Modern Art time to play and strategy
Tim Reddy
little over 2 hours. The box said it should take 40 minutes to an hour.
What is the typical 'time to play' for the game. Are we just slow?
Also, we had difficulty determining a good strategy - would anyone have any
comments about Modern Art strategy.
One more thing - we really enjoyed playing the game - the 2 hours zipped by.
Brian Bankler
Good strategy? I'm not sure that there is a good strategy.
Modern Art is a tatical game...your real decision is whether or
not to bid and how much.
Anyway, some random advice
1) Don't buy your own paintings unless they are hideously undervalued.
2) If you start with a hand full of X paintings, sell them (even
cheaply) to try to get them on the board so that they will sell
for a lot in the endgame.
3) Try to figure out what strategy others are using and go opposite.
4) Don't get into a $29 bidding war (bidding up to $29 when then
max value of the painting is $30). Usually people talk themselves
into it by saying..."Well, X has already bid $21, so if I bid $22
then the seller is only getting $1 more" ... which completely forgets
that X will bid $23 and (by your logic) you'll bid $24, etc. If you
drop the bidding, X makes $9 and seller makes $21. If you let X bid
$29, he makes $1 and the seller makes $29. If the painting stumbles
and is only worth $20, the loss of ten hits equally no matter if
the selling price was $21 or $29. All you are really doing is
redistributing wealth from X to the seller. If you just jump up
the bidding to $29, you may gain $1, but you risk $9 (in the later
rounds, this gets even worse, as the painting may be worth $40-60
or $0).
Now, if you are bidding against the leader, that's different.
In that case you don't care about the sellers money, but really care
about the leader. Sometimes you really care about the seller and it
may be worth it to let X have a steal.
What's worse, if you win the bid (at $29) you often have
to take your turn to end the round to protect your bid, losing a sale.
4a) Selling makes you money.
That $30 wealth you were redistributing comes from the sale.
Every time you close, you lose an opportunity to sell. I see a lot
of mistakes made by closing a round to make sure that the paintings
bought pay off the max, when making a sale would have made a little
more (at worst) to a lot more.
5) Play to the sucker. If someone overbids, sell paintings they want
to buy.
6) Don't try to corner the market. Getting the third painting of a
type (when nobody else has any) means that other players shouldn't
sell any. Give another player a copy of that painting, he may sell it.
Getting a fourth painting is just asking the player before you to
play an '=' on some other guy.
7) Recognize that position is really important. If you go next (and
can control whether or not to end the round) then you can force
people into uncomfortable positions.
8) Be vary wary of starting that 4th artist in a round, particularly
if the other three artists have 3-4 paintints each. Unless you get
a sucker, the sale will generate very little revenue...a wasted turn.
That is all pretty obvious advice. The real trick is in
the psychology...knowing how much to ask for a name your price
auction and how much to bid in a closed fist auction or once
around. (The open auctions are pretty easy).
Brian
--
-----
Brian Bankler
New Concepts
Ericsson, Inc.
Ben Baldanza
that you watch not only WHAT you pay but WHO you pay. Knowing the general
cash position of everyone is essential to good play. As an addendum to
this, if you are playing someone who violates Brian's rule #1 ("don't buy
your own paintings"), make sure not to forget that if they buy, they pay the
bank, whereas if you buy you pay them. As such, even a card that you think
is a good buy at $20k might be better to let go to the seller for $19.
Have fun, and by the way after a few plays the game should never take 2
hours with 5 players. We're almost always finished in about 45 minutes.
brandon...@my-dejanews.com
Brian Bankler <ban...@rtp.ericsson.se> wrote:
> 2 Hours is slow, but it was a first game.
>
> Good strategy? I'm not sure that there is a good strategy.
> Modern Art is a tatical game...your real decision is whether or
> not to bid and how much.
> Anyway, some random advice
> 1) Don't buy your own paintings unless they are hideously undervalued.
It depends on what Hideously undervalued is. In a 4 player game, if you can
buy your own painting for about 57% of its probably value or less, then do
so.
> 2) If you start with a hand full of X paintings, sell them (even
> cheaply) to try to get them on the board so that they will sell
> for a lot in the endgame.
