[🐝] Guide to Trading Every Pet on CS --- **being updated**

[Herald of the Arcane]

i feel like pets going for really different values than other pets of their rarities/year go for should be put into some guide as well even if they're not MAs/NONs. Thinking of pets like: gacha dog, valentine lioness, jack o lantern banner pumpkin dragon, and the fae event foxes. pets pictured below for clarity.




That is, if there is some way to collect enough recent trade data on them.

edit: basically like a guide like the idea on the post right above mine, which i really like, but including the different value pets in it

[fιяєfℓу]

i feel like pets going for really different values than other pets of their rarities/year go for should be put into some guide as well even if they're not MAs/NONs. Thinking of pets like: gacha dog, valentine lioness, jack o lantern banner pumpkin dragon, and the fae event foxes. pets pictured below for clarity.




That is, if there is some way to collect enough recent trade data on them.

edit: basically like a guide like the idea on the post right above mine, which i really like, but including the different value pets in it

I don't think we should separate them from the others as that could end up driving up the demand. Maybe a "Honorable Mention" section, stating some specific pets might trade for more than listed and list them there but not give them a specific value. But then, what would define how much overpay is enough for them to be worthy of being on the list? That'd be a bit tricky in my opinion.

[Miladux]

I don't know if this is already a thing, but maybe attached to whatever final 'tiers' we get can have threads attached that track what some of these more high demand rares are going for successfully and just pasted at the bottom. It allows people to gauge value, without creating a hype around it if its just a foot note.

[Cloverstream]

I like your breakdown a lot firefly!

And to those worried about 08 regular rares being valued the same as 09 regular rares- I wouldn’t worry that much because there essentially /are no 08 regular rares left/ as it is. Almost every single 2008 pet has a special list value anyways.

I could see a guide for more recent high demand rares being helpful. I feel like with things like those and true dates, it’s hard because no one wants to talk about it and drive up inflation on them, but it feels silly when you’re offering “fair swaps” for pets that no one is ever going to accept no matter how many people you ask- sometimes you just want someone to level with you and tell you what they are going for with demand. If it would help you Henry I’d also be willing to dig up my data on pets like that. They aren’t very dramatic overpay, but worth a little more than “regular rares” I’d say.

[Miladux]

CS is almost 16 years old. I do agree at this point it's quite unrealistic to use the 2:1 rule for rares. A 2009 would be 2 2010 rares, sure semi reasonable. But that would be hundreds of recent rares, which is just ridiculous. They are the same rarity after all. I do believe older rares should mantain a higher status so, I have a suggestion (unsure if this has been suggested before).
We could group rares into different groups, for example:
2008-2011 - Old Rares, Highest Tier, could be like Gold Tier for example (saw this idea somewhere before for lists I think)
2012-2015 - Semi-Old Rares - Silver Tier
2016-2019 - Semi-Recent Rares - Bronze Tier
2020-2023 - Recent Rares - Cooper Tier
Rares in same tier should be able to swap without problem. This is not the same as the "3 year rule", as I do not agree with it. By saying you can trade rares if their difference is less than 3 years you could theoretically trade a 2023 rare for a 2008 rare with just a few trades ( 2023 for 2020, 2020 for 2017 and so on). By keeping the tiers, this grants the older rares which are more likely to turn vr sooner a higher status than recent event pets.
So a Gold Rare could be worth 2 Silver rares, 4 Bronze rares or 8 Cooper rares. Seems way more realistic than a 2008 rare being worth thousands of 2023 rares.

This could also help with list trading, just like we valued lists in 2009 rares we could now value them in Gold Rares.

After reading some of the input, I have decided to rectify my suggestion.

Just wanted to make a quick note, this guide is meant to be used for regular rares. Just like a Raven won't swap for another ER, the Gacha Dog might not swap for another rare because of demand. That's irrelevant to the discussion as this is meant to serve as a general guideline for trading and not commend to every exception. Those are up to the users to decide their own values.

Back to the topic, after reading the replies to my post, it appears a lot of people would rather see a division in the Gold Tier. I agree, I initially planned to keep 2008 and 2009 rares separate but put them in with the others as I had seen a bunch of posts suggesting that and for the sake of simplicity. So that'd be something like:

2008-2009 - Oldest Rares - Platinum Tier
2010-2011 - Old Rares - Gold Tier
2012-2015 - Semi-Old Rares - Silver Tier
2016-2019 - Semi-Recent Rares - Bronze Tier
2020-2023 - Recent Rares- Cooper Tier

As for swaps between tiers, after a bit more thought I have a new suggestion:
1 Platinum Rare equals 2 Gold Rares
1 Gold Rare equals 2 Silver Rares
1 Silver Rare equals 2 Bronze Rares
Gap
1 Bronze Rare equals 2 Cooper Rares OR 1.5 Cooper Rares

So this would be something like, 1 2009 rare = 2 2010 rares or 4 2013 rares or 8 2018 rares or 16 2023 rares with the 2:1 ratio.
Or, 1 2009 rare = 2 2010 rares = 4 2013 rares = 8 2017 rares = 12 2022 rares with a 1.5:1 ratio for bronze and cooper.
I'm aware the 1.5 swap could complicate it a bit, although it seems fairer to me. Let me know your thoughts on it! (As in, a Cooper Rare and a Cooper EU for a Bronze Rare for example)

I think the groups could be the same for Extremly Uncommon and Uncommon pets, but with all tiers with a 2:1 ratio for swaps.
Possibly something similar for under uncommon pets, but with more years grouped together and less tiers.

