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

[kyte]

Honestly, ever since the rarity update, trading has felt.... I don't want to use the word broken, but it feels like it. I don't have a clue what to offer anymore and many people I trade with echo my sentiment.

I hear some people say there's now less distance between pets across years, so there's now fairness for pets within 3 years of each other, and plenty of others still follow the 3 month rule.

The distance between one rarity to the next is now even harder to determine- is one common worth two very commons? Or is it a very common and an extremely common? Or something different entirely? Is this distance between rarities the same across all rarities (i.e., are a rare and very rare the same distance apart as an EC and VC?) Rarity math previously had years of trades to back up the community created values, but now it just feels like everyone is lost while a few are pretending to understand exactly what is going on so long as it benefits them.

I don't know if it's because I'm autistic and prefer having very set in stone guidelines, but this is why I dislike user-based economies- especially when there are changes as drastic as the one that happened here, and when rarities are CONSTANTLY updating (oh, this pet you thought was a middle ground UC is now a VUC, while these others you thought were borderline VUC are still UC!). I like the concept of having the extra rarities because in theory, it makes each individual pet's rarity marker more accurate, and therefore SHOULD be easier to trade- but it's only made things harder since we were given a new system and absolutely zero guidance on how to use it. :(

[musicgurl333]

Does anyone have a guide for trading pets with rarities “between years” this guide has a section on it but it hasn’t been updated with any information yet.

I'm not sure if there is one. Things are still sort of in flux. Some people have moved to a "3 year rule", at least for older pets. Some people are still sticking to the "2:1 rule" that they're used to. (Which NEVER made any sense, even before the rarity change, and it makes less sense now.) Those are two of the most popular systems right now for trading between years, but there are a lot of variations. Some people only use the 3 year rule with pets after 2012. I've seen a couple if people using a 5 year rule. Some people are using a +1 rule between years instead of doubling. And then you have a few people still using the 3 month rule. So it's really sort of all over the place. You just have to find someone who shares your trading opinions.

Personally, I think the 3 year rule seems reasonable, and that's what I've been using in my own trades. It allows for a lot more flexibility, while still acknowledging that older pets are a bit harder to find. I know some people have said that it doesn't make sense because you could trade up a '24 rare for a '10 rare in just a few jumps, but you also could have traded up a '24 rare for a '10 rare using the old 3 month rule...this is just fewer steps.

Pet rarity just doesn't increase very much in the short term. It usually takes YEARS for a pet to go up in rarity, so saying that 1 2020 uncommon is equal to 16 2024 uncommons is just crazy to me.

[Horror]

Does anyone have a guide for trading pets with rarities “between years” this guide has a section on it but it hasn’t been updated with any information yet.

In addition to musicgurl333's explanation, I'll be setting up a poll on the thread to see how people prefer trading between years. It'll be up for a while just to see how people like to trade now

something like
3 year rule
5 year rule
+2 rule
2:1 rule
'i mainly trade by vibes'
'i don't trade by dates at all'

With the recent rarity update the Red Kneed Tarantula has dropped from Extremely Rare to just Very Rare so I'm wondering if it'll change tiers?
I'm unsure if any other pets have had the same happen, I only know because I'm collecting all the spiders and it's one of the last I need

[Update] A couple others changed as mentioned in this forum: Forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=4014876

yeah, pets in "tier 7" / "tier 8" may move slightly between tiers when they change rarity labels since these are the pets that are basically just "ERs closer to VR" and "VRs closer to ER". The PPS pony that just went down actually only went up in January too, and we had one other pet go up to ER from VR in November



Those pets have been moved now and I'm working on updating Demand again this month. Sorry for taking so long to get to this, I'm really burnt out lately. Thank you everyone for your patience

[Audrey_Bee]

I hope its okay to post, but I'm stuck between the options of using the 2:1 rule and using different rules because they both apply and don't at the same time.

I use the 2:1 rule until it comes to rarer, older pets like vrs. but I don't really use other "rules", at that point I take into account all kinds of different factors (date, rarity, demand, species, design, personal preference etc) and I'm so strongly against the 3 year rule that I don't want to be put in the category by proxy 😂
Edit to show why I don't think the 3 year rule works:
Like "oh you got your 2021 common pet 3 years ago and it's probably going to turn uncommon a lot sooner? Well too darn bad! *slaps 2024 common in your face*
"Oh you got a 2018 common? That super cool! *slaps the 2021 common in your face*
"Ooo a 2015 common, just want I wanted! *gently passes over the 2018 common*
"Omg I've always wanted this 2012 common in l like all my life TAKEMY2015COMMON!!!"

Then suddenly you've gone from a 2024 common to a 2012 common worth SO much more for nothing at all. That renders anything from the last 15 years completely useless. Good job, you smushed the trading system!!! *thumbs up*

Is it possible to either let us choose two options or have an option that is "I use the 2:1 rule for rares and lower" or something ? ❤️ or is that getting too specific?

