New Trading Standards Discussion (please join in!)

[Loelya]

If we can I think we should take this chance to update the valuing everything in 09 rares system too ^^ I swear I feel like thats been the method since like 2010 lol. We only have 16 2009 rares (+ 6 extended releases and 2 from 08, for a total of 24 pets) when there used to be hundreds; almost everything from 2009 is at least VR now, plus they're just super old

If we do go the counting things as 1 standard year route again, we should move to 2010 or 2011. We have around 433 2011 rares or 348 2010 rares now and those would be more accessible as the default than 09s at this point

I also do like the 5 year rule. I've been going by a vague personal 3-4 year-ish rule myself with rare pet swaps before, and I think 5 works now with how many new rarities we have and 15+ years worth of pets

I gotcha! so you're thinking that a new possibility for evaluating value would be moving away from the "2009 rares" and switching out for something with more stable rarity to be our new default? I definitely agree that if we stuck to a single rare category as the base unit then we should move to a different year! I'll add this as a discussion point to the first post~

[Sashtato]

for anyone interested in giving a reply, how would you feel about creating a new base system for values something like this?

if there is an OMGSR special release within a given year, what if we valued that based on rares from the same year? instead of trying to define everything based on one type of rare from one year (like everything always being valued by '09 rares?.)

for example, what if we said that an OMGSR from 2009 was worth something like 100 rares from 2009? and a 2010 OMGSR was worth 100 rares from 2010?

if we applied this as a standard, like, 100 rares is equal in value to a pet you have a chance of pulling in that year's dec 18th boxes, then we could tweak it up or down for pets that are either event or month releases that ended up with that label, or for store pets that are known to have higher demand and rarity over time.

Just wanted to jump in and say that I LOVE this idea! Maybe store pets can be something like 5 rares of the same year, or whatever people think is fair. Maybe 5 for a store rare, 10 for a store VR, 15 for a store ER? Just brainstorming!

[Loelya]

Just wanted to jump in and say that I LOVE this idea! Maybe store pets can be something like 5 rares of the same year, or whatever people think is fair. Maybe 5 for a store rare, 10 for a store VR, 15 for a store ER? Just brainstorming!

these are some great ideas! I love this sort of dynamic approach. I hope there's some interest in a discussion between this as a potential method vs adopting a new "standard" like with Horror's suggestion.

[Finch Fry]

Personally I really only partake in high value trades these days, so I feel very uncomfortable trading those pets without some sort of guide to follow atm.

[Loelya]

Personally I really only partake in high value trades these days, so I feel very uncomfortable trading those pets without some sort of guide to follow atm.

that’s understandable, it can be easy to feel paralyzed if you’re worried about making a mistake you can’t recover from. :0

[WingedWolfPsion]

Honestly, I absolutely feel that the rarity tags are now very much in line with the value of the pets (demand aside), but I can't trade that way unless everyone else is doing so, as I'll find my pets devalued and be unable to get the ones I want in trade. So, here's hoping that at least the 5 year rule sticks. I think valuing pets based on date is unfair to site newbies, because those pets aren't actually any less common than younger ones.

I wish people would go for trading straight to rarity tags, though, I really do.

For rarity, the 2:1 valuation is easy and very fair, except for OMGSR because some pets with that tag are significantly more rare than others (for all we know, there's some pet on the site that there is only one left of, or something, lol). Those will still have to be calculated largely by feel and demand. But everything else can be simplified fairly.

[AhoyCookie]

ahh i honestly cant decide how i wanna go from here... i understand that the rarity tags are based off their actual rarity and availability on the site, but i cant help but find more value in older pets even if new pets are literally just as rare... maybe date will become more of a vanity thing from now

[kes.]

I don't do a lot of trading at higher values/rarities & older dates, and trading pets of that nature has always been super intimidating to me. I'm always worried about misjudging a pet's value. This update definitely makes things more clear in terms of pure rarity values, so that just leaves date and demand as additional factors.