Sorry for the long post oop

Don't say sorry about post length! I really think your onto something. And it provides a objectively fair outcome imo. My personal opinion is what you've put forward is a really good foundation. I think it just comes down to working out the kinks.

Another thing I wanted to mention. Regarding the new OMGSR's, what are peoples thoughts on tiering the 'top list' where all the OMGS's are based on the dates of the rarity changes? Obviously this is in place for some pets already. But I think its as close as we can have knowledge to actual scarcity as the dates of those decisions are directly influenced by the number of pets on the site,.

Thinking maybe the MA's that went OMGSR might be looking at being the new bottom of the 'main list' (from back in the day lol).

[lil rascal]

I posted this on another thread but am going to post it here too now that discussion of OMGSRs has come up again as it’s something that had never really registered with me before.

I read a theory on one of the threads about how OMGSR and the rereleases works and it makes a lot of sense to me considering we have been told that the purpose of the re-release is to ensure that no non-store pet becomes so rare that it’s impossible to find. We have been following a system which assumes all pets just keep getting rarer as they age. However this theory is that, due to CS not wanting any non-store pet to drop out of circulation, the system has an upper threshold limit for (non-store) OMGSRs and when those pets reach that threshold the system releases more of those pets in the next rerelease to bring them back below the threshold. This would explain why there are often more of the rarer outcomes in multi outcome rereleases than would be expected.

This theory would throw the idea of pets continuing to become rarer and rarer the longer they’re OMGSR on it’s head as it would mean at most we really only have three groups in OMGSRs:

Pets that have been OMGSR for years or since their release (at or near upper threshold)
Pets that used to be VR and turned OMGSR before this update (midrange)
Pets that have never been OMGSR before this update ( near the lower threshold)

* Keep in mind that this is only talking about normal pets that are rereleased every Dec 18, not retired store pets that are never going to be rereleased.

[SolarSonnet]

Woah, gold gacha dog is going for that much nowadays?

That's nuts.

-

Also, I didn't mean to come off as closed-minded and I apologize for seeming hostile.

My own opinions have changed quite a lot over the course of the discussion, so I am open to other perspectives. I try to preface when things are my opinion as opposed to things I've researched as well. So, to re-iterate, As far as my knowledge goes, people seem to want some kind of rarity system like this guide, even with multiple posts saying that trading is confusing, that's kind of what we're here to discuss. A way to make trading less confusing, while still being fair.

I came up with equations for a +2+1 method, I came up with the new graph that puts 09r at 12 2023 rares, and I gave my two cents on the Gold/Silver/Bronze tier system.

I do tend to come off really strongly and over-invested despite being open to discussion, and I'm quite bad at coming off as non-hostile which is why I will sometimes preface specifically that I'm not meaning to seem rude/angry/upset/etc. It's just hard to do that for every post.

I've sent out apology dms before to people who seemed to take my posts with a hostile tone when that wasn't how I intended them to come off.

I'm extremely uh.. Bad. At communicating tone through text. So I'm sorry if anyone has felt put-off or offended by something I've said.

--

With all of that said:
Firefly, I really like your revision! The one thing I'd be a little bit weird about with trading 1.5 on the last tier is that 2016 and 2023 seem very far away. So maybe an additional like, it's more of the 2018-2019 part that trades 1.5 with 2020-2023, and then the 2016-2017 still trades 2:1?

Then again, that's just me and might not be the best to make a 'rule' rule when I can just throw it in my trade rules if this becomes the standard.

[Miladux]

No worries Solar! I'm sorry if I came off stroppy myself! I definitley do respect your views and you know alot more than me! I'm not as blessed in math as you are! You've put alot of effort into contributing to this discussion and thats nothing scoff at <3

I agree with your point to regarding the 1.5 swaps to, interesting point to bring up

[Bronze!]

Obviously what this whole thread needs is more math theory... I don't think there's a way to replace the 2:1 rule with a new rolling rule, is the problem, and that just comes down to how rarity works. I mean, outside of URs and wonky demand, the basic rarity calculation is a function of two things: the relatively rarity of outcomes in a given litter, and the number of players who were around to adopt it, right? So the real calculation we're trying to figure out is the relative number of active players from each year. Obviously plenty of people active today have taken hiatuses at some point between when they joined and now, but for simplicity's sake, we're assuming everyone who joined in 2008 or 2009 adopted the 2009 pets, and the next year, 2008-2010 people adopted the 2010 pets, and in 2011 it was 2008-2011, etc. So the 2:1 ratio between years has historically assumed that every year, there are about twice as many of the new pets being adopted. Except we can pretty easily figure out that this isn't the case.

