New Trading Standards Discussion (please join in!)

[SolarSonnet]

I understand that it increases the number of pets required to trade between rarities, but as someone who personally almost never traded rares for any other rarity because the gap between uncommon and rare felt too uncomfortable to judge, this feels just right to me, and in my opinion requiring more pets to trade between rarities is an okay consequence for making it so anyone with any rarity pet can trade up / down rarities with me without me feeling stressed and uncertain. I would love to be able to trade my rares down for newer players who only have commons and uncommons, or to trade up for rares that I want, but I've always declined those trade before. Now I feel much better about finding something that's fair without feeling like I'm asking them to overpay for an unreachable rare, because I'm not as scared that I'll never be able to trade back up again. I like that it makes me more willing to trade up and down rarities without stress.

I would say I agree with you actually! I feel weirdly guilty having this opinion because I do tend to value flexibility in trading, and I don't like the idea of making it "harder" in some way on principle. but I do have to admit that this makes sense to my brain - given now the extra specificity in trading, I feel less uncertain about whatever value gap exists between different rarity labels. I worry a little that increasing this "value gap" is a bad move but I can't shake the feeling that it makes more sense to go 2:1 with the new rarity labels than it did with the old ones. (at least up through VR, I agree with a few others who have mentioned that maybe ER and OMGSR should be a step above other rarities.)

I agree with the above, but I don't quite feel "guilty", especially since this is the kind of thing I was looking for in terms of being able to properly value pets.

It gets rid of a ton of my anxieties about trading, even if it makes it harder to get up to rares initially.

I think in all of this trading discussion, we fail to properly recognize how generous the CS community can be. On the opposite end of all the greed and milking every pet for everything they're worth spectrum. There are people who do that, yes, and sometimes those same people are the ones who turn around and gift players insane amounts of value in terms of pets.

I like going through the trade forum and gifting people the things they're looking for sometimes, even if they're just common hoard pets.

Sometimes if a trade falls through and I'm feeling it that day, I'll just gift whoever I was trading with the pet I'd offered that was on their WL. I've done this with omgsc pets all the way up to store pets and vrs. I don't quite have the value on my account to do it with OMGSRs or ERs without massively damaging the trading potential I have, but I would if I had the disposable value.

There is an entire forum of adoption centers and free pets that users can take advantage of. Running on donations. Out of the sheer kindness of the heart of the CS community.

I do think that on this thread, about trading, it's important that gifts are acknowledged. Every time I see a new player, I like gifting them a bit of value for their account, even if it's not much. I've seen others with that mindset, too. So while it's "harder" to start off as a new player, the harder it is, the more the community swarms to the rest of the player base to boost others up as a result.

[Loelya]

I agree with the above, but I don't quite feel "guilty", especially since this is the kind of thing I was looking for in terms of being able to properly value pets.

It gets rid of a ton of my anxieties about trading, even if it makes it harder to get up to rares initially.

I think in all of this trading discussion, we fail to properly recognize how generous the CS community can be. On the opposite end of all the greed and milking every pet for everything they're worth spectrum. There are people who do that, yes, and sometimes those same people are the ones who turn around and gift players insane amounts of value in terms of pets.

I like going through the trade forum and gifting people the things they're looking for sometimes, even if they're just common hoard pets.

Sometimes if a trade falls through and I'm feeling it that day, I'll just gift whoever I was trading with the pet I'd offered that was on their WL. I've done this with omgsc pets all the way up to store pets and vrs. I don't quite have the value on my account to do it with OMGSRs or ERs without massively damaging the trading potential I have, but I would if I had the disposable value.

There is an entire forum of adoption centers and free pets that users can take advantage of. Running on donations. Out of the sheer kindness of the heart of the CS community.

I do think that on this thread, about trading, it's important that gifts are acknowledged. Every time I see a new player, I like gifting them a bit of value for their account, even if it's not much. I've seen others with that mindset, too. So while it's "harder" to start off as a new player, the harder it is, the more the community swarms to the rest of the player base to boost others up as a result.

