options.

The community could control demand a bit better by placing limits on how far up or down a pet should move based on demand. For example, we could say 08 rats should be no more than 1 tier lower than 08 dogs due to demand. We could say, Joker dog is worth a lot more than pets with a similar rarity history, but let's cap it here. If people start trading more for it, we don't move it up into a higher tier because that will inflate its value again. We decide as a community where it should go, and then we keep it there.


There are 2 simple reasons why we really need a trading guide:

• We can no longer reliably work with rarities, especially now that the rarity system has changed and there are more OMGSRs than ever. Rarity history is valuable, but many of these pets have been through well over a decade of rereleases. I think this is why the existing rarity lists, which were great at the time, are now showing massive clumps of pets of different trade values all thrown into giant groups. That's not easy to work with as a trader. We can work with rarity histories and we absolutely should, but there's not enough reliable data anymore to accurately break down the lists further.
  
• We need to replace the Non/MA system because it's very problematic (1 OMGSR should not equal 30 OMGSRs). We can only do that by implementing a better system. That system doesn't necessarily have to be a tier list of trading values, but a rarity list isn't really something we can reliably make granular to the point it can be used as a trading guide, so if we don't want to do a tier list then we need to come up with something else.

I was only running with the tier list idea because I saw other people in this thread and others suggesting it as a way forward. That's why I was helping with the idea. But I'm happy to listen to new ideas! The only idea I don't agree with is swapping 1:1 OMGSRs. That's definitely not going to be accepted by the community, nor is it fair. An UR TIger is not going to swap for a Coral Rat. Now that doesn't mean we can't have massive tiers. We might decide that sub tiers aren't needed and we end up with really big groups of OMGSRs that can swap 1:1, or just have an ER or VR as an addition if one pet is liked more than another.

I do think we need to have a lot of discussions about demand as a community. We may decide we want to manage demand differently in the new tier list system, such as not increasing or decreasing their values in the guide and just highlighting them - that's a valid opinion and probably something we need to poll on in future, showing both examples and letting the community decide which is better.

But first we need to agree that a new tier list system is what we need - if it isn't, we need to brainstorm alternative ideas. Because I don't know about you guys, but I really want to get rid of the Non/MA system. It's confusing and starting to spit out crazy values now that the advents are OMGSR. So how can we get rid of it? What can we replace it with that a newbie with a Dec 18 OMGSR can visit and go, now I know which pets I can swap my OMGSR (e.g. Rose PPS) for, and which pets are worth a lot more than it (UR Tiger), or less than it (Coral Rat).

[Inactive.]

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.

I really do hear this, but I think the list you're describing can't exist right now. We can guesstimate from past updates, and I believe ages ago somebody counted out the number of original July pets to get a sense of their rarity relative to each other, but when you throw in rereleases, we really can't know a definitive list of rarest pets. It also runs into the cusp issue Solloby was talking about with a litter of all roughly equal outcomes now being split into two lines even though they've always swapped 1:1 before. It sounds like you want Nick and Tess to just release pet numbers, and you're certainly not alone in that! But it's kind of a catch 22: if we had that data, we could just point to that instead of a list, and without that data, we can't make an accurate list.

But the thing people want is a guide, not just a list. That's what all the polls have been about: OMGSR demand, what do you value in a guide - it's about actually trading what they have. The FTT and "what is this pet worth?" thread can't keep up with the volume of questions, especially not around the 18th when it becomes most relevant to less experienced traders. People need something to reference that has immediate functionality. A guide that deliberately gives wrong or incomplete information because "all successful list traders" know to use other sources is a bad guide. Not everyone is going to be a rarity expert, but ideally people should be pretty confident in their trading most of the time. All the other resources can and should still exist and be used, especially for more complicated trades, but if you have a guide that puts, say, a BA with all the other advent dogs, you are doing the community a major disservice. It isn't just the person starting the thread saying the BA should be worth more because they like it; we all know it trades for more. Putting it there but highlighting and saying it has good demand and trades for more is better, but still not the most useful for a newbie who got this dog on the 18th and wants to know how to trade it.

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.

All of this. I know no one likes how big a role demand plays. But it does play a part. And we need to incorporate it to some degree. Not to its full extent, but in moderation. Accept the role it plays, but not allowing it to contribute to further inflation.

[kee;]

personally, I have always disliked placing pets in a list, or any sort of guide, taking their demand into account. I agree that it’s relevant and factors into how certain pets trade. but when a pet is placed higher because of its “demand”, all that happens is users ask for even more for it, even though it was already elevated to account for demand. we’ve seen this happen over and over and there’s no reason to think it wouldn’t happen again.
I think it would be better to not factor demand into placement, but make notes where needed about pets that trade higher/lower because of their demand.
we’ve already talked about having other types of information available with a guide (trade history, rarity change, etc.) which can help make demand clear without factoring it into pet placement. to me, demand doesn’t need to be factored into placement, the information about it just needs to be readily available with the guide.

-kee

[TANKMEN]

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.