Medici vs. Modern Art
Justin Berman
Reiner Knizia, so naturally I'm looking to pick up a few more games of
his. I have heard very positive things about Medici, but after reading
a little about the game, it sounds very similar to Modern Art.
For those that have played both games, would you recommend picking up
Medici and what are your opinions of Medici strategy versus Modern Art
strategy.
- Justin Berman
Richard Dewsbery
> For those that have played both games, would you recommend picking up
> Medici and what are your opinions of Medici strategy versus Modern Art
> strategy.
Modern Art is clearly the _better_ game, IMHO.
Of course, we play Medici _much_ more often than Modern Art.
The two are similar, in the same way E&T and Samurai (two other games by
the same designer) are similar. Both games are about collecting sets of
cards. Both games are about auctions for cards, and the_right_ bid for a
particular card may change, not only from game to game but also depending
upon others.
Medici feels easier and more fun, partly because it's slightly more
luck-dependant, partly because it is possible to card-count easily (insofar
as this isn't in conflict with advantage 1), and partly because it feels
less competitive (I don't know why, it just does). It's also harder to
deliberately stitch someone up in Medici (the cards seem to do that
themselves), and play strategies vary less from game to game and group to
group.
All IMHO, take with a pinch of salt, etc etc.
Richard
Steffan O'Sullivan
>Modern Art is clearly the _better_ game, IMHO.
>
>Of course, we play Medici _much_ more often than Modern Art.
:-) Which is why I feel Medici is clearly the better game. But then,
I'm one of the heretical few who don't like Modern Art at all. I do
like Medici - not that it's in my top ten list, but it's a good game
I'm usually willing to play. I haven't been willing to play Modern Art
in about two years, and doubt I'll ever want to play it again ...
--
-Steffan O'Sullivan | "The Loklor are not so much a human variation
s...@vnet.net | as a human deviation. They approximate
Chapel Hill, NC | humanity much as a nightmare approximates a
www.io.com/~sos | birthday party." -Jack Vance
Benjamin Foy
>
> > For those that have played both games, would you recommend picking up
> > Medici and what are your opinions of Medici strategy versus Modern Art
> > strategy.
>
> Modern Art is clearly the _better_ game, IMHO.
>
> Of course, we play Medici _much_ more often than Modern Art.
>
> Medici feels easier and more fun,
What are you trying to say? Generally the better game is the one that is
more fun. Actually I have heard game designers say something like "I
really appreciate the design of game A and think its a better game then
game B. But I enjoy playing game B more."
> partly because it's slightly more
> luck-dependant, partly because it is possible to card-count easily (insofar
> as this isn't in conflict with advantage 1), and partly because it feels
> less competitive (I don't know why, it just does). It's also harder to
> deliberately stitch someone up in Medici (the cards seem to do that
> themselves), and play strategies vary less from game to game and group to
> group.
So Modern Art requires more subtle strategy than Medici. I would agree
with that. But that doesn't mean Modern Art is a better game. Personally
I think Medici is the better game because it is more fun. Of course that
is my subjective opinion. Why is it more fun? Medici is faster paced,
has alot of player interaction and feels less abstract than Modern Art.
- Ben
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Cold hearted orb that rules the night,
Removes the colours from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white,
But we decide which one is right.
And which is an illusion???."
from Nights in White Satin by The Moody Blues 1967
Christopher Dearlove
<URL:mailto:ric...@NOSPAMdewsbery.globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > For those that have played both games, would you recommend picking up
> > Medici and what are your opinions of Medici strategy versus Modern Art
> > strategy.
>
> Modern Art is clearly the _better_ game, IMHO.
Nonsense. IM - I can't be bothered with an H - O. (Drop the "clearly"
and I'll change "nonsense" to "I disagree".)
> Of course, we play Medici _much_ more often than Modern Art.
And that would be because? (It's the "of course" that gets me!)
> The two are similar, in the same way E&T and Samurai (two other games by
> the same designer) are similar. Both games are about collecting sets of
> cards. Both games are about auctions for cards, and the_right_ bid for a
> particular card may change, not only from game to game but also depending
> upon others.
