[🐝] Guides to Trading Every Pet on CS * NEW THREAD! *

[Dreams of Roses]

Haven't looked at this post in a while and I must say I love the new update. You've really outdone yourself listing all of the VRs, and I can't help but find the big chunky "regular VR" tier from the 2019 rarity update kinda funny. Also super cool that you've listed all the special demand regular rares--I've been hoping someone would make a guide for those for reference. Truly this is a worthy successor to the "old" list, And I love that it clearly shows the discrepancies between demand and actual rarity. Finally I must say that I'm really happy to see the new updated store pet list, it's very helpful for specifying which pets trade for more than the normal yearly value. Before this I couldn't really find a place where all that was outlined. Thanks for all your hard work, I'm sure this list will be incredibly useful for many years to come!

[DarkNights]

hope its okay that i mark this lol

[the]

mark (:

[Horror]

useful info, useless info, previous poll results, maybe a faq

Previous Poll Results

"Do you support the idea of the thread's rarity list?"
Yes because I want a rarity list to trade by that makes sense
Yes because I just miss the rares list
I support the idea, but maybe a different execution of it
No
I’m not sure / I just want to vote

Total votes : 1616
1037 [64%]
134 [8%]
114 [7%]
159 [10%]
172 [11%]

"If they're all from the same year, How many Uncommons = a Rare pet to you?"
5 or more Uncommons = Rare
4 Uncommons = Rare
3 Uncommons = Rare
2 Uncommons = Rare
I use 2:1 for old pets, but More for recent pets
I use 4:1 for old pets, but Less for recent pets
It just depends on demand, I'll expect/pay more for a good rare and less for a bad one
I just use whatever the person I'm trading uses
A different method not listed here
I’m not sure / I just want to vote

Total votes : 2248
146 [6%]
273 [12%]
257 [11%]
630 [28%]
72 [3%]
88 [4%]
494 [22%]
57 [3%]
20 [1%]
211 [9%]

"(Only applies to pets above the non tier) Combine the top rarest OMGSRs into 1 Tier or 2 Tiers?"
1 Tier. I think with the new update it matters less what they were 5 or more years ago, and they're still the rarest anyways
2 Tiers, I don't think all of those pets belong together even with the new changes and still need some division

Total votes : 126
42 [33%]
84 [67%]

"What should we do with the last "list" pets that DIDN'T go OMGSR?"
Make them one large group of High Extremely Rares. I think they're all close enough to be together now/think one group will make trading less strict
Merge them into two small groups. I think they should still have a bit of separation, even with the big rarity update

Total votes : 96
61 [64%]
35 [36%]

[musicgurl333]

I actually did a similar poll a couple of years ago on this thread. Obviously it’s not current, but I thought it might be interesting to compare the older and newer poll results.

I might actually try to revive that thread in the near future. I just got too busy to keep it up.

[Wookieinmashoo]

I chose 5:1 for the old poll, and other for this one as I've changed it a bit. I do 5:1 from current year to 2014. for 2013 in can be 4/5:1 and reduce it for older years from there. I don't actually trade uncommons for rares, but animal eggs instead so my experience may be skewed because of people's dislike for items in general.
I don't think 2:1 for uncommons is reasonable unless for older years simply because of the ratios we have been given. They're old, but it's at least something to go off of even after the shuffling of the rarities.

[Dawn.]

I chose 5:1 for the old poll, and other for this one as I've changed it a bit. I do 5:1 from current year to 2014. for 2013 in can be 4/5:1 and reduce it for older years from there. I don't actually trade uncommons for rares, but animal eggs instead so my experience may be skewed because of people's dislike for items in general.
I don't think 2:1 for uncommons is reasonable unless for older years simply because of the ratios we have been given. They're old, but it's at least something to go off of even after the shuffling of the rarities.

Its true, i am sure that ratio has been a thing since before i joined in 2013. This was back before c$ was incredibly common and less users too. If i had to guess anyways. The ratio deff needs to be updated due to present cs economy.

I do like that, the ratio seems to depend a lot on the date of the pet and whether or not its a store pet. Even then year still applies in this case~

[musicgurl333]

I kind of wish that “it depends” hadn’t been included as an option. I feel like it doesn’t really give much information, and it’s drawing votes away from the other categories. I mean, to me it seems obvious that of course it depends. I think nearly everyone could honestly put that as an answer. I almost did myself, until I considered that if everyone did that, then the poll wouldn’t really paint a very clear picture of how many uncommons people trade in general for rares.

[Panne]

I kind of wish that “it depends” hadn’t been included as an option. I feel like it doesn’t really give much information, and it’s drawing votes away from the other categories. I mean, to me it seems obvious that of course it depends. I think nearly everyone could honestly put that as an answer. I almost did myself, until I considered that if everyone did that, then the poll wouldn’t really paint a very clear picture of how many uncommons people trade in general for rares.

I definitely agree to a point! Really, all CS rarities other than the tag they are given are largely subjective, so every trade depends on things like user preferences and biases so I don't think its a really productive answer. However, it does still gather data on people that dont strictly adhere to one single ratio and value pets for their demand over anything else.

Personally, I use 2:1 across the board for no reason other than it makes the most sense to me and it better keeps trades from becoming a headache to calculate when it comes to bulk. I could get on board with upping that number, but my reasoning below still pretty much stays the same and I prefer to keep the same ratio across years.
In general I'm personally not really too picky with newer pets and it seems a little bit pointless to me to change the "rule" depending on year, unless of course the pet has some special demand warranting more value.
To me, it doesn't really matter what year the pet is from when considering same year trades. When trading across just rarities, the gaps between rarities arent going to be as dramatic as trading across years (excluding outliers in demand that raise it's effective value). A 2010 rare and a 2010 uncommon are both worth more than recent rares and uncommons due to age and amount in circulation(and are likely to go up in rarity before newer pets), so that, I think, balances out the need to add more uncommons. And with more recent pets, they're just easier to trade for in general because there are going to be more in circulation, so I dont really see why they would require more uncommons than an older pet to bridge that gap.

That's just my rationale though, I'm definitely not a trading expert and some intricacies may be lost on me, and I am also pretty indifferent when trading pets that arent lists or that I dont have attachment to.
I'm also really bad at explaining my thoughts, so hopefully my rambling makes sense.

[×Seven of Nine×]

It DOES depend because as we see in the poll, people will value differently.