I like the perspective of remembering that gifting and lifting up other players is important! but I'm unsure how that might fit in directly to a discussion about trading standards. I think a positive community outlook and generosity to newer players can be absolutely invaluable, but I don't know if I can think of a way to work that into how I think about approaching the idea of "fair" trading.

- - -

and real quick just to put this out there, please do feel free to share thoughts if you have any about our base "value" terms like old rares or revising/reinventing the MA/non system.

I like these ideas so far?
- change from "2009 rare" to "2010 rare" as a base value unit
- make our "base value" unit a changing unit that doesn't have to be re-adjusted periodically. something like, the "base" value unit is always a rare from whatever year is 5 years ago at a given time on-site. so in 2024, maybe the "base unit" would be a "2019 rare," then when we get into 2025, that base unit would then be a "2020 rare" ? and could we work with this to value higher-rarity/high-demand pets?
- value things based on a category of OMGSR (like URs?) instead of specific old pets like nons and advents?

[SolarSonnet]

(snip)

I like the perspective of remembering that gifting and lifting up other players is important! but I'm unsure how that might fit in directly to a discussion about trading standards. I think a positive community outlook and generosity to newer players can be absolutely invaluable, but I don't know if I can think of a way to work that into how I think about approaching the idea of "fair" trading.

- - -

and real quick just to put this out there, please do feel free to share thoughts if you have any about our base "value" terms like old rares or revising/reinventing the MA/non system.

I like these ideas so far?
- change from "2009 rare" to "2010 rare" as a base value unit
- make our "base value" unit a changing unit that doesn't have to be re-adjusted periodically. something like, the "base" value unit is always a rare from whatever year is 5 years ago at a given time on-site. so in 2024, maybe the "base unit" would be a "2019 rare," then when we get into 2025, that base unit would then be a "2020 rare" ? and could we work with this to value higher-rarity/high-demand pets?
- value things based on a category of OMGSR (like URs?) instead of specific old pets like nons and advents?

I just think it's important to remember for the overall discussion if we're talking about the consideration of how hard it is for new players to get into higher trading, which I've heard brought up as an argument a couple of times. If not in this thread, then definitely in others in the past.

That, generally, no matter how fair trades work, the generosity of the community will uplift each other, and maybe considering how hard it is for new players to get trading shouldn't be the number one concern in terms of fairness or how much pets are valued at.

Because if we say that 2 EUCs should equal a rare, but there are people who feel bad about that because it makes it harder for newer players to get rares, that's not quite valuing pets based on what they're worth.(Not taking demand value into account) It's valuing pets based on not feeling too great that new players will have a more difficult time getting rares. There are events, where the token pets tend to be EUC/Rare at the end of the day. There are also free adoptions, and the community is just as generous as it is greedy, new players will figure it out.

This sentiment makes me feel kind of 'mean', but I do think that in terms of trading worth/value, that the "ease of access" for getting higher-value pets should not be a huge consideration.

---

-- How are we transitioning from 2009 rare to 2010 rare as a "base" value? Would it be, "Nons are worth 100 '10 rares" or "200 '10 rares" or, what? Because if it's 100 then 09 VRs have even more value than they did before. I think that overall, if we're keeping Nons and MAs and such, we need to revalue them to make sure they're getting traded fairly.
As of right now, it seems like everything up to 09 rares has been discussed, and all of the list pets are just. "Idk, vibe? Check their old values and only trade them between each other. Good luck!"

-- I think having a "base value" pet that changes every so often is nice in theory, but super annoying in practice.
If it's a 2020 Rare in 2025, then we have to figure out how to value a pet that's worth a 100+ 09 rares in terms of a 2020 rare. It's hard to figure out what one 09 rare is worth in 2020 rares, especially with there being so many different new charts and valuations. In my chart, there's not even a cohesive way to translate 2009 rares into 2020 rares because I don't know if there's any amount of 2020 rares you could trade me to make me wanna let go of a 2009 Rare. (Minus demand) God forbid you try to get me to trade a non for any amount of 2020 rares. I wouldn't even know where to start on that one. The best I've got is that rares with a 6-9 year gap are worth 2r + an EUC of that year. So the best you'd get from me is maybe trading an 09 rare for 2 2017 Rares + a 2017 EU. And that's pushing it, even if it says its fair in my chart. 09-'12 rares tend to be a different breed for me entirely.