>
> Medici feels easier and more fun, partly because it's slightly more
> luck-dependant,
This is where I definitely disagree with you. Yes I've had incredibly
good luck playing Medici, but only when playing the percentages so
the odds weren't quite as long as they looked. For example my last game
I won with a massive margin on a lucky final card. However I would have
won with the other card left in the deck, just rather more narrowly.
(No, I hadn't calculated in that detail, but a 50-50 for a win or good
shot is about as good as you can hope for in a multiplayer game with
good players.)
> partly because it is possible to card-count easily
Works best with 5 or 6 players (the best numbers, 4 is OK but the luck
begins to cut in more - perhaps that's why we disagree).
In Modern Art conversely is, say, Lite Metal is "it" this game (there's
always one, sometimes two) and you only have two and both have $ signs
(no =, which are where the luck is) then you're stitched. OK that's an
extreme case, but in Medici I can bid on anything; in Modern Art I can
bid on anything, true, but my income is limited by the cards I've got.
> (insofar
> as this isn't in conflict with advantage 1), and partly because it feels
> less competitive (I don't know why, it just does).
No to me. This time I'll include the H in IMHO.
> It's also harder to
> deliberately stitch someone up in Medici (the cards seem to do that
> themselves), and play strategies vary less from game to game and group to
> group.
Don't get me wrong, Modern Art is a very good game. I prefer Medici (that's
pure opinion). I think Medici is a better game, but we can all argue over
that one. I definitely think Medici is more skillful - it must be I win
it much more often ;) [note the _semi_ colon].
Medici Strategy, my take. If in doubt don't bid, and wait. If there's
something you want try to accurately assess its value (e.g. worth 10
extra due to boat size position, plus 5 for a position in spices) to you
and others. Get to know which of your group over and under bids. Be cautious
turning cards (that applies both when what you turn over first is good or
bad for you). Building your own position is much more important than
destroying someone else's. Play several times.
I leave it to someone else to explain Modern Art strategy. Perhaps
that's why I don't do so well.
I recommend both games. Actually I recommend almost (*) anything by
Reiner; they're not all masterpieces but some are and most range from
good to very good. (For completeness I suppose I should say there are
still several I've yet to play, mainly some of the older - or brand new
- or smaller ones.)
(*) Not Vegas. Well everyone has an off day. (Of course if Vegas were
mine - difficult when I don't design games - I'd be proud of it; I just
hold Dr. K to higher standards.)
--
Christopher Dearlove ch...@mnemosyne.demon.co.uk Speaking only for myself
DM
nongamers. And I've only fooled with the Java Medici (just today) that I found
linked off the Billabong web site (although I plan on getting a "hard" copy for
my upcoming b-day). So this is just an initial impression. But it seems like
Modern Art is more of a "family" style game and Medici is a bit more of a
"gamer's" game. There is just a bit more for a player to wrap their head around
in Medici. If anything I'd say Medici is even more abstract than Modern Art,
contrary to what someone in this thread stated.
My first play of Modern Art was with my in-laws, complete non-gamers. I
can't help but feel that Medici would've been a bit beyond them (it took them a
few to get Modern Art's basics under their belts, heck I don't know if my
father-in-law ever quite figured out the scoring).
Anyhoot, just a bunch of HO's there.
Mark
P.S. Steffan, we're warming up the stake for yah. How can you NOT like Modern
Art!?! Blasphemer!
Christopher Dearlove wrote:
> In article <01be3d92$a298e040$2f8593c3@pii-400>, Richard Dewsbery
> <URL:mailto:ric...@NOSPAMdewsbery.globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > For those that have played both games, would you recommend picking up
> > > Medici and what are your opinions of Medici strategy versus Modern Art
> > > strategy.
> >
> > Modern Art is clearly the _better_ game, IMHO.
>
> Nonsense. IM - I can't be bothered with an H - O. (Drop the "clearly"
> and I'll change "nonsense" to "I disagree".)
>
> > Of course, we play Medici _much_ more often than Modern Art.
>
> And that would be because? (It's the "of course" that gets me!)
