New Trading Standards Discussion (please join in!)

[kee;]

I’m sure this is just a difference in how people understand things, but I personally find that valuing higher value pets in rares is confusing. Most of the time, trades for high value pets don’t contain a bunch of regular rares but other high value pets. So for me, valuing everything in rares just makes for more math.
I think a system that is simpler and requires less calculation would be more accessible to more people. I understand some amount of calculating is inevitable, but I think it should be limited. I think it’s gotten a bit out of hand in the last few years and I think it’s one of the main reasons why so many users have said that they don’t understand higher value trades and what is considered fair using rarity math.

-kee

[Loelya]

it would be a BIG help by the way if anyone who voted/feels strongly that we should do away with the idea of a numerical value system entirely could post what you think the alternative should be~ ^^ if we shouldn't count up worth/value in terms of things like old rares/extremely rares/nons/advents/etc - what do you think we should use instead? knowing what alternatives would be easier for community members to understand would go a long way towards helping those who make guides to accommodate everyone.

[SolarSonnet]

^ This. I'm open to the idea of not using Old Rares as a valuation, but I don't have any alternatives.

Counting in nons and mas can get confusing (idk how? but a lot of people seem to be unable to figure it out?) so I voted for only valuing things in ORs.

I think valuing things in ORs is the easiest way to do it.

I think tokens or units or stars could get confusing as well for people who don't understand nons and mas and ORs are like, the best/least confusing way to go.

Because at least if you have a pet that's worth, say, a random number of old rares.. generating a number 1-100 let's say 48 ORs.

Then on the other side of the trade, you have a pet that's worth 27 and 13 ORs, you only get to 40, so then you just need to add 8 old rares or a pet that's worth that. As opposed to being like "My pet is worth 4.8 Advents, yours is worth 1.3 and 2.7, so you need to add 0.8 Advents"

It's the same with high-value pets, even if two pets are both worth a super high value, instead of having nons and mas and random crap, you just are like "My side is worth 200 ORs, your side is worth 170 ORs, you need to add." and its simple. Instead of, "My side is worth 2 nons, and your side is only worth 1 non and 7 advents"

And then somebody has to know how many advents = a non, and on top of that if they're adding in old rares, they have to figure out how many old rares = an advent.

It's a lot of complicated math, but it's simple addition and division, it's not hard by any means.

--

I guess I find it a little confusing, how people can just not understand how Nons and MAs work.

It's like, let's say you have a 50 cent piece, and somebody wants to trade for it.
They have a quarter (25), a dime (10), and two nickels (5 x 2). That's Only 45. So they'd need either a third nickel, or 5 pennies.

Why is it easy for people to know a penny is 1 cent, a nickel is 5, a dime is 10, a quarter is 25, and a dollar is 100, but nobody can/wants to remember more than one value for their pets on a site they frequent?

(I'm in the U.S. so I use U.S. currency for my example. If you're not, though, use whatever is your local currency for this example)

[lil rascal]

^ It’s only easy to know that a penny is 1 cent, a nickel is 5 and a dime is 10 if that’s what you’re used to. As an Australian I’d need to carry around a cheat sheet in America if it wasn’t for the beauty of bank cards taking care of it for me. We use 5 cents, 10 cents, 20 cents, 50 cents, 1 dollar, 2 dollars, 5 dollars and so on (removed 1c and 2c years ago). And that is the problem here, people who understand the system are fine but for everyone else it’s a lot to get their heads around, especially if they’re from a country who’s currency calls a spade a spade.

I personally agree with the person who said that with that many tiers for OMGSRs it’s looking more like a new Rares list. Do OMGSRs really need to be spilt into 6 groups (not including a legendary/legacy tier for OMGSR store pets)? It seems a lot of tiers for one rarity.

I read a theory on one of the threads about how OMGSR and the rereleases works and it makes a lot of sense to me considering we have been told that the purpose of the re-release is to ensure that no non-store pet becomes so rare that it’s impossible to find. We have been following a system which assumes all pets just keep getting rarer as they age. However this theory is that, due to CS not wanting any non-store pet to drop out of circulation, the system has an upper threshold limit for (non-store) OMGSRs and when those pets reach that threshold the system releases more of those pets in the next rerelease to bring them back below the threshold. This would explain why there are often more of the rarer outcomes in multi outcome rereleases than would be expected.