This is crucial. It will also lessen the value of the other players
paintings. Its very important to preempt artists you are weak in.
> 3) Try to figure out what strategy others are using and go opposite.
Im not sure what bidding strategies you are refering to. Please elaborate.
If someone tends to over bid, then do NOT get into a bidding war because it
just means more money for the seller. If bidding against the leader, then
maybe go a little higher to make him pay more. But if the leader is selling,
bid less.
> 4) Don't get into a $29 bidding war
Dont bid over 55-65% of the value of the painting anyway. decide on the
value of the painting, modify it by the POSITION of the bidders+seller, and
then play accordingly.
This is an excellent point. Selling a painting puts pressure on other
players, and can sometimes swing the order so that those who bought early may
end up over paying.
> 5) Play to the sucker. If someone overbids, sell paintings they want
> to buy.
But then there might be few paintings sold in total. And unless you have
those paintings, you will get little for thje paintings sold later on.
> 6) Don't try to corner the market. Getting the third painting of a
> type (when nobody else has any) means that other players shouldn't
> sell any. Give another player a copy of that painting, he may sell it.
> Getting a fourth painting is just asking the player before you to
> play an '=' on some other guy.
Amen to that.
> 7) Recognize that position is really important. If you go next (and
> can control whether or not to end the round) then you can force
> people into uncomfortable positions.
The threat of playing an = of a suit that the next player doesnt want will
certainly make a player with 3 or 4 of an artist nervous. But this might
bring in less revenue for the player playing the =. As always it depends on
what suit the = is.
> 8) Be vary wary of starting that 4th artist in a round, particularly
> if the other three artists have 3-4 paintints each. Unless you get
> a sucker, the sale will generate very little revenue...a wasted turn.
But it might make the difference between 2nd and 3rd or 3rd and 4th, thats a
swing of $10 per painting.
>
> That is all pretty obvious advice.
But well presented!
> The real trick is in
> the psychology...knowing how much to ask for a name your price
> auction and how much to bid in a closed fist auction or once
> around. (The open auctions are pretty easy).
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Brian Bankler
>
> Brian Bankler <ban...@rtp.ericsson.se> wrote:
> > 1) Don't buy your own paintings unless they are hideously undervalued.
>
> It depends on what Hideously undervalued is. In a 4 player game, if you can
> buy your own painting for about 57% of its probably value or less, then do
> so.
I assume you meant 'expected value'. I'm not sure why you said
57%. I would have put the ceiling at 50%. For example, you expect the
painting to be $20. Pay $10. If it is 20, you make 10. Note that
expected does not mean 'the most it could be worth. Here I'm assuming
that I expect 2nd place in the first round. I assume that 1st is as
likely as 3rd, and discount 'not showing' (I could play with the numbers
to include that). Now, if someone bids $11, I do better to take that
than to bid on, reducing my gain from $11 to $8 (if I bid $12). Granted,
I win if I bid $12 and get overbid to $13. If you reasonably expect
to get overbid, then it might be worth pushing a little. That might
be where the 57% comes from.
*With the group I play with* you are very likely to silence the
other bidders when you bid on your own painting.
Which highlights the point that Modern Art is a game where
knowing how your group thinks is the most important skill.
> > 3) Try to figure out what strategy others are using and go opposite.
>
> Im not sure what bidding strategies you are refering to. Please elaborate.
> If someone tends to over bid, then do NOT get into a bidding war because it
> just means more money for the seller. If bidding against the leader, then
> maybe go a little higher to make him pay more. But if the leader is selling,
> bid less.
Basically, yes.
> > 5) Play to the sucker. If someone overbids, sell paintings they want
> > to buy.
>
> But then there might be few paintings sold in total. And unless you have
> those paintings, you will get little for thje paintings sold later on.
Possibly true. But sometimes ending the round is good. For example,
I have a hand rich in artist X. If someone is a sucker in X and I sell them
the fourth (for good value, like $18 in round one). If they close the round
and X is the only artist, great! Now in round two, X will sell for $30-50
(since it has the carryover from teh previous rounds) and all other artists
will sell for $0-20.
