Guide to CS Rarities *update in progress*

[lil rascal]

Just realised I haven't posted here yet to say how much I love this! Now if only we could get more people in the FTT using this in their answers!

[Loelya]

New Years’ resolution: start using this thread in any answers I give for “fair trades”

[amarok.]

Just realised I haven't posted here yet to say how much I love this! Now if only we could get more people in the FTT using this in their answers!

eh, there's me and one or two other people who have been for a month or two now but we're usually shot down by somebody citing "demand". i have a running joke with a close friend that i've become a Rarity "Keyboard Warrior" but hey, i think that's kind of catchy. rkw alliance assemble.

the large problem is that people will usually be reluctant to accept these values due to the fact that their pets will possibly be perceived as less valuable, especially with demand running rampant at the moment. for example, the number of people i've seen saying 2+ nons for a joker is fair is ridiculous. in actuality, that was just one player running around spreading misinformation en masse and whilst i'm not saying it had anything to do with the fact that they were running a joker auction, it definitely didn't come across well to me. others are concerned that they'll miss out on what their pet could actually fetch in a trade or do not feel their pet could fetch as much as it is worth, as in the case of the zebras.

if you're able to reference this when answering trading questions, it'd definitely help with this issue. the more widely acknowledged this true rarity is, the more likely it is that people will get less hooked up on demand. it's slightly horrifying that ftt helpers have this much influence but we definitely need to use it for good.

[Asvoria]

Just realised I haven't posted here yet to say how much I love this! Now if only we could get more people in the FTT using this in their answers!

eh, there's me and one or two other people who have been for a month or two now but we're usually shot down by somebody citing "demand". i have a running joke with a close friend that i've become a Rarity "Keyboard Warrior" but hey, i think that's kind of catchy. rkw alliance assemble.

the large problem is that people will usually be reluctant to accept these values due to the fact that their pets will possibly be perceived as less valuable, especially with demand running rampant at the moment. for example, the number of people i've seen saying 2+ nons for a joker is fair is ridiculous. in actuality, that was just one player running around spreading misinformation en masse and whilst i'm not saying it had anything to do with the fact that they were running a joker auction, it definitely didn't come across well to me. others are concerned that they'll miss out on what their pet could actually fetch in a trade or do not feel their pet could fetch as much as it is worth, as in the case of the zebras.

if you're able to reference this when answering trading questions, it'd definitely help with this issue. the more widely acknowledged this true rarity is, the more likely it is that people will get less hooked up on demand. it's slightly horrifying that ftt helpers have this much influence but we definitely need to use it for good.

I've tried to give advice now and then and tried to stay very basic with what I said (hinting, that demand could be a thing, but only really spoke about rarity), but I felt so bad always saying "demand is up to you and your trading partner" that I stopped answering any list-trades. I think I'll try to re-join you and just link this thread in any answer so that more people will become aware of it. Maybe this helps, lol.

[Aurora Storm]

okay so i just got around to reading this and am i wrong in thinking that sorbets ("half a non") are actually the closest vrs on the site to a non? oof, the ftt gang won't like that at all. the pink balloon's placement also really surprised me. the bunnies definitely didn't, but a pink balloon? wow.

i have a little hypothesis that all the "pink" pets are worth more because people deleted them and/or they're sitting collecting dust in inactive accounts. the "i'm not like the other girls" phase probably had a very interesting effect on today's pet rarities.

edit; closest to a non, not a sorbet. duh. apparently i am incapable of proofreading.

It's crazy, right? I think once the rest of the sorbets turn omg it will cause a bit of shock and hopefully we'll see some change there. Although, the pink sorbet changing should've been enough to indicate nons aren't worth that much more (not to mention the fact that nons aren't even technically equal to each other lol).

And you could be right about the pink balloon; I found that even after seeing the blue balloon was originally rare and the non & pink balloon were very rare, once the blue balloon changed there's a post somewhere from 2009 saying the pink balloon is worth less. That did get corrected by a couple people but it still never sat as equal to the Nonballoon like it should.

EDIT; Also a lot of the top part of the list pre-October 09 will probably reshuffle a lot once those pets start going OMGSR. It was impossible to place them accurately because they've always been VR, so there's some that could very well turn before the sorbets *coughthebunniescough*

Just realised I haven't posted here yet to say how much I love this! Now if only we could get more people in the FTT using this in their answers!