[jprspereira]

2:1 is pure scam. I'll give you my 2014 rare for 2 2015 rares, then sell them for C$, buy a rare 2014 again, and still profit near 100%.

Do not support 2:1. This is not 2014.

I've seen some insane trades of people flexing their 1 rare for dozens of rares. It's disgusting not gonna lie. Yeah, congratz on drying 1 account out of rares for a 30C$ pet. 1 pet worth 30C$ suddenly became 500-1000C$ in rares. Fair, right?

I'm all in favor of people getting richer by searching for good deals. 2:1 is not that.

I've done hundreds of trades every day for the 6 months I've played. Barely anyone agrees doing the 2:1 rule when it's me giving the older year pet. This makes me suspect that people only want the 2:1 rule to stay relevant so they can be on the side that gets bulk. Of course, it's an easy overpay trade to take if you're getting the bulk side.

When there's a gap of 2-3 years and I'm the one taking bulk, that works. People are willing to do bulk for an older pet. Mind you, the person getting the bulk is still decently better off with this rule in most cases.


My opinion is: 3 year rule for latest years is not bad at all. For the oldest pets, 2:1 starts making more sense, but I still feel like 1.5:1 would be more accurate. For the sake of simplicity, I guess 2:1 in trades between 2011-2014 could be tolerated.

[ACat]

I've seen a few people mention that all rares should be valued the same, old or new, so I was wondering do you think that'll become a general rule at all? They are the same rarity after all just different years, and they can get re-released anyway. It would make sense tbh and maybe make trading easier for newer players who can't access 'old rares' as easily

[Space Cadet Marz]

I've seen a few people mention that all rares should be valued the same, old or new, so I was wondering do you think that'll become a general rule at all? They are the same rarity after all just different years, and they can get re-released anyway. It would make sense tbh and maybe make trading easier for newer players who can't access 'old rares' as easily

Not at all, because the more years you go back, the fewer users their were, so statistically there are less of those pets. Also the more pets are added, the lesser the odds for each pet to turn up in the rerelease. So if it were 2014, you'd only have a chance of getting 8 years worth of pets, where as 2024, you have 16 years worth of pets that can turn up, thus drastically reducing the odds of getting certain pets from certain years.

[ACat]

I've seen a few people mention that all rares should be valued the same, old or new, so I was wondering do you think that'll become a general rule at all? They are the same rarity after all just different years, and they can get re-released anyway. It would make sense tbh and maybe make trading easier for newer players who can't access 'old rares' as easily

Not at all, because the more years you go back, the fewer users their were, so statistically there are less of those pets. Also the more pets are added, the lesser the odds for each pet to turn up in the rerelease. So if it were 2014, you'd only have a chance of getting 8 years worth of pets, where as 2024, you have 16 years worth of pets that can turn up, thus drastically reducing the odds of getting certain pets from certain years.

I get what you mean in that sense!

Maybe I'm just being stupid but like.. if there's less of the older rares then shouldn't they be a higher rarity? That's kind of the whole point of a rarity system after all. In theory all rare pets should be about the same level of rarity, same with VRs, commons, etc. Obviously that's discounting pets with specific demands. The whole point of adding more rares into monthly litters was so they'd be accessible to newer players so it's a little counter intuitive having them worth less than other rares just because they didn't play then.

[Space Cadet Marz]

I've seen a few people mention that all rares should be valued the same, old or new, so I was wondering do you think that'll become a general rule at all? They are the same rarity after all just different years, and they can get re-released anyway. It would make sense tbh and maybe make trading easier for newer players who can't access 'old rares' as easily

Not at all, because the more years you go back, the fewer users their were, so statistically there are less of those pets. Also the more pets are added, the lesser the odds for each pet to turn up in the rerelease. So if it were 2014, you'd only have a chance of getting 8 years worth of pets, where as 2024, you have 16 years worth of pets that can turn up, thus drastically reducing the odds of getting certain pets from certain years.

I get what you mean in that sense!

Maybe I'm just being stupid but like.. if there's less of the older rares then shouldn't they be a higher rarity? That's kind of the whole point of a rarity system after all. In theory all rare pets should be about the same level of rarity, same with VRs, commons, etc. Obviously that's discounting pets with specific demands. The whole point of adding more rares into monthly litters was so they'd be accessible to newer players so it's a little counter intuitive having them worth less than other rares just because they didn't play then.

I think the rarities are based on a scale right? Like 1-200 = OMGSR (this is just an example, I don't know actually what the scale is), so I wish we could know exactly how many of something exists out there, it'd be cool, but I also get why they don't let us know. lol.
I think it's all a little confusing for me these days honestly. I also feel like.. because of hoards (which I am not bashing!) that a lot of older pets, even if there are just as many as say a 2024 rare from this Easter event, they are primarily held up in hoards and harder to get, so people value them higher; especially high demand pets like the GSDs and White February dog, which a lot of people hoard. That's one of the reasons I think people wouldn't get behind something like that too.

