TITLE: Is algebra needed to really understand and/or enjoy model theory?
QUESTION [13 upvotes]: What are the desirable pre-requisites to be able to learn model theory well? In particular, it seems that connections to algebra are used heavily especially as examples. 
I would like to know if a good grasp of algebra is essential for a deeper understanding of model theory and whether a good grasp of analysis and topology would compensate for lack of the former.
Thank you.

REPLY [5 votes]: I have always felt that examples usually just confuse you (though not always), having always specific properties that are traps as they do not hold in general.
S.Shelah, The future of set theory

Indeed, the easiest (counter)examples in model theory are obtained by hand using basic combinatorial ideas. This holds for simple examples, as well as major innovative examples such as Hrushovski'e new minimal set. Actually, it is the latter that inspired the interest in algebraic structures such as Zilber's fields.
However, if you do not have the brain of Shelah, or you aim for a tenure position, you better prove to the rest of the word that what you do is somehow connected to mainstream mathematics. You get $10\times\#$citations.
In the '90s it was common to think that algebraic geometry was the nearest area. In the last years there are also other options. E.g.

Continuous model theory is gaining popularity. It has connections to functional analysis.

Descriptive set theory and functional analysis have interacted with model theory in many other ways. This is an examples and this is a second very different examples

There have been some major achievements that connect free groups and model theory (though no model theorist understand them at the moment). See work related to Zlil Sela.

Discrete combinatorial geometry has some surprising applications to model theory. See this for example Though this goes the opposite direction, still it helps in demonstrating that model theory is connected to mainstream mathematics.