Rating: 7.84 out of 10 based on 19 ratings
You can review this board once you have completed a Public game
Ratings
3 Mar 2023
Pure strategy game - no rub of the dice. Excellent
Reviewed by Ealer 
Superb
Superb
Pure strategy game - no rub of the dice. Excellent
6 Jan 2018
Ok in realtime, otherwise terrible. Outcome decided by initial setup 90%+ of the time.
Ok in realtime, otherwise terrible. Outcome decided by initial setup 90%+ of the time.
10 Dec 2017
The idea behind this board is absolutely brilliant. When the initial distribution is balanced, it makes for a fun game.
But the problem is that the initial distribution is rarely ever balanced. As Thingol said, for most layouts, the outcome is known before the first move is played.
The idea behind this board is absolutely brilliant. When the initial distribution is balanced, it makes for a fun game. But the problem is that the initial distribution is rarely ever balanced. As Thingol said, for most layouts, the outcome is known before the first move is played.
2 Oct 2017
Enjoyable board for a fast game, even if the initial setup will often handicap one player (not necessarily first mover). I'd like there to be some rules to how terrs were allocated, to make things more even at the outset.
Enjoyable board for a fast game, even if the initial setup will often handicap one player (not necessarily first mover). I'd like there to be some rules to how terrs were allocated, to make things more even at the outset.
26 Jun 2017
This board is fun, makes for short games and is good to look at.
The downside: after playing 10 games on it - for two players who know what they are doing, the outcome is not in doubt after initial setup 90+% of the time.
This board is fun, makes for short games and is good to look at.The downside: after playing 10 games on it - for two players who know what they are doing, the outcome is not in doubt after initial setup 90+% of the time.
20 May 2017
I enjoy playing this game. Except a few boards, I've found the advantage of going first and of board set up are much less than I initially thought.
I would prefer that at the start of each turn was "Fortify" instead of "Attack". "fortify" is the first move most of the time. Also, each round has only two possible. When one is executed it would be great if the other is activated. This would speed things up.
Great game!!!
I enjoy playing this game. Except a few boards, I've found the advantage of going first and of board set up are much less than I initially thought. I would prefer that at the start of each turn was "Fortify" instead of "Attack". "fortify" is the first move most of the time. Also, each round has only two possible. When one is executed it would be great if the other is activated. This would speed things up.
Great game!!!
4 May 2017
Interesting concept. I think it's a lot of luck based on initial layout, and I think ending the game with more than 23 territories would help with the strategy.
Interesting concept. I think it's a lot of luck based on initial layout, and I think ending the game with more than 23 territories would help with the strategy.
25 Mar 2017
Good for a quick game. I like what ratsy said, but I think it is more about 60% initial placement.
Good for a quick game. I like what ratsy said, but I think it is more about 60% initial placement.
14 Feb 2017
"There are some hard lessons on this board."
That was good advice, given to me freely.
This game is 15% initial layout, 60% knowing what your doing and 15% seeing the future.
But there are some truths that make for better strategies.
At time is can be very frustrating, at times a little deterministic, but mostly, it's a ton of fun.
Pacing is good, looks good, fun to play, easy to learn, hard to master.
I like it ALOT. (it's be perfect except for the initial layout problem)
"There are some hard lessons on this board."That was good advice, given to me freely.
This game is 15% initial layout, 60% knowing what your doing and 15% seeing the future.
But there are some truths that make for better strategies.
At time is can be very frustrating, at times a little deterministic, but mostly, it's a ton of fun.
Pacing is good, looks good, fun to play, easy to learn, hard to master.
I like it ALOT. (it's be perfect except for the initial layout problem)
6 Dec 2016
Great board, good mix of simplicity in layout but complexity in strategy
Great board, good mix of simplicity in layout but complexity in strategy
30 Aug 2016
Both the original Seven and Seven Redux have a significant luck element with initial placement of territories, but after that it is all strategy. It does take a few games to pick up on how to best work this board, but it continues to be a learning process, despite the apparent simplicity of the board.
A few key tips: Keep track of both players' total territories at every turn, you are not limited to fortifications from your base territory (though fortifying from base is recommended almost all the time), and try to gain access to the center of the board if you are able to and if it doesn't impede accessing your or opponents' territories. Also, try to force opponent into giving up more territories than they anticipated, or into not being able to fortify from their base territory.
