The "Is this a fair trade?" Thread

[Corn flak]

Would trading a WWA for a Red malk dragon + 2 advents be fair? [Lower advents]

[Rbpuppy]

Would trading a WWA for a Red malk dragon + 2 advents be fair? [Lower advents]

That trade would be unfair to the WWA

[Corn flak]

Would trading a WWA for a Red malk dragon + 2 advents be fair? [Lower advents]

That trade would be unfair to the WWA

Really? If so what would need ot be added ?

[JJdiner]

how much does the ur tiger go for? trades/viewtrade.php?id=83926752&userid=837651&signature=jvoUizXg_0U0O5i-ehzSnQ should i value it at 6? i value the sunback as 4, and the other 2 on my side 1 non each

could i get one more opinion? and thank you for the help!

[quisicorazon]

Would this be fair? Or would I need to add more?
trades/viewtrade.php?id=83909748&userid=686260&signature=0GsuaM8mXHF1d0caP-l4xA

[amarok.]

I still find the Trade in this Post a mini-bit Unfair for Poster by about 2x 2014 Xmas Pets..., strictly Rarity-wise... (But compensated by 'Dragon' Species and Number of Pets on the other Side, the Final Trade looked perfect to me, for both Sides, or I've been playing this Game completely wrongly since 5 years, oops...!)

Unless trading pets on the (discontinued) Rares List or certain pets with high demand like Shima Longtails or Zodiacs, here are the general guidelines most users follow:

○ If the pets are the same year, it's 2:1 as you go up the rarity scale

e.g. 2 commons = 1 uncommon, 2 uncommons = 1 rare
Caveat: some users value it as 4 uncommons to 1 rare of the same year
○ If the pets are not the same year but are the same rarity, it's 2:1 for each year in between as you go older

e.g. 2 2019 commons = 1 2018 common
○ If the pets are neither the same year nor the same rarity, both of the above rules need to be applied to calculate the equivalency

e.g. 4 2019 commons = 2 2019 uncommons = 1 2019 uncommon

Store pets are valued differently, and you can find the generally accepted value for them by searching one of the "Is this a fair trade?" threads, which is what I do!

Advice given here is meant to be more empirical. Personal preference like species demand is entirely subjective, and therefore not something we generally do here; that's up to the traders themselves. Most trades not involving high-value pets and items are valued solely on rarity and year alone.

Oh...!, excellent...!, thanks for that...!

I've always been using 1 UC = 3 Commons, and 1 Rare = 3-4 UC's, after asking maybe 20 "Older" Players since I joined the Game..., so OK, now, everything is 1:2...

Mini-Mistake I think in:

e.g. 4 2019 commons = 2 2019 uncommons = 1 2019 uncommon

The last part should be "1 1019 Rare" or "1 2018 Uncommon", or again, I don't understand the "Principle" otherwise...!?

But hum, even with that "2:1" Principle, I still find the Trade it all started in this Thread perfectly Fair for both Sides, adding the "Dimension" that I don't know any single Player on CS that will accept 2 UC's for 1 Rare same Date (and same Species) in a Trade, most Players only accept Rare for Rare, yeah, or maybe 2 UC Lions for 1 Rare Rat, hum, not even, that will be 1 UC Lion for 1 Rare Rat...

But OK, the "Rule of Thumb" is thus "everything is 2:1" (approx)... And for a same or mixed Species...
(Good Luck trying to trade 2 UC Rats for 1 Rare Lion, ah-ah...! )

Uh, this "rule of thumb" is in no way a rule of thumb. We've had arguments over this on the thread before and every time the consensus has come to the fact that 2:1 is not correct. The UC:R ratio is absolutely 4:1 "as a rule of thumb" and most of the senior players on this thread will agree. Only a very few players consider a 2:1 ratio between uncommons and rates to be fair. As a player, you can absolutely chose to value things your own way, but the fact remains that trades of that sort will probably be declined because practically nobody else in the know considers that fair.

The trade referenced is unfair to the top, as the first five pets in the offer are equal in value to the couple on the bottom side. A '15 uncommon is equal to a '17 rare, and a '13 uncommon with a '14 uncommon and two '15 uncommons adds up to a '14 rare.

[GreenteaLatte]

Uh, this "rule of thumb" is in no way a rule of thumb. We've had arguments over this on the thread before and every time the consensus has come to the fact that 2:1 is not correct. The UC:R ratio is absolutely 4:1 "as a rule of thumb" and most of the senior players on this thread will agree. Only a very few players consider a 2:1 ratio between uncommons and rates to be fair. As a player, you can absolutely chose to value things your own way, but the fact remains that trades of that sort will probably be declined because practically nobody else in the know considers that fair.

The trade referenced is unfair to the top, as the first five pets in the offer are equal in value to the couple on the bottom side. A '15 uncommon is equal to a '17 rare, and a '13 uncommon with a '14 uncommon and two '15 uncommons adds up to a '14 rare.

I actually use the 1:2=rare:uncommon ratio and have done a lot of successful trades like that with people old or new. It really just depends on who you trade with. To be completely honest, I've only heard about the 1:4 ratio last year...

I agree with Amarok about this
trades/viewtrade.php?id=83926670&userid=820034&signature=NOi7wmvCodR0rVho8hbVuA
trade is unfair to the top. Even by using the 1:4 ratio. It was overpay from the top by 3 2017 rares.

[Redpanda]

Could I get some opinions on this?

This as well, I’ve been searching for the PPS Dragon for awhile now. Not sure what it goes for.

[ArisuV]

trades/viewtrade.php?id=83919263&userid=375783&signature=j9GKNyVdtqzfPYVAOU5fsw

Is this fair? If not, how do I make it so? I don't like it personally but I'm not up tp date with year rarity worth-

[Mega chonker]

https://www.chickensmoothie.com/trades/viewtrade.php?id=83919263&userid=375783&signature=j9GKNyVdtqzfPYVAOU5fsw

Is this fair? If not, how do I make it so? I don't like it personally but I'm not up tp date with year rarity worth-

I dont think so. not quite up to date