Does anyone else feel like Demand is killing CS?

[Seasonal]

I would challenge the idea that all older pets are rarer by saying that we don't know the ratios pets are set at upon their release. Take this litter for example:
archive/2016/March/Dog

We don't know what ratio this pet was released at. The only way we could accurately determine if this pet is rarer would be a rarity change; whichever pet changed to VR first would be more rare. So, a 2016 rare could absolutely be rarer than a 2010 rare. Generally we assume that older pets are rarer because less users played CS and less pets were adopted, but I'm sure that there are exceptions to this rule. When pets are re-released, they are done so in a way that maintains their rarity (the exception to this being a pet that is bordering on a rarity change reaching the "tipping point" due to a re-release, like we've seen with many July '08 litters).

I think a good rule of thumb is that yes, pets released in 2008-2010 are rarer than new pets. But when rare and VR pets are introduced in monthly releases, then we really don't know where they lie.

And what about the August PPS from August 2012? We don't know where it lies on the scale either. It could be worth more than an older VR pet, or it could not be. We just don't have that information.

Rarity tags are broad to discourage users from being too specific about their trades. We can only make accurate claims when we have rarity changes to back them up.

Also, ZEL mentioning that the Moonswirl bunny was VR before the CEG blew my mind. I think it just goes to show that rarity changes are the most reliable way to determine values within any rarity label. I am very surprised!

[Asvoria]

I actually think I've just been hit with a brick.

It's so inconventional to think that a 2019 rare could be worth more than a 2010 rare, but who is to say that it isn't?
The only information that we have and can work with, is that both pets lie in a certain 'pets per user' section that makes both of them rare, but we don't know at which end of the spectrum they are, unless one of them changes rarity.
That is, in fact, the only thing we know.

I know trading is hard right now and everything is up to change every day, demand rockets and store pets are ridiculously expensive, but you don't have to join the party, right?
That is something I'd like to say to everyone here right now, because I just realized it through this discussion:

The list is history and the current trades are anything but beautiful, but instead of complaining, we could be changing the trading economy!
How, you ask? By standing up and not agreeing to pay a kidney for a UR or any other famous list pet! Tell them that you want to swap that worthless 2019 rare for their 2010 rare and watch their face loose shape when you ask them for the proof that their pet is rarer.
Every one of us can maybe change one members opinion each day by showing the real rarities and explain the system.
Change takes time and the lists sits deeply engraved in the CD economy but I believe that better times will come and we have to work towards it.
We can make a small change to CS each day, so let's do it!

[amarok.]

I actually think I've just been hit with a brick.

It's so inconventional to think that a 2019 rare could be worth more than a 2010 rare, but who is to say that it isn't?
The only information that we have and can work with, is that both pets lie in a certain 'pets per user' section that makes both of them rare, but we don't know at which end of the spectrum they are, unless one of them changes rarity.
That is, in fact, the only thing we know.

I know trading is hard right now and everything is up to change every day, demand rockets and store pets are ridiculously expensive, but you don't have to join the party, right?
That is something I'd like to say to everyone here right now, because I just realized it through this discussion:

The list is history and the current trades are anything but beautiful, but instead of complaining, we could be changing the trading economy!
How, you ask? By standing up and not agreeing to pay a kidney for a UR or any other famous list pet! Tell them that you want to swap that worthless 2019 rare for their 2010 rare and watch their face loose shape when you ask them for the proof that their pet is rarer.
Every one of us can maybe change one members opinion each day by showing the real rarities and explain the system.
Change takes time and the lists sits deeply engraved in the CD economy but I believe that better times will come and we have to work towards it.
We can make a small change to CS each day, so let's do it!

P R E A C H

[HoneySoftBoi]

┍━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ⋆⋅☆⋅⋆ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┑
Please Stop Feeding DEMAND!
★ Raven is not worth Nons!
★ Dragon PPS Cat is not worth the List!
★ Cerberus is not worth 5 Nons!
★ Black Advent is not worth Non!
★ LT Shima is not worth the List!
★ Very Rare is not worth more than OMGsr!

★ Zebras are not worthless!
★ Tribals are not worthless!
★ Rats are not worthless!

