No Plans to Implement add a new rank to next season

[MrTurtleGamer]

it's pretty obvious there's been more elo every season, and it kinda deflates the ranks. i mean there are 5 bedrocks this season and almost 30 netherites, and it's not even over yet. just a few seasons ago there was barely 1 bedrock a season and like 10 netherites at the very most. a lot of games with a ranked system will add a new rank as more people play, so there aren't as many people in the top ranks (i think league did this recently?). i don't think it really matters where the rank is, but probably somewhere between gold and netherite (i still think bedrock-netherite-diamond should be the top 3 tbh). a good title for the rank is amethyst. it's a mc ore and is a unique color that no other rank uses, except kinda netherite, but that just uses purple armor trims. since the season is ending soon, i thought this would be a good idea for next season to help with the rank inflation

 

[NotSoSushii]

+1 we have literal cans getting Neth and dia

 

[Windows10Laptop]

+1 Add a coal rank and repurpose wood fr

 

[Deevil]

Time to add Amethyst rank!

 

[BIGSIZZLEE]

make a rank between diamond and em or bedrock and neth

 

[Shrubbery]

+1 i miss when people getting neth was rare

 

[BIGSIZZLEE]

ideas for this create a rank between diamond and em called amethyst and a rank between neth and diamond called obsidian and maybe a rank beteeen gold and emerald or iron and call it lapis idk

 

[UghBraces]

+1 to what sizzle said

 

[johnsonxdxd]

+1 to what sizzle said

Agreed with this bot

 

[Cryptite]

It's important to realize the statistical difference in seasons over time, especially Season 16 which was far bigger than our previous ones.

Season 15:
- 848 players played about 97,710 matches.

Season 16:
- 1290 players played about 173,380 matches.

This is a 52% gain in players and a 77% gain in games played. Great numbers!

The misconception we see is that Bedrock, Netherite are supposed to be some ultra-rare rank that extremely few players get and yet in both season they represent less than 1.5% of the entire players in the ladder, and less than 0.5% for Bedrock (The bedrock players from s15 that win traded had their stats wiped so don't appear on the graph).

When there are more players in the ladder and more games being played at high levels, this simply allows for more players to climb to higher ranks. This is not a flaw in the system; it's how any competitive ladder system with rankings works. We don't find it problematic that there are more Netherites and Bedrocks this season because there are both more players playing, and the skill of our playerbase is increasing. They still represent an extremely small, top % of the playerbase.

Now we're not saying we never need to consider adding more ranks but we don't see any reason to at this time. It's possible there is too much emphasis being placed on "Netherite players" as a whole when there is a clear difference between Netherite I and II/III (though this could be explained by people just going for the Netherite title, locking that in and then letting that be their rank for the season).

It's also worth remembering that the more ranks you add, the more the "difference" between ranks becomes devalued. If there are so many ranks then really what's the difference between a Gold, Amethyst, and then a Emerald? Ranks are meant to mean something and you risk ruining the ability to delineate between ranks by having so many that "the middle ranks" are all considered similar.

 

[Windows10Laptop]

It's important to realize the statistical difference in seasons over time, especially Season 16 which was far bigger than our previous ones.

Season 15:
- 848 players played about 97,710 matches.

Season 16:
- 1290 players played about 173,380 matches.

This is a 52% gain in players and a 77% gain in games played. Great numbers!

The misconception we see is that Bedrock, Netherite are supposed to be some ultra-rare rank that extremely few players get and yet in both season they represent less than 1.5% of the entire players in the ladder, and less than 0.5% for Bedrock (The bedrock players from s15 that win traded had their stats wiped so don't appear on the graph).

When there are more players in the ladder and more games being played at high levels, this simply allows for more players to climb to higher ranks. This is not a flaw in the system; it's how any competitive ladder system with rankings works. We don't find it problematic that there are more Netherites and Bedrocks this season because there are both more players playing, and the skill of our playerbase is increasing. They still represent an extremely small, top % of the playerbase.

Now we're not saying we never need to consider adding more ranks but we don't see any reason to at this time. It's possible there is too much emphasis being placed on "Netherite players" as a whole when there is a clear difference between Netherite I and II/III (though this could be explained by people just going for the Netherite title, locking that in and then letting that be their rank for the season).

It's also worth remembering that the more ranks you add, the more the "difference" between ranks becomes devalued. If there are so many ranks then really what's the difference between a Gold, Amethyst, and then a Emerald? Ranks are meant to mean something and you risk ruining the ability to delineate between ranks by having so many that "the middle ranks" are all considered similar.

View attachment 10066
View attachment 10067

Kinda wild how there are less stone 1s than diamond 1s