An extreme example, but occasionally a round ends without a third
place. Eliminating an early carryover drops that paintings price in all of
the next rounds...if you don't have many of that painting, great!
> > 8) Be vary wary of starting that 4th artist in a round, particularly
> > if the other three artists have 3-4 paintints each. Unless you get
> > a sucker, the sale will generate very little revenue...a wasted turn.
>
> But it might make the difference between 2nd and 3rd or 3rd and 4th, thats a
> swing of $10 per painting.
If all three previous artists have 3+ paintings, the fourth artist
will typically not sell for much because it won't pay. If it does sell,
it is usually because the next player will buy it cheaply and then
slap down two more. Even if someone else wants to contest it, they can't
risk paying too much, because then the next player may just end the
round against them, and all their money is wasted. So you usually have
a bidder and maybe some lackluster contest bidding. You, as the seller,
don't get much. If you are loaded on that artist it may be worth absorbing
the loss to get that $10 (or more) carryover for the next rounds.
But more often you just wasted a turn.
Brian
"Do you feel lucky, punk-san?"
Peter Sarrett, TGR #19
Magnus Lundgren
Hi !
Just wanted to add some small notes from the times that I have
played Modern Art. The first games we played I didn't score
very well since I didn't gamble enough, that is I didn't bid high
enough. But we had one player who always overbid everyone
and he won big.
So the next game I decided on the the easiest tactics - always
overbid him (I was sitting after him in the turn), and I won
big :) So what that says is, as always, it depends on the
rest of the players. Since I knew that I had a group of players
where only one other player would actually buy paintings and
I made sure he didn't get any - then I won.
Modern Art is very much a matter of 'playing' the rest of the
players. Now I am often the leader after the first or second
turns, but even then the others cannot agree to lower the price
of the paintings that I sell. I also know that if I play a
painting of a type X the next player will also most likely
play a painting of type X. Such things are very important
in Modern Art since that means I can figure out the value
of a painting well in advance. In the groups that I play in
the first painting played in the first round has always (>90%)
come first or second, ie the value is 20000 (expected value
close to 25000).
//Regards
Magnus Lundgren TerraTel AB/NetGuide Scandinavia
m.lun...@netg.se Tel: +46 (0)31 50 79 40
Fax: +46 (0)31 50 79 39
brandon...@my-dejanews.com
Brian Bankler <ban...@rtp.ericsson.se> wrote:
> brandon...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > Brian Bankler <ban...@rtp.ericsson.se> wrote:
> > > 1) Don't buy your own paintings unless they are hideously undervalued.
> >
> > It depends on what Hideously undervalued is. In a 4 player game, if you can
> > buy your own painting for about 57% of its probably value or less, then do
> > so.
>
> I assume you meant 'expected value'. I'm not sure why you said
> 57%. I would have put the ceiling at 50%.
I strongly disagree!!! You will be able to make a lot more money for your
self and the seller only a little more by paying 57%. The 57% is the break
even point for a 4 player game. Its the point where I dont care if I buy or
sell. If I sell 1 painting to each of 3 other players at 57% of its expected
value (I accept your description of expected value) then Im neutral as to
whether I buy the paintings at 57% or sell them at 57%.
[each painting is worth $100 for ease of compuation]
case 1 - I sell 3 painting, I make $57 *3 = $171 and my nearest opponent makes
$43 so Im really ahead of my competition by 171-43= 128
case 2 - I buy 3 paintings at $57. I make [100-57=] $43 per painting * 3 =
129
129 is about equal to 128 (ok a buck off)
My point is its a multiplayer game and its important to make a little more
money here and there because you are competing against the entire board, not
just the current seller. I susspect that I would do well against 3 players
using the 50% cap.
For example, you expect the
> painting to be $20. Pay $10. If it is 20, you make 10. Note that
> expected does not mean 'the most it could be worth. Here I'm assuming
> that I expect 2nd place in the first round. I assume that 1st is as
> likely as 3rd, and discount 'not showing' (I could play with the numbers
> to include that). Now, if someone bids $11, I do better to take that
> than to bid on, reducing my gain from $11 to $8 (if I bid $12). Granted,
> I win if I bid $12 and get overbid to $13. If you reasonably expect
> to get overbid, then it might be worth pushing a little. That might
> be where the 57% comes from.