This theory would throw the idea of pets continuing to become rarer and rarer the longer they’re OMGSR on it’s head as it would mean at most we really only have three groups in OMGSRs:
Pets that have been OMGSR for years or since their release (at or near upper threshold)
Pets that used to be VR and turned OMGSR before this update (midrange)
Pets that have never been OMGSR before this update ( near the lower threshold)

[Metax]

Not sure if this has been posted here yet, but check out the CS OMGSR Pet Popularity Poll thread by ♥Princess of Lions♥. The more responses this gets, the better. c:

[kee;]

I don’t know what exactly would make the most sense, but in addition to me personally finding the extra math confusing, I think evaluating very high value pets in old rares makes for very strict trading. If one side of a trade is worth 350 old rares and the other side is worth 340, do those extra 10 old rares really matter? Probably not once a trade gets to be that high of a value. But we’ve gotten to the point that we feel like we have to milk every last drop of value out of every single pet, to the point that so many people have given up in higher value trading.
I think the other part of it that I don’t really agree with is that we don’t really have any idea how many old rares a pet is worth — it feels like we’re just guessing as best as we can.

I also think it’s important to try to move away from what we’ve always been doing where possible and where it makes sense. I think it’s easy to just keep doing the same thing, but that doesn’t mean we have to.

I’m sorry I don’t really have a unique idea on how to evaluate anything. I’m not a very creative person so I’m not a lot of help there, unfortunately. I’m a great devil’s advocate though. (:

-kee

[Frœyjɑ]

Personally, I don't even look at date or species. Rarity is rarity. For trading different rarities, I tend to follow the 2:1 rule, so like 2 VU for an EU. If I really want a pet, I will overpay, but it's all personal preference for me. The rarities got updated for a reason, so that trading would hopefully be easier and you no longer have to put in a ton of guess work regarding a pet's worth. If it's Very Uncommon then it's Very Uncommon, regardless of species or date.

[conarcoin]

I still think 09 VRs makes more sense than Old Rares. If we were valuing everything in 09 rares, and most 09 rares are now VR, then it only makes sense to use 09 VR as a value, to me...

[Sashtato]

I read a theory on one of the threads about how OMGSR and the rereleases works and it makes a lot of sense to me considering we have been told that the purpose of the re-release is to ensure that no non-store pet becomes so rare that it’s impossible to find. We have been following a system which assumes all pets just keep getting rarer as they age. However this theory is that, due to CS not wanting any non-store pet to drop out of circulation, the system has an upper threshold limit for (non-store) OMGSRs and when those pets reach that threshold the system releases more of those pets in the next rerelease to bring them back below the threshold. This would explain why there are often more of the rarer outcomes in multi outcome rereleases than would be expected.

This theory would throw the idea of pets continuing to become rarer and rarer the longer they’re OMGSR on it’s head as it would mean at most we really only have three groups in OMGSRs:
Pets that have been OMGSR for years or since their release (at or near upper threshold)
Pets that used to be VR and turned OMGSR before this update (midrange)
Pets that have never been OMGSR before this update ( near the lower threshold)

This is so interesting!! I really think we should be considering this, and I like your idea of only three tiers. It’s simple, makes a lot of sense, and seems to consider the rerelease situation which I hadn’t even considered before. Thanks for sharing this!

[auroraphoenix]

I read a theory on one of the threads about how OMGSR and the rereleases works and it makes a lot of sense to me considering we have been told that the purpose of the re-release is to ensure that no non-store pet becomes so rare that it’s impossible to find. We have been following a system which assumes all pets just keep getting rarer as they age. However this theory is that, due to CS not wanting any non-store pet to drop out of circulation, the system has an upper threshold limit for (non-store) OMGSRs and when those pets reach that threshold the system releases more of those pets in the next rerelease to bring them back below the threshold. This would explain why there are often more of the rarer outcomes in multi outcome rereleases than would be expected.

This theory would throw the idea of pets continuing to become rarer and rarer the longer they’re OMGSR on it’s head as it would mean at most we really only have three groups in OMGSRs:
Pets that have been OMGSR for years or since their release (at or near upper threshold)
Pets that used to be VR and turned OMGSR before this update (midrange)
Pets that have never been OMGSR before this update ( near the lower threshold)

This is so interesting!! I really think we should be considering this, and I like your idea of only three tiers. It’s simple, makes a lot of sense, and seems to consider the rerelease situation which I hadn’t even considered before. Thanks for sharing this!

I also really like this idea! I think it's a good compromise between getting rid of tiers and just having straight OMGSRs across the board and keeping some level of difference between them. It sounds easier to make sense of than previous rares lists if we keep it this lax consistently^