With every year that goes by, we have fewer and fewer extras from those earlier years, which is the thing the new rarity changes can't accurately account for (even if they are factoring in inactive accounts), and is the thing a lot of people here have already mentioned. The 2010 people picked up most of the 2009 extras for their collections, so there weren't as many left for the future members and thus everything gets rarer. But at this point, yeah, there's a negligible difference between the number of 2010 and 2009 rares left over and 2009/2010 members still active. And the pets from 2009 that are still rare and not VR were super common when I started. Like, I picked up most of them from free adoptions, there were so many. Nobody was making a big deal at that point about trading them for 2010s because we were talking what would now probably be in the omgsc-vc range. So I would still argue for a 2009 rare = a 2010 rare (probably + an uncommon, in practice, because old habits die hard) and then 2 '09 or '10 rares for an '09 VR, which would more or less maintain the values we had pre-update, really.

But also, a lot more people joined in 2011-2013. Like, a LOT more. Right away, about 50% more people joined in 2011 than in 2010. In terms of overall membership, for reference, we're currently at about member #1,090,000. Roughly 400,000 of those accounts were made from 2011-2013. Pets in that range still get rarer with time, sure, but I think it's worth factoring in these numbers if you want to build a rarity math system that can last. Since then, membership has fallen off but fluctuates a bit year to year, and I think the within 3 years rule starts making more sense.

So basically, my adjustment to the tiers suggestion above:

1 2009 rare = 2010 rare (or platinum, if you like)
[2:1 gap]
1 2011 rare = 1 2012 = 1 2013 (gold)
[2:1 gap]
1 2014 = 1 2015 = 1 2016 (silver)
[2:1 gap]
1 2017 = 1 2018 = 1 2019 (bronze)
[+1 gap - neater than 1.5 imo]
1 2020 = 1 2021 = 1 2022 (copper)
[+1 gap]
<current year here>

This at least gives new members the chance to trade up, but exactly how it converts to moving up to MA+ is a trickier question. This would give us 1 '09 VR = 2 '10 rares = 4 '11s = 8 '14s = 16 '17s = 17 '20s = 18 '23s, which, I dunno. I think we might be doing this part backwards. We can all agree that north of a thousand 2023 rares for 1 '09 is ridiculous, but 10 feels a little low. Maybe we should be asking people's minimum current year rare : '09 rare exchange rate, and then adjust the gaps between the new tiers accordingly.

[72027]

After reading some of the input, I have decided to rectify my suggestion.

Just wanted to make a quick note, this guide is meant to be used for regular rares. Just like a Raven won't swap for another ER, the Gacha Dog might not swap for another rare because of demand. That's irrelevant to the discussion as this is meant to serve as a general guideline for trading and not commend to every exception. Those are up to the users to decide their own values.

Back to the topic, after reading the replies to my post, it appears a lot of people would rather see a division in the Gold Tier. I agree, I initially planned to keep 2008 and 2009 rares separate but put them in with the others as I had seen a bunch of posts suggesting that and for the sake of simplicity. So that'd be something like:

2008-2009 - Oldest Rares - Platinum Tier
2010-2011 - Old Rares - Gold Tier
2012-2015 - Semi-Old Rares - Silver Tier
2016-2019 - Semi-Recent Rares - Bronze Tier
2020-2023 - Recent Rares- Cooper Tier

As for swaps between tiers, after a bit more thought I have a new suggestion:
1 Platinum Rare equals 2 Gold Rares
1 Gold Rare equals 2 Silver Rares
1 Silver Rare equals 2 Bronze Rares
Gap
1 Bronze Rare equals 2 Cooper Rares OR 1.5 Cooper Rares

So this would be something like, 1 2009 rare = 2 2010 rares or 4 2013 rares or 8 2018 rares or 16 2023 rares with the 2:1 ratio.
Or, 1 2009 rare = 2 2010 rares = 4 2013 rares = 8 2017 rares = 12 2022 rares with a 1.5:1 ratio for bronze and cooper.
I'm aware the 1.5 swap could complicate it a bit, although it seems fairer to me. Let me know your thoughts on it! (As in, a Cooper Rare and a Cooper EU for a Bronze Rare for example)

I think the groups could be the same for Extremly Uncommon and Uncommon pets, but with all tiers with a 2:1 ratio for swaps.
Possibly something similar for under uncommon pets, but with more years grouped together and less tiers.

Sorry for the long post oop

i like the new revisions! i wouldnt mind a system like this. also, for pets with extra demand, might i suggest what they did on horror's list? pets with higher demand were highlighted a certain color and pets with lower demand were highlighted another color. this way, there was no set worth, other than the base worth, and it was up to the players to determine how much they think the demand should be. as demand is entirely subjective.

my only worry with this tiering is that there will be confusion about the worth of pets between tiers. a 2015 rare is in one tier while a 2016 rare is in an entirely different tier. in reality, there is not much difference between the worth of these two pets. but this tiering implies that a 2015 rare is worth either two 2016 rares or two 2019 rares, which doesnt seem right. while i think users may come together to figure something out, is there possibly a detail you could add to address this? its confusing me a bit and im sure new users may have even more confusion about it.

(btw i think you mean copper, not cooper)