This game has an inherited flaw where the one who creates a "threat" first takes the game's pace. This is easily tested in hard bots. You can go for 1x3. If you feel that the oponent has not responded to your 1x2 threat. You can try for 2x2. If the threat was stopped, you can still do a 1x3 and try from there, but you're already better off focusing on stopping your oponent from creating a threat.

Its a very fun concept, but the flaw is that its basically a solved game, you either know the solution or you dont. For example the second challenge. You basically can't solve it on your own without a solution. And there are no hints.

You would be better off making the whole challenges thing into a tutorial with explanations. Right now i'm after the bots, but hard bot is easily beaten if you just go for early attack, because else its takes the first threat and then the game is solved unless there are multiple mistakes.

A varried map with walls or more cells or with random +1 cells or a 1v1v1 or single use abilities would be perfect for this.

The ui needs work. No idea how to get from game end screen to main menu.

Overall. Very good and pretty addictive, but needs a "game"

Thanks for the feedback!

Adding hints to challenges is a good idea. Some of them may indeed be too difficult early on. Were you able to complete the second challenge in the end?

What would you suggest to avoid the initial threat flaw pattern?
Since the central position is quite advantageous, I already restricted it for the first player. However, I have not found a good way yet to help a player recover from a disadvantage. Walls seem like an interesting direction.

Regarding the UI, the menu button is in the top right. I could make it more visible indeed.

And you can also play on a larger maps by tapping the gear icon on the top right of the new game screen

cf:

Nope. I believe i accidentally solved the first. Tried a few times but get running into 51. Most i had was 56 but the endscreen kinda prevents you from analysing the board. The challenges is a great idea, like chess exercise in a complicated state, but desperately needs explanation and maybe a "the intended solution is 5 moves away" kind of deal. One can argue about how much control i have over the board, but for me I just send it without much strategy, since complicated board states like 1-2-1-2-1  have the obvious middle 1, but it all will depend on the rest of the board, launching flank attacks or maybe collecting om the side to protect corners. Its fun. Its complicated. But its a bit too complicated for me.

The initial threat issue... i believe there's no "fits all" solution. I think theres a video about "why hexagonal tik-tac-toe won't work" that explores the initial threat problem, but there are no solutions there i believe. I think you don't need to solve the flaw of the mechanic, but you might want to solve the player going in with a complete solution.

1) blocked squares - the initial blocked centre is good, but il lasts for 1 turn, not enough to prevent the player 1 from creating the first threat. Maybe multiple starting block patterns for 5 turns that prevent from using one solution. For example a checkerboard for 5 turns pattern will prevent player 1 from making a 2-1 construct on his third turn. Needs to be explored since player 2 will be able to put a threat. Maybe random cells unblocked gradually after turn 5.

2) player 2 getting a +2 on his first turn will prevent a one square

3) interest points (flat x2 cell or maybe every 5 turns it gives something. Or a cell that can be accesed (stabilised?) for a limited time and then it becomes innaccesable, or even becomes a x0 cell, voiding any operations done to it. Same can be done to some blocks on the edge of the screen, allowing risky plays.

4) random starting +- peppered in. Iffy about it as its just sort of a challenge map with a solution, but could be explored.

5) as i mentioned, abilities. The simplest i can think of is once a game being able to spend your turn to flip the value on one of the blocks, so if enemy accumulated a large number or accidentally cascaded into a large number, you could take advantage of that once, flipping a -9 into a +9. Maybe allowed on blocks >5. That would create a pressure to control the numbers and avoid accidentally creating cascades or avoid preparing big bully number attacks. Surely that can be explored to create baits or a person with better game knowledge setting up cascade laucher to make a big number and then crush the enemy's ability right away with another cascade.

Some things require new mechanics, some just extend the initial central square blocked mechanic. Up to you with what dirrection you wish to take it. 

I personally have a strong feeling against "solved games" because my favourite childhood game was Mancala and this brings me back to it. If only it wasn't solved one could still enjoy it. If you haven't played it, there are a few online, you might want to try it, it has a lot of similar mechanics with cascading and setting up the board for the enemy or baiting them.

One of the issues of a solved game is the "complete information". I think it would be a different game mode, but a fog of war would be fun to explore, both players starring in one of the corners and blocked from seeing the other half of the screen, not knowing what the other player is building (or maybe where the other player's walls are and how they utilise them in their offence/defence)

Oooooh! I'll try the larger maps! WHY did you hide them from me!!! XD

Anyway. I hate puzzles, i like stategy games. I want to play it as a strategy game against complex bots. This game gets me thinking and i like it.

Good job.

ahahah, now i know why you hid the bigger fields. The ai has no clue what its doing some times xD

On the second screen i matched every ai move and it proceeded to destroy me for 80 moves. For a moment i thought maybe its the famous "dev took over the game" moment, but the it switched from snowballing to attack and it all fell as i was able to snowball myself. The dynamoc is very weird. Its hard to lose the initiative, but once you lose it, you're done as threats always need to be responded to. The hexagonal tic-tak-toe video taked about it. You can be responding to threats untill you have enough pieces on the inside to start sending threats of your own. The tactic does not have room for dynamic responses.