★ Nick Sunback PPS is worth more than Joker!
★ Nick Blue Tox is worth more than Joker!
★ UR Apple is worth more than Joker!

★ Re-released pets has SAME rarity as True Dates!
Please be aware of how demand is causing the trading economy to crumble.
A pet's rarity determines its value. Demand is up to you.
┕━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ⋆⋅☆⋅⋆ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┙

May we should think about that.
Happy Holidays everyone!

I agree with this so much over 9000% demand is so bad on CS that I have given up on trading for a huge dreamie of mine...and a few other pets I really really want its sad and demand makes people on here so greedy they will have multiple of valuable pets and puts them to demand to get more valuble pets and it hurts to see demand make people greedy.....demand can also be the cause of people making multiple accounts or hack others....its heartbreaking for example I have a friend who has been playing for a long time and introduced their sibling to the game and got them an account but after a while their sibling turned on them and got into their account making unfair trades to get their rare leading to BOTH of them being banned...my friend in turn losing theit account entirely because of their sibling...

[ThunderCedar]

It is true that we do not really know how rare pets are in relation to each other outside of rarity tags.
But, although rarity is a big factor - so is availability. Some pets are just harder to come across than others. If a pet was just released, it'll always be at its easiest to obtain - because most of the ones released are still on active accounts/have not yet been locked away/removed from circulation. The more you wait, the more of them get locked (in hoards, collections, NFT groups, etc).

That's why the older they are, the harder they tend to be to obtain.
Of course that's not the case for every pet. However, dates do matter in many cases.

[amarok.]

It is true that we do not really know how rare pets are in relation to each other outside of rarity tags.
But, although rarity is a big factor - so is availability. Some pets are just harder to come across than others. If a pet was just released, it'll always be at its easiest to obtain - because most of the ones released are still on active accounts/have not yet been locked away/removed from circulation. The more you wait, the more of them get locked (in hoards, collections, NFT groups, etc).

That's why the older they are, the harder they tend to be to obtain.
Of course that's not the case for every pet. However, dates do matter in many cases.

this is basically my thoughts to a t, but just phrased in a way that actually makes sense as opposed to my typical incoherent ramblings. the longer a pet is in circulation, the more likely it will find a forever home.

[Fayoumi]

It is true that we do not really know how rare pets are in relation to each other outside of rarity tags.
But, although rarity is a big factor - so is availability. Some pets are just harder to come across than others. If a pet was just released, it'll always be at its easiest to obtain - because most of the ones released are still on active accounts/have not yet been locked away/removed from circulation. The more you wait, the more of them get locked (in hoards, collections, NFT groups, etc).

That's why the older they are, the harder they tend to be to obtain.
Of course that's not the case for every pet. However, dates do matter in many cases.

This is very true. That being said I would argue that the general attractiveness of the pet may well have a stronger effect on how many are locked away than the age. When there are designs that are particularly popular there are often multiple people hoarding them before the end of the month and others that get them are putting them straight into their NFT groups. I feel it is an oddity of CS trading that it seems to be considered fine to add value to older pets based on what is only a guess that they might be rarer - and even to laugh or be rude to anyone who offers you something newer thinking it equal and yet the idea of something raising in value because it looks nice and no-one wants to trade theirs away seems to be considered almost evil. Why shouldn’t someone ask more for their new pet if it seems likely that if they trade it away they won’t be able to easily get another?

I could be wrong, so I would love it if someone could verify this but I seem to remember reading somewhere before that the cs rarity system stops counting pets from accounts that have been inactive for more than a certain length of time. If that is so it would not completely refute the concept that there are more inaccessible old pets within the rarity but it would certainly weaken it.

[Asvoria]

It is true that we do not really know how rare pets are in relation to each other outside of rarity tags.
But, although rarity is a big factor - so is availability. Some pets are just harder to come across than others. If a pet was just released, it'll always be at its easiest to obtain - because most of the ones released are still on active accounts/have not yet been locked away/removed from circulation. The more you wait, the more of them get locked (in hoards, collections, NFT groups, etc).