>
> > The two are similar, in the same way E&T and Samurai (two other games by
> > the same designer) are similar. Both games are about collecting sets of
> > cards. Both games are about auctions for cards, and the_right_ bid for a
> > particular card may change, not only from game to game but also depending
> > upon others.
> >
> > Medici feels easier and more fun, partly because it's slightly more
> > luck-dependant,
>
<much snippage>
richar...@hotmail.com
j-be...@prairienet.org wrote:
> I have Modern Art. Our local gaming group really enjoys the games of
> Reiner Knizia, so naturally I'm looking to pick up a few more games of
> his. I have heard very positive things about Medici, but after reading
> a little about the game, it sounds very similar to Modern Art.
>
> Medici and what are your opinions of Medici strategy versus Modern Art
> strategy.
Ok, anyone prefer High Society, Knitzia's 3rd bidding game, over either of
these two? =)
- Richard Hutnik (hoping I got the name right on the game)
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/
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Mark Jackson
> I've only played Modern Art about a dozen times, always with newbies and
> nongamers. And I've only fooled with the Java Medici (just today) that I found
> linked off the Billabong web site (although I plan on getting a "hard" copy for
> my upcoming b-day). So this is just an initial impression. But it seems like
> Modern Art is more of a "family" style game and Medici is a bit more of a
> "gamer's" game.
Huh? I couldn't disagree more.
> There is just a bit more for a player to wrap their head around in Medici. If
> anything I'd say Medici is even more abstract than Modern Art, contrary to what
> someone in this thread stated.
Wow... I could posted this exact same post... EXCEPT reverse the names of the
games.
> My first play of Modern Art was with my in-laws, complete non-gamers. I
> can't help but feel that Medici would've been a bit beyond them (it took them a
> few to get Modern Art's basics under their belts, heck I don't know if my
> father-in-law ever quite figured out the scoring).
The scoring is NOT the problem in Modern Art... it's glomming onto any sort of
coherent strategy with 5 different kinds of bids.
In Medici, there's one bidding system and ALL of the scoring is on the table in
front of you.
Medici usually has a one game learning curve (it's hard for people to "get" until
about 1/2 way through their first game). And it just takes 60 minutes to play.
Modern Art, on the other hand, usually takes a couple of games to "get", and takes
90+ minutes to play.
Now, which one was the "gamer's" game?
--
"We are men of action. Lies do not become us."
THE PRINCESS BRIDE
Mark Jackson
Nashville, TN
DM
Hmmm, like I said I was mostly going on initial impressions, I'll have to give
Medici a try out on some unsuspecting family members!
GREG SCHLOESSER
> Ok, anyone prefer High Society, Knitzia's 3rd bidding game, over either of
> these two (Modern Art or Medici).
You can count me in your camp on this one, Richard. I enjoy all three of the
above titles, but find High Society the best of the lot. Not being able to
make change for your bills, the threat of being stuck with a negative value
card, and the absolute horror of being eliminated if you have the least money
remaining makes this game an agonizing joy to play!
--
Greg J. Schloesser
The Westbank Gamers: http://home.earthlink.net/~gschloesser/
Richard Dewsbery
> >
> >
>
> more fun. Actually I have heard game designers say something like "I
> really appreciate the design of game A and think its a better game then
> game B. But I enjoy playing game B more."
That's pretty much it. Chess is _better_ than Snap!, but I'll play Snap!
more often, too. :-)
I agree it's all _very_ subjective.
> So Modern Art requires more subtle strategy than Medici. I would agree
> with that. But that doesn't mean Modern Art is a better game.
Personally
> I think Medici is the better game because it is more fun. Of course that
> is my subjective opinion. Why is it more fun? Medici is faster paced,
> has alot of player interaction and feels less abstract than Modern Art.
>
> - Ben
[warning - psychological giveaway approaching]
I'd rather win at Modern Art - there's a stronger feeling that I've stuffed
the other players because of innate cleverness. I'd rather lose at Medici
- it doesn't feel as _important_, somehow. So I play MA to win, and Medici
to have fun. If I played games only to win, I'd choose contract Bridge,
but I usually play for fun.
Well, sometimes.