> *With the group I play with* you are very likely to silence the
> other bidders when you bid on your own painting.
That would be SWEET! I would love to pick up paintings at 50% of their worth.
The only disadvantage is if you have many paintings you are vulnerable to the
board teaming up to change the valuation.
BUT they have to worry about themselves also, not just to screw you.
>
> Which highlights the point that Modern Art is a game where
> knowing how your group thinks is the most important skill.
I agree. Psychology is very important. But also is knowing who has the most
money. You can over pay the last place player and never go over 57% on the
1st place player.
>
> > > 8) Be vary wary of starting that 4th artist in a round, particularly
> > > if the other three artists have 3-4 paintints each. Unless you get
> > > a sucker, the sale will generate very little revenue...a wasted turn.
> >
> > But it might make the difference between 2nd and 3rd or 3rd and 4th, thats a
> > swing of $10 per painting.
>
> If all three previous artists have 3+ paintings, the fourth artist
> will typically not sell for much because it won't pay. If it does sell,
> it is usually because the next player will buy it cheaply and then
> slap down two more. Even if someone else wants to contest it, they can't
> risk paying too much, because then the next player may just end the
> round against them, and all their money is wasted. So you usually have
> a bidder and maybe some lackluster contest bidding. You, as the seller,
> don't get much. If you are loaded on that artist it may be worth absorbing
> the loss to get that $10 (or more) carryover for the next rounds.
> But more often you just wasted a turn.
I have not played with many different goups so I have never seen this
situation. The most Ive seen is 3 artists with 3+ paintings. Its not just a
question of absorbing a $10 loss. If 2 or 3 paintings of an artist X you
have are already on the table and you dont support X, his value will be less
later on. It depends, but I think its worth giving up a painting to have a
good chance that X comes in 3rd or even 2nd. BEcause if he comes in 3rd
there is more value for each of your remaining paintings.
David desJardins
> Generally, I try to bid about half of the MV. ....
> The only other strategy is to save the doubles for the later rounds.
> I haven't read the other replies to your post; now I'll see if there are
> better strategies.
Most of the strategy in Modern Art is in selecting the auction type, not
in making the bids.
David desJardins
Dave Menconi
slowly, however.
I really like the game because I have no "good strategy" for it because it's
so dependent on what the other players do. I just sort of muddle though.
However, we have what our gaming group calls (I'm proud to say) "The Menconi
Value" which is the value for a painting up for auction if the round ended
right after the painting was sold but before any other paintings came out.
This is a fanciful value (because more paintings will certainly come up before
the real value of the painting is determined) and it's usually wrong
(especially at the beginning of the round) BUT it's useful because it gives
you an idea of what the painting is worth.
Generally, I try to bid about half of the MV. However, I might bid more if I
have a lot of that artist in my hand and I plan to play more of it before the
end of the round. I might bid less if I don't have as many.
The only other strategy is to save the doubles for the later rounds.
I haven't read the other replies to your post; now I'll see if there are
better strategies.
Dave
In article <3687c...@news.primary.net>, "Tim Reddy" <tre...@primary.net>
Matthew Hubbard
[interesting anecdote snipped]
> Modern Art is very much a matter of 'playing' the rest of the
> players.
This is true to an extent, but I consider that if everybody is
overpaying for paintings, the best thing to do is make a lot of cash when
you sell, and buy as little as possible.
> In the groups that I play in
> the first painting played in the first round has always (>90%)
> come first or second, ie the value is 20000 (expected value
> close to 25000).
Even if you assume it will come in as a top three painting, the
expected value should be at least $20,000. Since you should be trying to
buy at a little more than 50% of expected value, you would only be
overbidding by a few grand; it's when you buy something for tens of
thousands more than it's worth that you start throwing games away.
Here are a few of my selling tips.
$ paintings: I almost always present the price I consider fair, but
occasionally I bluff, asking for 5,000 to 10,000 more than I really think
it's worth. Do this *rarely* and few of your opponents will catch on.
Once around paintings: Half of expected value + 1,000 is the magic
number, but sometimes I will outbid a person if I think that person is my
main competition.