That's why the older they are, the harder they tend to be to obtain.
Of course that's not the case for every pet. However, dates do matter in many cases.

this is basically my thoughts to a t, but just phrased in a way that actually makes sense as opposed to my typical incoherent ramblings. the longer a pet is in circulation, the more likely it will find a forever home.

Yes, yes, totally agree.
It is alright to be suspicious when someone ask you to swap two pets of different years but same rarity.
I myself don't really know what to do with that information yet as it is opposing everything that I got to know about trading.
As long as you find a trading partner that is willing to negotiate, you can surely work something out, even if it means adding some more pets to your side to trade up or so.
You can always find someone who will pay more or pay less, but is it fun to wait for the best trade and make no progress to your collection?
It might be that your pet turns up a rarity next time the rarities are re-calculated, but that's not something we can really predict.
I think it's best to be less strict with rarity math and to just aim for the pets that you really want, even if you overpay or underpay a little, as long as both sides are happy with the outcome.
I think that is the trading spirit that we are all aiming for <3

[Aurora Storm]

It is true that we do not really know how rare pets are in relation to each other outside of rarity tags.
But, although rarity is a big factor - so is availability. Some pets are just harder to come across than others. If a pet was just released, it'll always be at its easiest to obtain - because most of the ones released are still on active accounts/have not yet been locked away/removed from circulation. The more you wait, the more of them get locked (in hoards, collections, NFT groups, etc).

That's why the older they are, the harder they tend to be to obtain.
Of course that's not the case for every pet. However, dates do matter in many cases.

this is basically my thoughts to a t, but just phrased in a way that actually makes sense as opposed to my typical incoherent ramblings. the longer a pet is in circulation, the more likely it will find a forever home.

Yes, yes, totally agree.
It is alright to be suspicious when someone ask you to swap two pets of different years but same rarity.
I myself don't really know what to do with that information yet as it is opposing everything that I got to know about trading.
As long as you find a trading partner that is willing to negotiate, you can surely work something out, even if it means adding some more pets to your side to trade up or so.
You can always find someone who will pay more or pay less, but is it fun to wait for the best trade and make no progress to your collection?
It might be that your pet turns up a rarity next time the rarities are re-calculated, but that's not something we can really predict.
I think it's best to be less strict with rarity math and to just aim for the pets that you really want, even if you overpay or underpay a little, as long as both sides are happy with the outcome.
I think that is the trading spirit that we are all aiming for <3

Yes yes yes. I decided to try this out yesterday because I haven't been shy of my opinion on rarity math and yknow, practice what you preach. And I completed my entire rare and below collection in 3 hours. And had people thanking me for trading them 2011 rares for 2016 rares. It felt so good, especially after being at a standstill in rare trades for so long. Rarity math is not realistic. If you have the pets to spare, I would encourage you all to trade based on rarity tags alone to see how far you can get (and maybe make someone's day along the way).

[Shinryu]

I could be wrong, so I would love it if someone could verify this but I seem to remember reading somewhere before that the cs rarity system stops counting pets from accounts that have been inactive for more than a certain length of time. If that is so it would not completely refute the concept that there are more inaccessible old pets within the rarity but it would certainly weaken it.

Inactive accounts and their pets are not counted towards rarity, that's correct.

But it's pretty much as Dioxeon said - with newly released rares you can usually still find a good amount of them in people's trade groups, because they just came out and a lot of people wouldn't have traded all their extras away already.
But the more time passes, the more of people's trade fodder finds its way into others' collections and hoards. Those pets are on active accounts, so they still exist as far as the rarity system is concerned, but their owners are usually intending to keep them, so they're not in circulation any more.
Additionally, more and more users will join who weren't around to adopt those pets themselves.
Most people who stop playing also never give away their collections before they quit, so you'll have a lot of people who collect pets, take those pets out of circulation and then quit, taking them out of the rarity count alltogether. And that is when it will affect the rarity tags eventually. So that's where old pets take the double hit - they've become scarce in people's trade groups as it is, and slowly get stuck on inactive accounts.
If it weren't for the re-release, that effect would be a lot more drastic, and the older a pet is, the more you'll notice it.