eleventh hour wrote:support!
while this might be controversial and I'm not sure if this had been said somewhere, i think a big way to get c$ value up is to stop allowing offsite trading. this makes rarer pets even harder to get because huge hoards of rare pets are locked behind a gem (or other) pricetag, meaning users will spend money on other sites which makes pets on this site harder to get only further driving inflation. i'm not targeting anyone but I've seen huge groups of even "regular" rare pets locked behind a fr/offsite only trade tag. i'm guilty of buying gems to get pets on here as well, but i really think it's harming the c$ economy
I think this is an extremely important point - because now people are taking their currency to a game that has shown to be consistent. There are some accounts that have extremely rare pets that they're asking 30,000+ gems for, which is over 300 USD. Why allow off-site trading in the first place? That in itself lowers the values of the pets on the site because then people can make up whatever they want for the pet in another site's currency.
Also, I think that part of the reason inflation has gotten so bad is because of the rarity scale. I think there needs to be clear lines for rarities. I'm not 100% sure how they do it, but the rarity scale using a normal distribution does not make sense when there are so many pets on the website. I think they need to give away less pets for free, less items for free, and make the rarities more clear. For example, the rarities are not based on dates, which I think they should be. Why can a dog from 09 and a dog from 2023 both be labeled as rare? As time goes on, there is a reason why CS players are valuing older pets as more rare, so they should have a different label. Continuously adding more and more rarities, however, is not going to work with the amount of pets we have on the site. The lines for rarities need to be drawn more clearly. Who cares if it follows a normal distribution curve or not.