-- I think that's just recategorizing things. What's the difference between valuing things in terms of URs vs valuing them in Nons and Mid-Advents? I think the reason Nons and Advents work is because they have a cohesive calculation to them.
(Off the top of my head, I think)
Mid-Advents were worth 7-9 09 Rares.
Nons were worth 10-12 MA. (70-108 09 rares, typically agreed upon to be worth "around 100" 09 rares)
So if something is worth "0.25n" that's around 25 09 rares. Nons being 100 09 rares makes the math super easy, because it's just 100 times the number of nons its worth.
3 Nons? 300 09 rares.
0.5 nons? 50 09 rares.

If we just say, that a UR is worth X amount of 09 Rares, or '10 rares, or whatever our new base valuation is.. It's the same thing, different shapes. I think we just need re-figure out what a MA and a Non is worth post-rarity update. Has it changed that much? How are we valuing them now? What is our baseline?

[LavenderRain]

Just wanted to pipe in, for those interested in my C$ Chart, here is the link to the google doc, which you can copy and paste into your own doc to edit your own chart! That way you can easily make edits to preset to all here, or to even make a personal chart for your own use, whatever you'd like ^^

Google Doc Link

I also have 2 different pre-made charts in there, Version 1 which is what has been used on this forum, and a Version 2 which I made a while back to try another attempt at evening the common to rare curve. Please remember these are meant to be guides, and probably do need some touch ups ^^

[SolarSonnet]

Just wanted to pipe in, for those interested in my C$ Chart, here is the link to the google doc, which you can copy and paste into your own doc to edit your own chart! That way you can easily make edits to preset to all here, or to even make a personal chart for your own use, whatever you'd like ^^

Google Doc Link

I also have 2 different pre-made charts in there, Version 1 which is what has been used on this forum, and a Version 2 which I made a while back to try another attempt at evening the common to rare curve. Please remember these are meant to be guides, and probably do need some touch ups ^^

Personally I'm a big fan of the C$ charts that value 09 EUCs at what the lowest tier 09 Rares were worth pre-update (30-35 C$) and then go from there, as my valuation of newer pets is less important to me. Your charts are kind of perfect for the kind of C$ Trading I do and how I value my pets, outside of ERs+ and Store Pets, which I think can't really be valued with a formula like that.

I do agree that 8 to 30 is a kind of massive jump for VUC to EUC, but I think the way to do that is not lowering the price of the EUC and Rares, but rather raising the prices of the OMGSC-VUC.
So for 2009 it'd be
EUC 30 - VUC 15 - UC 8 - C 4 .. And then Idk how to do it from there because lower tier trading for C$ is not my forte. Especially since nothing under an 09 Uncommon exists as far as I'm aware.

Before the massive rarity update, 09 Uncommons were valued at like 10-15 C$ anyway, making 09 UCs now be worth like 8 and VUCs be worth like 15 makes a lot of sense. So I'd recommend a 3rd table that does that.

This is the oldest VUC I have and the litter was released in January 09 but the pet itself was adopted in August, suggesting that it had a really long time to be adopted. (It does have a regularly Uncommon littermate, as well.)


Pet's name: January 09??
Adopt virtual pets at Chicken Smoothie!

[LavenderRain]

Personally I'm a big fan of the C$ charts that value 09 EUCs at what the lowest tier 09 Rares were worth pre-update (30-35 C$) and then go from there, as my valuation of newer pets is less important to me. Your charts are kind of perfect for the kind of C$ Trading I do and how I value my pets, outside of ERs+ and Store Pets, which I think can't really be valued with a formula like that.