I'm a bit shallow, aren't I? :-)
Richard
Richard Dewsbery
of
> > these two (Modern Art or Medici).
>
> You can count me in your camp on this one, Richard. I enjoy all three of
the
> above titles, but find High Society the best of the lot. Not being able
to
> make change for your bills, the threat of being stuck with a negative
value
> card, and the absolute horror of being eliminated if you have the least
money
> remaining makes this game an agonizing joy to play!
This is getting a bit odd. I don't like High Society, for _exactly_ the
same reasons! :-)
Richard
Doug Adams
>
> In article <369A3A...@prairienet.org>,
> j-be...@prairienet.org wrote:
> > I have Modern Art. Our local gaming group really enjoys the games of
> > Reiner Knizia, so naturally I'm looking to pick up a few more games of
> > his. I have heard very positive things about Medici, but after reading
> > a little about the game, it sounds very similar to Modern Art.
> >
> > For those that have played both games, would you recommend picking up
> > Medici and what are your opinions of Medici strategy versus Modern Art
> > strategy.
> > - Justin Berman
>
>
All three games are wonderful - enjoy them all! :)
Doug
Chris Lawson
> This is getting a bit odd. I don't like High Society, for _exactly_ the
> same reasons! :-)
Tsk, tsk, I don't know, the young today. No sense of what's right or wrong,
where did society go wrong we ask. :-) :-)
I sort of understand what you are saying. In our games group, High Society is
considered possibly the *most* difficult of the trio. Any one mistake, any one
bid can be your undoing. At the end we all (except the winner who is sitting
there with a big smirk on their face) realize that if *only* we did / did not
purchase a specific item or bid one more / less on an item, we would have won.
It really is a great game, the one rule twist (where the poorest automatically
loses) make *such* a difference to the other sort of games of this genre.
Cheers
Chris
Chris Lawson
> j-be...@prairienet.org wrote:
> > For those that have played both games, would you recommend picking up
> > Medici and what are your opinions of Medici strategy versus Modern Art
> > strategy.
> > - Justin Berman
I would say a big yes to you trying Medici. I find it is a lot 'easier' to get
into, it also is quite different from Modern Art. While both center around
auctions, Medici has quite a different feel to it. The number of cards to turn
over introduces a new twist and the reasons why you would want to bid for one
group to another are quite different. As for strategy, well, much more fun to
find out yourself :-)
> Ok, anyone prefer High Society, Knitzia's 3rd bidding game, over either of
> these two? =)
Ha, I was going to raise this point a couple of days ago but got sidetracked
by all the En Garde questions. By the way, while the 't' is sounded when you
pronounce Knizia, it is not actually in the spelling :-) (this is from Mr.
Kant Spel Four Toffie Lawson).
Just like many people consider E&T, TtD and Samurai to be part of a set (of
tile placement games), a similar association can be put on these three
auction games.
There are definite links between Modern Art, Medici and High Society but they
were developed over a number of years (Modern Art was released *seven* years
ago now) unlike E&T, TtD and S, which were designed sort of sequentially
while Reiner had his 'Tile Placement' thinking hat on. I find all these games
to have their own identity and Reiner tends to ensure that there is enough
distance between the games not to make them similar.
As to which I prefer, I must say it is Medici. Again, it is a bit like rating
E&T, TtD and S, they are all great games IMO. Medici has the right mix of game
length, intensity and enjoyment for me.
As to which I would play, it rather depends on the situation. If I wanted
something deep, then it would be Modern Art. If I wanted something quick, it
would be High Society. If I had a choice, it would be Medici :-)
Cheers
Chris
Who is wondering what it will tonight. More of 'England' or will we get round
to playtest the E&T variants, oops, no, you're not meant to know about that.
Where's the delete key when you need it :-)
richar...@hotmail.com
chris....@virgin.net wrote:
> Just like many people consider E&T, TtD and Samurai to be part of a set (of
> tile placement games), a similar association can be put on these three
> auction games.
>
> There are definite links between Modern Art, Medici and High Society but they
> were developed over a number of years (Modern Art was released *seven* years
> ago now) unlike E&T, TtD and S, which were designed sort of sequentially
> while Reiner had his 'Tile Placement' thinking hat on. I find all these games
> to have their own identity and Reiner tends to ensure that there is enough
> distance between the games not to make them similar.