Free-for-alls: Some people get caught up in the excitement of an
auction; subtly encourage this, even if someone else is getting the profit.
In the fist: Again, half the expected value + a few thousand is my
standard bid.
My buying tips are much the same, with the proviso that you
should *never* buy a painting whose value you cannot increase.
MattH
Magnus Lundgren
> Dave Menconi <da...@menconi.com> writes:
> > Generally, I try to bid about half of the MV. ....
> > The only other strategy is to save the doubles for the later rounds.
> > I haven't read the other replies to your post; now I'll see if there are
> > better strategies.
>
> Most of the strategy in Modern Art is in selecting the auction type, not
> in making the bids.
>
Good point, even if I wouldn't value it as high as you do.
Someone in this thread said that killing a round is not a good thing
(generally). I have seen games where killing the round was exactly
the right thing.
If you are in the lead - fewer painting means less earnings - kill
the round. If you have few good paintings in your hand in the
next to last turn - kill the round so that you have some left
for the last round (When they will be worth even more.)
Good paintings are paintings that have a high value from
former rounds and have a good auction type (as stated by
David.)
richar...@hotmail.com
Matthew Hubbard <leoNOSP...@crl3.crl.com> wrote:
> Here are a few of my selling tips.
>
> $ paintings: I almost always present the price I consider fair, but
> occasionally I bluff, asking for 5,000 to 10,000 more than I really think
> it's worth. Do this *rarely* and few of your opponents will catch on.
>
> Once around paintings: Half of expected value + 1,000 is the magic
> number, but sometimes I will outbid a person if I think that person is my
> main competition.
>
> Free-for-alls: Some people get caught up in the excitement of an
> auction; subtly encourage this, even if someone else is getting the profit.
>
> In the fist: Again, half the expected value + a few thousand is my
> standard bid.
>
> My buying tips are much the same, with the proviso that you
> should *never* buy a painting whose value you cannot increase.
>
> MattH
I think you need to add a proviso to your proviso. Unless I need cash to
make other purchases, I don't understand why you NEVER buy a painting whose
value I can't increase? I assume the painting has a locked in value of
$15,000 for the round, and I can pick it up for $14,000 (with the auction
money going to the bank, not another player. Iee, I hope I don't have rule
wrong here :-)). At the end of the round, I made a profit, and my opponents
didn't. Why is this a bad move?
- Richard Hutnik
--
Visit DocReason's Strategy HQ for free games, reviews, and
support and opponent finding for obscure/orphan games at:
http://www.geocities.com/timessquare/fortress/7537/
Dave Menconi
In article <vohpv90...@yuban-fddi.berkeley.edu>, David desJardins
>
>Most of the strategy in Modern Art is in selecting the auction type, not
>in making the bids.
>
I find that to be a very interesting statement. Would you care to elaborate on
it?
Dave
J. Hunter Johnson
> I think you need to add a proviso to your proviso. Unless I need cash to
> make other purchases, I don't understand why you NEVER buy a painting whose
> value I can't increase? I assume the painting has a locked in value of
> $15,000 for the round, and I can pick it up for $14,000 (with the auction
> money going to the bank, not another player. Iee, I hope I don't have rule
> wrong here :-)). At the end of the round, I made a profit, and my opponents
> didn't. Why is this a bad move?
You have a rule wrong. Buying a painting means money goes to the
player offering it for sale, unless you buy your own (then money goes
to the bank).
Hunter
DM
>
> > I think you need to add a proviso to your proviso. Unless I need cash to
> > make other purchases, I don't understand why you NEVER buy a painting whose
> > value I can't increase? I assume the painting has a locked in value of
> > $15,000 for the round, and I can pick it up for $14,000 (with the auction
> > money going to the bank, not another player. Iee, I hope I don't have rule
> > wrong here :-)). At the end of the round, I made a profit, and my opponents
> > didn't. Why is this a bad move?
I'm not sure I understand you. If the painting is locked in at $15000, and
I'm offering it for auction, why would I top someone's $13000 offer and bid $14000
on it (and pay my winning bid to the bank)? When it pays off at $15000 I've made
$1000. Now if I'd just accepted the $13000 bid I would've made $13000 (and some
opponent would've made $2000). So unless the bid is under 50% of the expected
value you shouldn't bid on your own paintings, no? Or am I missing something?