I do agree that 8 to 30 is a kind of massive jump for VUC to EUC, but I think the way to do that is not lowering the price of the EUC and Rares, but rather raising the prices of the OMGSC-VUC.
So for 2009 it'd be
EUC 30 - VUC 15 - UC 8 - C 4 .. And then Idk how to do it from there because lower tier trading for C$ is not my forte. Especially since nothing under an 09 Uncommon exists as far as I'm aware.

Before the massive rarity update, 09 Uncommons were valued at like 10-15 C$ anyway, making 09 UCs now be worth like 8 and VUCs be worth like 15 makes a lot of sense. So I'd recommend a 3rd table that does that.

This is the oldest VUC I have and the litter was released in January 09 but the pet itself was adopted in August, suggesting that it had a really long time to be adopted. (It does have a regularly Uncommon littermate, as well.)


Pet's name: January 09??
Adopt virtual pets at Chicken Smoothie!

I definitely agree with all that, especially with EUC being valued closer to rare vs uncommon, and actually Version 2 seems to do everything you're talking about exactly xD

I do think it still needs some edits, VC is perhaps a little to low, and Rare should probably go back to how they were on Version 1 ^^

[-MOOSHROOM-]

4

This is not something I've weighed in on.
I really like the idea of keeping pets valued at "X [Year] Rares" but I also have observed that most 09 rares are now Very Rare, and that might bring down the value of list pets by quite a lot if you're using the 2:1 rule for rarity. This might make '10 rares more of a stable method to go on, unless we start valuing pets by how many 09 very rares they're worth. Which then makes regular 09 Rares worth half as much as they used to be worth, and makes literally every other pet that's worth less than an 09 VR, worth less than they used to be worth in terms of list pets.

Before, you could trade 2 '10 rares for the valuation of an 09 rare with the 2:1 method. Now that most 09 rares are very rare, using 2:1, you'd need 4 '10 rares to equal that valuation. Using my version of the years chart, however, you'd need a '10 rare and a '10 VUC to equal an 09 Rare, so that'd be 2 '10 rares and 2 '10 VUCs for an 09 VR. Which is a more reasonable ~3 '10 rares in value as opposed to doubling it.

If a non is still worth 100 09 rares, then suddenly, most pets from 2009 are worth double what they were previously in the context of a non. Now you only need, averagely, 50 09 pets rather than 100 to equal a non. Almost all of the pets here were regular 09 rares before the rarity overhaul. Now they're worth "double" what they were before in terms of trading value if nons are worth the same.

I'm gonna go ahead and quote this section of your post because this is something I would really really love to see discussed in-depth! like in an ideal world I would love to see us restructure or reinvent the 09/MA/non system entirely to something a lot easier to understand at-a-glance. like instead of using these "currency" words like MA or non, maybe we could even move to a system that has a given value for URs or OMGSRs for each year, and use rarity & date math to figure out high-rarity pets of other values from there. or maybe we could move to something other than the "09 rare" being the basis of all "currency" terms since there's really not very many '09 rare designs left, most of them have moved up in rarity. I really think this would be a valuable discussion point for the community. I had it in my mind that maybe this could be the next one after we looked at rarity math, but if rarity math just isn't something there's cohesive positions on, maybe this fourth point discussion would be more productive & helpful.

Can't help but agree, as an old player coming back to the game it has been so confusing to wrap my head around all the 09/MA/non system. I've found people do get quite intense about it, and it's making me nervous to even offer a trade. I can't imagine what it is like for newer players understanding the site as a whole and then trying to learn a whole new currency.