New Years’ resolution: start using this thread in any answers I give for “fair trades”

Go forth and spread truth and justice, my friends! c;

[amarok.]

okay so i just got around to reading this and am i wrong in thinking that sorbets ("half a non") are actually the closest vrs on the site to a non? oof, the ftt gang won't like that at all. the pink balloon's placement also really surprised me. the bunnies definitely didn't, but a pink balloon? wow.

i have a little hypothesis that all the "pink" pets are worth more because people deleted them and/or they're sitting collecting dust in inactive accounts. the "i'm not like the other girls" phase probably had a very interesting effect on today's pet rarities.

edit; closest to a non, not a sorbet. duh. apparently i am incapable of proofreading.

It's crazy, right? I think once the rest of the sorbets turn omg it will cause a bit of shock and hopefully we'll see some change there. Although, the pink sorbet changing should've been enough to indicate nons aren't worth that much more (not to mention the fact that nons aren't even technically equal to each other lol).

And you could be right about the pink balloon; I found that even after seeing the blue balloon was originally rare and the non & pink balloon were very rare, once the blue balloon changed there's a post somewhere from 2009 saying the pink balloon is worth less. That did get corrected by a couple people but it still never sat as equal to the Nonballoon like it should.

EDIT; Also a lot of the top part of the list pre-October 09 will probably reshuffle a lot once those pets start going OMGSR. It was impossible to place them accurately because they've always been VR, so there's some that could very well turn before the sorbets *coughthebunniescough*

i'm not entirely sure why the whole "i hate pink" thing was a thing, but it definitely had a hand in the pink septembers being pushed as low as they were. crazy.

ah, i'm very much going to enjoy the day the bunbuns all go OMGSR i think. particularly the "advent list" ones at the top of your vr list draft. might just drive home how out of whack demand has made the economy.

[Lufi]

I just thought about 2020 store pets and their value in old pets. Because I do not think, that we should continue in evaluation, that recent store pets cost like late 2010 rare. It just not make sense. That would mean, that their value absolutely not grow (based on their age)
Try to imagine, that you will pay in 2025 or 2030 for new store pets, still and only one 2010 rare, cause someone told, that 2010 rare worth 20cs$. I was told, that price of cs$ grow every year, but I absolutely did not noticed any grow or it's so small, that is negligible. Anyway I do not like (and do not think), that 10 years old pet should worth only 20cs$ = 1 recent store.
In my opinion should value grow already (or at least faster) and 2020 store pets should worth 2011 early rare, not 2010 anymore.
But this is just my opinion.
I can be totally wrong and I'm sorry if I say something absolutely stupid. But it is just weird for me to give 10 years old pets for 2020 pets.

[みりん〇°•]

Just a question. How can a 2010 rare be worth a 2019 vr? Isn’t the vr worth more? I thought vr was worth more because vr means there is less in the system than rares.

[ElementalInsanity]

I’d love to move this C$ conversation to the thread itself as I think it would be very useful reference for others there!
Forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=3915876

For now I’ll make a quick answer though-
@Lufik- I’ve been asking many different users for help on updating the thread so that it’s not just lil old me updating. And more opinions and personal input is the best with that thread. So it’s taking a long time to do so. (For reference I started trying to get users opinions and help via discord and pms and etc since August 2019)
But to answer your question a number of the users have agreed that it’s time for 2011 pricing to be around that of a new store pet and just the yearly change of C$ says that as well.
Also to add it’s taking longer this year because it’s not just a flip up of the numbers and go. As you said the store pets are way trickier this year along with now 2011 becoming the new comparison in C$ to new store pets.

I also need to add another question to the FAQ or some kind of disclaimer because:
@above (rip I can’t type your unique username)
In reality it isn’t. A rare is less than a very rare just like a very rare should be less than an OMGSR. C$ has never added up like regular pet worth, nor should it. It’s a different system and based on actual currency.
People going off a C$ compared worth, ie 2010 rare=20-25c$ and a store pet in stores =20C$, compare them and say it’s worth the other. By c$ worth that’s correct. In actual terms it’s not.
So it comes down to users personal opinion and views on that. Do I think my new store pets are worth an old rare? Would I do that trade? Would I do it if it was reversed? Etc etc.

[Lufi]

Just a question. How can a 2010 rare be worth a 2019 vr? Isn’t the vr worth more? I thought vr was worth more because vr means there is less in the system than rares.

I asked once myself. Same question you can use for example on 2019 rare event pet and 2010 uncommon. Of course, that rare pet should cost more, because it's rare... but the year is also important then I guess. As not much players would give you 2010-2011 uncommon for 2019 rare. But it would need to change completely whole system...and it's something what probably nobody would accept... unfortunately.