This is by far one of my favorite boards!
Both the original Seven and Seven Redux have a significant luck element with initial placement of territories, but after that it is all strategy. It does take a few games to pick up on how to best work this board, but it continues to be a learning process, despite the apparent simplicity of the board. A few key tips: Keep track of both players' total territories at every turn, you are not limited to fortifications from your base territory (though fortifying from base is recommended almost all the time), and try to gain access to the center of the board if you are able to and if it doesn't impede accessing your or opponents' territories. Also, try to force opponent into giving up more territories than they anticipated, or into not being able to fortify from their base territory.
This is by far one of my favorite boards!
17 May 2016
I love that this is a truly thinking game! No luck of the dice. There is one board set up pattern that hinders the second player. Other than that, great board!
I love that this is a truly thinking game! No luck of the dice. There is one board set up pattern that hinders the second player. Other than that, great board!
18 Apr 2016
I like this board very much. I like that it's a pure strategy game without dice factor. However, luck is still crucial because of the initial placement of colors on the board. Nevertheless, if one look carefully, could find an interesting move to save the situation.
The designer should warn about winning condition: 22 on the board or 22 + 1 (main stack) at the end of your turn.
Some comments mention about getting 24 at the end of the turn, but I played a couple of times today and haven't experienced that myself.
I like this board very much. I like that it's a pure strategy game without dice factor. However, luck is still crucial because of the initial placement of colors on the board. Nevertheless, if one look carefully, could find an interesting move to save the situation. The designer should warn about winning condition: 22 on the board or 22 + 1 (main stack) at the end of your turn.
Some comments mention about getting 24 at the end of the turn, but I played a couple of times today and haven't experienced that myself.
30 Mar 2016
I like it but it seems too skewed by random initial placement. Very fun though.
I like it but it seems too skewed by random initial placement. Very fun though.
2 Feb 2015
I'm very conflicted about this review. On the one hand, I love this game and its variations, including this updated board. On the other hand, having now played several games of it - including my first, which I lost in the same manner that MilesTeg describes in the previous review - I feel that Raptor made a mistake to focus on '23' rather than the function that number served in the previous version. Here's a reproduced comment that I wrote on my 5th or so game on the Redux implementation:
"I think I'm starting to think that Raptor missed something big when he updated this board. I think there's more/better tension if the win condition is actually held the same as the old version - just getting 23 isn't enough, you have to START THE TURN with 23. Which would mean, for this updated version, triggering the win condition at 24 rather than 23."
And having played some more games, I think I'm right. Alpha and Mongrel fine-tuned their board perfectly and Raptor's version, while slicker and cleaner, is slightly different. I actually think I prefer the original, although this is fun as well.
(for completion: I feel like the extra scenarios add nothing and as such I haven't played them. My suspicion is that they're probably not thoroughly play-tested anyway judging by the aforementioned major issue with the main version).
I'm very conflicted about this review. On the one hand, I love this game and its variations, including this updated board. On the other hand, having now played several games of it - including my first, which I lost in the same manner that MilesTeg describes in the previous review - I feel that Raptor made a mistake to focus on '23' rather than the function that number served in the previous version. Here's a reproduced comment that I wrote on my 5th or so game on the Redux implementation:"I think I'm starting to think that Raptor missed something big when he updated this board. I think there's more/better tension if the win condition is actually held the same as the old version - just getting 23 isn't enough, you have to START THE TURN with 23. Which would mean, for this updated version, triggering the win condition at 24 rather than 23."
And having played some more games, I think I'm right. Alpha and Mongrel fine-tuned their board perfectly and Raptor's version, while slicker and cleaner, is slightly different. I actually think I prefer the original, although this is fun as well.
(for completion: I feel like the extra scenarios add nothing and as such I haven't played them. My suspicion is that they're probably not thoroughly play-tested anyway judging by the aforementioned major issue with the main version).
17 Dec 2013
I love all of these boards. Might be worth putting into the description that occupying 23 territories DURING your turn (not at the beginning) will give you the win. Just lost a game assuming it worked like the old version. Alas.
I love all of these boards. Might be worth putting into the description that occupying 23 territories DURING your turn (not at the beginning) will give you the win. Just lost a game assuming it worked like the old version. Alas.