I like the idea of changing the 2:1 rule. While it works in some cases (such as lower rarities), it just becomes unrealistic at higher rarities/older dates. While date is still important, I don't think that as much value should be placed on it as there is. I like the idea of a 5-year rule, though honestly, 5 years seems like a little bit of a big gap to me ^^' I think personally I would value rarities with about a 3-year gap on the same level. So, taking demand out of the equation, a 2023 rare is about the same as a 2020 rare. But to me, a 2018 rare would be on a higher level.

As much as it would be nice to be able to use the rarity levels as the only metric, I think it's unrealistic.

[Loelya]

Honestly, I absolutely feel that the rarity tags are now very much in line with the value of the pets (demand aside), but I can't trade that way unless everyone else is doing so, as I'll find my pets devalued and be unable to get the ones I want in trade. So, here's hoping that at least the 5 year rule sticks. I think valuing pets based on date is unfair to site newbies, because those pets aren't actually any less common than younger ones.

I wish people would go for trading straight to rarity tags, though, I really do.

For rarity, the 2:1 valuation is easy and very fair, except for OMGSR because some pets with that tag are significantly more rare than others (for all we know, there's some pet on the site that there is only one left of, or something, lol). Those will still have to be calculated largely by feel and demand. But everything else can be simplified fairly.

I'm vibin with ya honestly! I think it'd be most ideal if we just went straight to trading by rarity tags, but I could definitely see the slight preference for older dates being hard to shake completely; including for myself. I'm hopeful the 5 year rule pulls through too.

and the 2:1 valuation between rarities other than OMGSR feels like it makes a lot of sense, too. I might end up doing that poll next unless there's another topic that really picks up speed between now and then.

ahh i honestly cant decide how i wanna go from here... i understand that the rarity tags are based off their actual rarity and availability on the site, but i cant help but find more value in older pets even if new pets are literally just as rare... maybe date will become more of a vanity thing from now

it's honestly hard to figure these things out after such a big change! maybe it'll be easier to chew on if more players give their thoughts and opinions over time.

I don't do a lot of trading at higher values/rarities & older dates, and trading pets of that nature has always been super intimidating to me. I'm always worried about misjudging a pet's value. This update definitely makes things more clear in terms of pure rarity values, so that just leaves date and demand as additional factors.

I like the idea of changing the 2:1 rule. While it works in some cases (such as lower rarities), it just becomes unrealistic at higher rarities/older dates. While date is still important, I don't think that as much value should be placed on it as there is. I like the idea of a 5-year rule, though honestly, 5 years seems like a little bit of a big gap to me ^^' I think personally I would value rarities with about a 3-year gap on the same level. So, taking demand out of the equation, a 2023 rare is about the same as a 2020 rare. But to me, a 2018 rare would be on a higher level.

As much as it would be nice to be able to use the rarity levels as the only metric, I think it's unrealistic.

a 3 year gap instead of a 5 year gap would still be better than no change in my opinion! C: I wonder if anyone else feels that a 3 year gap would be easier to move to? (open invitation to post if you think so!)

[bubblegumjello]

i feel like a 3-5 year gap is completely reasonable when it comes to rare and below. dates are always a pain to factor in. take for example a 2013 rare for a 2018 rare, doesnt sound so bad but then you got a 2018 rare for a 2023 rare, so then doesnt that mean a 2013 rare = 2023 rare? technically yes, but in practice i highly doubt anyone would do that. but ig the issue then would the 2023 rare is seen as “less rare” and easier to get than say a 2013 rare? even though they are the same? maybe as a general guide 3 year gap for years prior to 2016 and 5 for after 2017? something like that may make sense but im not sure exactly what the cut off should be.

i feel like an omgsr = omgsr no ifs ands or buts, especially right now. their rarity tags are new and the most accurate at this moment. i know store pets and some of the other omgsr are more popular, but there’s always gonna be exceptions to the 1:1 trades.

i feel the general guideline should be same year, same species, same rarity. or at least follow 2/3 of those guidelines (ex: same rarity and year, same species and rarity, etc). thats a very rough guideline and im sure it fan be better finetuned


ultimately i think a simpler guideline is what we want/deserve. something that is easy for new players/traders to pick up on :D