>
> As to which I prefer, I must say it is Medici. Again, it is a bit like rating
> E&T, TtD and S, they are all great games IMO. Medici has the right mix of game
> length, intensity and enjoyment for me.
>
> As to which I would play, it rather depends on the situation. If I wanted
> something deep, then it would be Modern Art. If I wanted something quick, it
> would be High Society. If I had a choice, it would be Medici :-)
>
> Cheers
> Chris
Maybe the series is a "quartet". I wonder where "Flinke-Pinke"/Quandry fits
into all this. Is it the 4th in the series of bidding style games? =)
- Richard
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/
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Brady Severns
> richar...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > In article <369A3A...@prairienet.org>,
> > j-be...@prairienet.org wrote:
> > > I have Modern Art. Our local gaming group really enjoys the games of
> > > Reiner Knizia, so naturally I'm looking to pick up a few more games of
> > > his. I have heard very positive things about Medici, but after reading
> > > a little about the game, it sounds very similar to Modern Art.
Speaking of, a friend of mine in DC wondered aloud what it would be like if you
played Medici with bidding options from Modern Art. Sound like it would be fun.
Anyone ever try this?
Brady
Chris Lawson
> In article <77hv5i$ebt$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> chris....@virgin.net wrote:
> > Just like many people consider E&T, TtD and Samurai to be part of a set (of
> > tile placement games), a similar association can be put on these three
> > auction games.
> > There are definite links between Modern Art, Medici and High Society but
they
> > were developed over a number of years (Modern Art was released *seven* years
> > ago now) unlike E&T, TtD and S, which were designed sort of sequentially
> > while Reiner had his 'Tile Placement' thinking hat on. I find all these
games
> > to have their own identity and Reiner tends to ensure that there is enough
> > distance between the games not to make them similar.
>
> into all this. Is it the 4th in the series of bidding style games? =)
?? I have not played either of these in yonks but I do not remember that they
were bidding games at all. Flinke-Pinke / Quandary was a stock market game of
sorts, you obtained 'shares' and set the price of the 'commodities'. I do not
remember that anything was auctioned.
Cheers
Chris
richar...@hotmail.com
chris....@virgin.net wrote:
> ?? I have not played either of these in yonks but I do not remember that they
> were bidding games at all. Flinke-Pinke / Quandary was a stock market game of
> sorts, you obtained 'shares' and set the price of the 'commodities'. I do not
> remember that anything was auctioned.
>
> Cheers
> Chris
Well, the reason why I said it might be a fourth is that there are mechanics
in the game that feel like they came from Medici or Modern Art (Modern Art
because the round closes when a set is closed out). The game involves the
wealthiest player as a goal. Ok, maybe it is a second cousin to the other 3,
but there feels like similarities between Quandary and the other titles.
- Richard
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/
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Richard Vickery
>> There is just a bit more for a player to wrap their head around in Medici.
>Wow... I could posted this exact same post... EXCEPT reverse the names of the
>games.
I agree with Mark. Medici is half of Modern Art - it has the bidding, but not
the selling strategy (which artist and what auuction style). It is also
harder to interfere with opponents in Medici as cards are not of as equal
utility to all players as they are in Modern Art, and so bidding up to make
someone pay a fair price can backfire if you get lumbered with them.
Medici seems more abstract to me - Modern Art really is wheeling and dealing
about objects of little intrinsic value but lots of assigned value.
For my money, Medici is a little dull and repetitive, and very hard to make a
comeback into after a bad round. It has one neat feature which is that the
chaos factor is relatively independent of player number.
I prefer Modern Art with 3 players, 4 is good, but find it too chaotic with 5.
Richard Vickery Our quest is for Meaning, \ /
Physiology & Pharmacology but the meaning is The Quest. (oVo)
UNSW, Australia ) (
ph. 61 2 9385 1676 Life's a Hoot! ^ ^
http://www.med.unsw.edu.au/Physiology/school/staff/vickery/welcome.html