Even with all the charts, graphs, and forums explaining it. It's difficult to fully understand. I feel like I have to go into trades thoroughly researching every pet and it's numerical worth rather than just having fun! Ultimately we are all here for a shared love of these pets and the talented artwork of the CS team<3 It would be great to see more discussions about reinventing the 'currency' with the new update

[SolarSonnet]

Personally I'm a big fan of the C$ charts that value 09 EUCs at what the lowest tier 09 Rares were worth pre-update (30-35 C$) and then go from there, as my valuation of newer pets is less important to me. Your charts are kind of perfect for the kind of C$ Trading I do and how I value my pets, outside of ERs+ and Store Pets, which I think can't really be valued with a formula like that.

I do agree that 8 to 30 is a kind of massive jump for VUC to EUC, but I think the way to do that is not lowering the price of the EUC and Rares, but rather raising the prices of the OMGSC-VUC.
So for 2009 it'd be
EUC 30 - VUC 15 - UC 8 - C 4 .. And then Idk how to do it from there because lower tier trading for C$ is not my forte. Especially since nothing under an 09 Uncommon exists as far as I'm aware.

Before the massive rarity update, 09 Uncommons were valued at like 10-15 C$ anyway, making 09 UCs now be worth like 8 and VUCs be worth like 15 makes a lot of sense. So I'd recommend a 3rd table that does that.

This is the oldest VUC I have and the litter was released in January 09 but the pet itself was adopted in August, suggesting that it had a really long time to be adopted. (It does have a regularly Uncommon littermate, as well.)


Pet's name: January 09??
Adopt virtual pets at Chicken Smoothie!

I definitely agree with all that, especially with EUC being valued closer to rare vs uncommon, and actually Version 2 seems to do everything you're talking about exactly xD

I do think it still needs some edits, VC is perhaps a little to low, and Rare should probably go back to how they were on Version 1 ^^

I was looking at V.2, EUC is at 26 and not 30, I'd've kept it at 30 and made VUC 15, then the rest below that can stay? Idk, not my ball park at that point. I don't wanna be throwing out random numbers if I don't have anything to back it up with.

[musicgurl333]

I have a question, and maybe this could be a topic for a future poll…how are people valuing store pets right now? Let’s say a store pet used to be worth an ‘09 rare. Is it worth an ‘09-‘12 rare now, using the 3:1 rule (which is what I’m using currently)? Since most ‘09 rares are VR now, and since most store pets are VR, should it also be worth an ‘09 VR? Or an ‘09-‘12 VR?

I feel like I’m pretty much settled on my trade values going forward (2:1 between rarities, 3 year rules for dates below VR, which VR+ determined on a pet by pet basis), and I don’t do much list trading, so that’s not a big issue for me at the moment, but I do a fair bit of trading in store pets and I’m a bit lost on how to value them right now. I’d be interested in hearing what other people think!

[SolarSonnet]

I have a question, and maybe this could be a topic for a future poll…how are people valuing store pets right now? Let’s say a store pet used to be worth an ‘09 rare. Is it worth an ‘09-‘12 rare now, using the 3:1 rule (which is what I’m using currently)? Since most ‘09 rares are VR now, and since most store pets are VR, should it also be worth an ‘09 VR? Or an ‘09-‘12 VR?

I feel like I’m pretty much settled on my trade values going forward (2:1 between rarities, 3 year rules for dates below VR, which VR+ determined on a pet by pet basis), and I don’t do much list trading, so that’s not a big issue for me at the moment, but I do a fair bit of trading in store pets and I’m a bit lost on how to value them right now. I’d be interested in hearing what other people think!

I use 1-year rule for pets above rare, so I might not be the person you want to receive advice from.

That being said:

Personally, for store pets, I start with the value of current store pets and relate it in my current C$ Chart.
So a store pet currently in the store rn, is 25 C$, which, for me, relates to a 2010 Extremely Uncommon. Then I go up from there until the vibes are wrong.
I'd say current are store pets in the store rn, + earlier this year.
So a current Store pet is like 25 C$
'22 would be 30 C$ making it an '11 rare
'21 is 35-40, probably putting it around an 09 EUC.
'20 you've got 40-45, making it more like an 09 EUC + a little add.
etc.

Overall its the vibes, but I'd call a current store pet solidly worth a 2010 EUC