Rarity system updated to add 4 new categories!

[LadyoftheGeneral]

There was no rework in October's mid-month update.

I'm still getting used to the new system, but I did trade a VR dog for an Extremely Rare rat.
Before, I would never have traded a VR dog for a VR rat, but the rat was rarer.

> all of cs atm: "oh no... our rarity system... it's broken..."

> ahem, anyways, in all seriousness i don't care for this update. i feel like every
single pet has been either overvalued, or undervalued, and that the list system
that we were all used to using has been completely disregarded.. the market is
completely flooded with omgsrs now and pets that actually had value before? i
can't see them being traded for fairly anymore. it's ridiculous.

> i'm calling it now: the rarity system will be reworked again in a month's time.
this way is just too severely broken.

Tbh “the list” was a stupid broken nightmare to begin with.

This rarity system makes more sense.

[CloudyWolf]

I'm m not sure where to post feedback of the new system. I did read through the first page and the last couple so if i missed it, I'm sorry!

First, I'm not a fan when sites make changes, but this doesn't seem too bad.

Second, where can you learn how this effects trading? Regardless of whether the staff says it doesn't actually change the rarities of pets, this does impact trading. Also, pets' rarities have changed because this means that the previous rating system overvalued or undervalued pets, if this is truly a more accurate representation of pet values.

Lastly, the "Extremely common" category...maybe it's the name, but "OMG so common" and "Extremely common" are the same thing. For me, this is just semantics or trivial. "OMG so common" already suggests that something is exceptionally, exceedingly, particularly, unusually, seriously, tremendously, immensely, or outstandingly common, all of which are synonyms for "extremely". How does this make sense to have two of essentially the same category?


I want to make it very clear that I'm not bashing anyone or the site! This is just well-intended critical feedback!

[Sashtato]

There was no rework in October's mid-month update.

I'm still getting used to the new system, but I did trade a VR dog for an Extremely Rare rat.
Before, I would never have traded a VR dog for a VR rat, but the rat was rarer.

> all of cs atm: "oh no... our rarity system... it's broken..."

> ahem, anyways, in all seriousness i don't care for this update. i feel like every
single pet has been either overvalued, or undervalued, and that the list system
that we were all used to using has been completely disregarded.. the market is
completely flooded with omgsrs now and pets that actually had value before? i
can't see them being traded for fairly anymore. it's ridiculous.

> i'm calling it now: the rarity system will be reworked again in a month's time.
this way is just too severely broken.

Tbh “the list” was a stupid broken nightmare to begin with.

This rarity system makes more sense.

I agree - the rarity system makes more sense because its based on actual data and math. I don't know how people can be mad about different pets being "under" or "over-valued" right now, because they literally aren't. What the rarity system rework is telling us is that we USED to over or under-value those exact pets. We now have a clearer understanding of a lot of pets. Sure, there are a lot of OMGSRs now, but really, is that a bad thing? This simply tells us that those pets were already pretty close to becoming OMGSR in the first place.

The list was figurative. Based on assumptions and user-collected "data" - which sure, was helpful at the time, but was clearly not accurate. The list SHOULD be entirely disregarded with the new rarity system, as it is based on TRUE data and numbers. It's not like Nick and Tess just decided to make some pets more or less valuable and arbitrarily changed their rarities. The rarities changed because of actual numbers.