I'm considering rolling back revision 6 of this answer

It updates some of the information in the answer, which makes it work keeping, but also adds some commentary (which can change intent), and it makes some changes that appear to be incorrect.

A fair bit has changed in Magic since the original answer (Player base growth, block redesign), but it feels like the editor changed enough to warrant "new post" rather than edit.

Yeah, I rolled it back

I would have gone for editing it to remove the commentary, since as far as I can tell the rest of the changes were accurate.

As I pointed out in my comment, the price tag changes were also hyperbolic

You can get some Tier 1 or 2 Vintage decks for a few thousand dollars. A $15,000 lower bound is ridiculous

Going by this list I found the low end they have is $6k

Dredge on that list is $4,000. That's the one I was talking about

And the average looks closer to the $15k number

Which would be fine, if 15k was presented as the average

I saw that edit earlier today and couldn't understand why Modern was not an eternal format

I considered editing over it just to change that one piece back

An eternal format is one that allows all sets

@Rainbolt Eternal means goes back to Alpha for card pool

That part of the change was actually correct

Ah, I see

Modern is non-rotating which means that card never leave once they enter (other than bannings)

I took "eternal" to mean "never rotating"

Yeah, I agree that the terminology is a bit wonky, but we're pretty much stuck with it

Don't worry, I wouldn't have edited without doing my research. And that edit looked like too much work for me

It's a huge post

@murgatroid99 Any issue with me restoring the accurate parts of the edit? Specifically, "Cards stay in Standard for approximately 15-18 months", and eternal => non rotating

@Rainbolt I was thinking of doing that, and also making some additional changes like the fact Event Decks have been discontinued and stuff like that

Oh, I'll let you go for it

I should get back to work

@Rainbolt I should too :)

Yeah, I'd have no problem with that

@murgatroid99 How do you feel about that edits extra commentary on Modern? It is true that Modern has settled down a bit now that they aren't banning something new every year to shake up the PT meta

In the last year, the two most prevalent decks lost a key card, right?

Or was it three decks? Amulet Bloom lost either bloom or amulet. Eldrazi lost eye of ugin. Twin lost twin.

@Rainbolt You're right, I thought Bloom and Twin were longer ago, and forgot about Eye

I'll take that commentary off too then

@Rainbolt It's been a while since I've been able to play Modern so while I knew those had been banned I forgot how recently it was. It was mostly remembering that the last 2 B&R updates have been no changes to any format.

Does anyone know how pricing on MTGO compares to paper? Since this answer says they are about the same, but I was under the impression that MTGO tended to be quite a bit cheaper.

@diego yeah, it is, except for mythics (generally speaking)

I'm sure you can find precise statistics somewhere, but my rough impression is that bulk rares in the $0.10 pricing class in paper might cost 0.02 tickets online, and popular rares which are $50-ish in paper are typically more like 20 tickets online.

Emphasis: rough impression

@diego I think Vintage is a lot cheaper online, because of the online-only Vintage Masters set, which includes the power 9

i.e. a single Black Lotus is over $3,000 in paper, but only about $100 on MTGO

I've updated the answer. I added sections for Commander, Draft, and Sealed, removed the added commentary for the different formats, updated some formatting (mostly making headers actually headers and not bold), and a few other minor rewordings.

Let me know if you think anything I changed should be un-done or has incorrect info

I don't see anything clearly incorrect, but I'm not sure adding those sections is the right thing to do here.

You added almost enough text to write your own answer

@murgatroid99 I was a little iffy on adding those, but since the answer already had descriptions of the major constructed formats I thought it would be ok. If other people feel the same way you do I'm ok with removing them though