[musicgurl333]

I've seen a few people mention that all rares should be valued the same, old or new, so I was wondering do you think that'll become a general rule at all? They are the same rarity after all just different years, and they can get re-released anyway. It would make sense tbh and maybe make trading easier for newer players who can't access 'old rares' as easily

Not at all, because the more years you go back, the fewer users their were, so statistically there are less of those pets. Also the more pets are added, the lesser the odds for each pet to turn up in the rerelease. So if it were 2014, you'd only have a chance of getting 8 years worth of pets, where as 2024, you have 16 years worth of pets that can turn up, thus drastically reducing the odds of getting certain pets from certain years.

I get what you mean in that sense!

Maybe I'm just being stupid but like.. if there's less of the older rares then shouldn't they be a higher rarity? That's kind of the whole point of a rarity system after all. In theory all rare pets should be about the same level of rarity, same with VRs, commons, etc. Obviously that's discounting pets with specific demands. The whole point of adding more rares into monthly litters was so they'd be accessible to newer players so it's a little counter intuitive having them worth less than other rares just because they didn't play then.

The reason why older pets are worth more because they're often (but not always) harder to find than newer rares. Newer rares tend to circulate around a bit more, where older rares are more likely to be locked in collections. Also, older rares usually (but not always) increase in rarity before newer pets as older users quit, accounts become inactive, and those pets stop being counted towards pet totals.

To see this in action, look at how many '10 pets are rare or VR, vs how many 2015 pets are rare and VR. The '10 pets didn't start out that way, but they've increased in rarity over time.

With that said, pets increase in rarity SLOWLY, and I think the "2:1 rule" was silly to begin with, and is even sillier now. It just gets crazy with gaps over a year or two. For example, no one is trading 32 2024 rares for a single '19 rare. That's INSANE! And that's only 5 year gap!

I hope its okay to post, but I'm stuck between the options of using the 2:1 rule and using different rules because they both apply and don't at the same time.

I use the 2:1 rule until it comes to rarer, older pets like vrs. but I don't really use other "rules", at that point I take into account all kinds of different factors (date, rarity, demand, species, design, personal preference etc) and I'm so strongly against the 3 year rule that I don't want to be put in the category by proxy 😂
Edit to show why I don't think the 3 year rule works:
Like "oh you got your 2021 common pet 3 years ago and it's probably going to turn uncommon a lot sooner? Well too darn bad! *slaps 2024 common in your face*
"Oh you got a 2018 common? That super cool! *slaps the 2021 common in your face*
"Ooo a 2015 common, just want I wanted! *gently passes over the 2018 common*
"Omg I've always wanted this 2012 common in l like all my life TAKEMY2015COMMON!!!"

Then suddenly you've gone from a 2024 common to a 2012 common worth SO much more for nothing at all. That renders anything from the last 15 years completely useless. Good job, you smushed the trading system!!! *thumbs up*

Is it possible to either let us choose two options or have an option that is "I use the 2:1 rule for rares and lower" or something ? ❤️ or is that getting too specific?

I see this argument a lot, and I understand the confusion. How can a '21 pet be equal to a '24 pet AND an '18 pet and the '18 pet is also equal to a '15 pet? So does that mean that the '21 pet also equals a '15 pet? That doesn't make any sense! But the thing is that pet values rise SLOWLY. Is an '18 more rare than the '24? Maybe, but even if it is, there can't be THAT big of a difference, because otherwise the '18 would be a VR.

And that's where the new pet rarities changed things. Before, there were bigger gaps which meant more guess work and more assumptions. Because MOST older pets tend to increase in rarity before MOST newer pets, we kind of had to trade based on the assumption that older pets are more rare than newer pets, even though that's not always the case. Now we have a much better idea of how pets compare to one another, regardless of age.

Older pets still do tend to be worth a bit more, for the reasons I mentioned in my other reply above. But they're not worth THAT much more. And the reason you can trade a '24 pet for a '21 pet for an '18 pet, etc. is because you're getting that value in exchange for the work put into trading up one step at a time. Yes, you do probably end up with a pet that's a bit more rare, but that's because of the extra effort required to trade up each of those steps.

The only place where I'm a bit iffy on the 3 year rule is with older pets. Would I accept a trade of '14 pet for my '11 pet? It would depend on the pets involved, but probably not. Even though I KNOW there's not a huge rarity gap, it's been so ingrained in my brain that old pets ('12 and before) are worth more, that it still feels a bit wrong to me. So I do understand! And I'm not saying that the 3 year rule is perfect. But it's waaaaaaaaaay better in my opinion than the "2:1 rule" which doesn't make sense (the number of users don't double every year, so why would pet values keep doubling?) and it just doesn't reflect how most people really trade. As I said in my example above, no one (or nearly no one) is going to trade 32 2024 pets for a '19 pet of the same rarity. Or 64 2024 pets for an '18 pet!! Insanity!