Mark
richar...@hotmail.com
jhun...@schultz.io.com (J. Hunter Johnson) wrote:
> <richar...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think you need to add a proviso to your proviso. Unless I need cash to
> > make other purchases, I don't understand why you NEVER buy a painting whose
> > value I can't increase? I assume the painting has a locked in value of
> > $15,000 for the round, and I can pick it up for $14,000 (with the auction
> > money going to the bank, not another player. Iee, I hope I don't have rule
> > wrong here :-)). At the end of the round, I made a profit, and my opponents
> > didn't. Why is this a bad move?
>
> player offering it for sale, unless you buy your own (then money goes
> to the bank).
Thanks for the rules clarification. I guess I had played the game wrong (I
checked the clarification). Go figure. I really only played it twice. Live
and learn. Now, I understand the reasoning for your logic. Now, mind you,
if the auctioneer is in dire economic straights, then paying $14,000 for a
$15,000 painting may not be such a bad thing.
mickel ernst knight
On Tue, 29 Dec 1998 brandon...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <3687D0C5...@rtp.ericsson.se>,
> Brian Bankler <ban...@rtp.ericsson.se> wrote: > 2 Hours is slow, but
> it was a first game. > > Good strategy? I'm not sure that there is a
> good strategy. > Modern Art is a tatical game...your real decision is
> whether or > not to bid and how much. > Anyway, some random advice > 1)
> Don't buy your own paintings unless they are hideously undervalued.
>
> It depends on what Hideously undervalued is. In a 4 player game, if you
> can buy your own painting for about 57% of its probably value or less,
> then do so.
I am more aggressive when buying my own paintings. Any profits I gain are
mine and mine alone. When bidding on other players paintings you have to
consider their profits as well as your own.
I'd rather make 15 Million (or what ever the denomiation is) rather than
make 20 Million along with another player.
> > 2) If you start with a hand full of X paintings, sell them (even
> > cheaply) to try to get them on the board so that they will sell
> > for a lot in the endgame.
>
> This is crucial. It will also lessen the value of the other players
> paintings. Its very important to preempt artists you are weak in.
This is a good opportunity to buy your own paintings. Your opponents may
think yo stupid for your high bidding during the first round of auctions.
But, if you play your cards right, you'll be selling paintings by the same
artist for two or three times what you 'overpaid' for that first painting.
Mickel Knight
mickel ernst knight
On 30 Dec 1998, David desJardins wrote:
> Dave Menconi <da...@menconi.com> writes:
> > Generally, I try to bid about half of the MV. ....
> > The only other strategy is to save the doubles for the later rounds.
> > I haven't read the other replies to your post; now I'll see if there are
> > better strategies.
>
> Most of the strategy in Modern Art is in selecting the auction type, not
> in making the bids.
>
> David desJardins
I'll second this. Some auction types are better late in a round, 'open
autions' come to mind. 'Once around' is another bid type which can be
tactically used to get paintings you know (or dearly hope) will be worth
alot of money at the end of the round. Selecting auction types is just as
good an indicator of player strategy as their bidding tactics.
Mickel Knight
danger...@my-dejanews.com
mickel ernst knight <mek...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>
> On 30 Dec 1998, David desJardins wrote:
>
> >
> > Most of the strategy in Modern Art is in selecting the auction type, not
> > in making the bids.
> >
>
> autions' come to mind. 'Once around' is another bid type which can be
> tactically used to get paintings you know (or dearly hope) will be worth
> alot of money at the end of the round. Selecting auction types is just as
> good an indicator of player strategy as their bidding tactics.
>
> Mickel Knight
>
I've only played Modern Art a few times with family members, and not
gamers, so I'm curious about the supporting argument for this statement, I
guess the "most" part is what intrigues me. I can see where you'd say that
the bidding is pretty much set at certain percentages given the expected
payoff and the general money position of other players, and thus is not a
huge strategic decision. I'm more curious as to the strategies behind the
selection of auction types, and why you'd say that those decisions are more
of a strategic factor than choosing which artist to offer in auction.
Mark