The Problem With Hexagons
general-staff.com
The Problem With Hexagons
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: The Problem With Hexagons
#2Re: The Problem With Hexagons
#3There's a huge upside the article misses. Having discrete movement allows the rules to be easily and exactly mentally simulated by humans. And that is key to a lot of tactical thought where you enumerate the possible responses and counter responses you and your opponent can have.
For the opposite side of the spectrum, see the excellent game Frozen Synapse which has non-discrete motion and so to allow this "simulate the future" aspect they actually allow you to plan future moves for both yourself and the opponent and test them out. Without that, exact movement loses a certain appeal that is shared by chess and go and hex-based games. There's still pleasure to be had in free-form movement and it should be better explored too. But don't forget why the old ways were great.
Re: The Problem With Hexagons
#4Great article about how to use hex grids in games:
https://www.redblobgames.com/grids/hexagons/
Re: The Problem With Hexagons
#5Great article about how to use hex grids in games: https://www.redblobgames.com/grids/hexagons/
This article can't be recommended enough. It goes into a lot of the theory behind hexagonal grid systems. Other articles on that site are well worth reading, too.
Re: The Problem With Hexagons
#6There are trade-offs involved with any paradigm, be it squares, hexes, even with continuous movement. The question is rather: what fits your design intent best? The player's experience is what counts in the end.
Squares and hexes are discretized environments. Again, this brings benefits and drawbacks. The advantage of hexes in this scenario lies in the fact that they often provide a richer medium for quantized movement in games. There is nothing inherently complicated about simulating movement and areas of effect in hex maps, neither for computers nor for humans.
If your game requires straight lines to be modeled perfectly, both hexes and squares provide two "clean" axes for that. Realism is a relative goal in a war game. It's all a set of models in the end.
Moving in straight lines using arbitrary angles is also not something that can realistically happen on battlefields.
Re: The Problem With Hexagons
#7Great article about how to use hex grids in games: https://www.redblobgames.com/grids/hexagons/
This article can't be recommended enough. It goes into a lot of the theory behind hexagonal grid systems. Other articles on that site are well worth reading, too.
Agreed, I'm not a game developer at all but I've spent quite a bit of time on that site just because it's so darn interesting!
Re: The Problem With Hexagons
#8There's this great thing called a flexible curve ruler. Assign each unit a movement speed in centimeters of map per turn, apply penalties and bonuses, and measure out the path that you want them to take.
They're expensive compared to cheap dice and cheap compared to expensive dice. With high-end board game prices the way they are now, bundling one in is reasonable. Then you can use any map of the right scale.
Re: The Problem With Hexagons
#9There are trade-offs involved with any paradigm, be it squares, hexes, even with continuous movement. The question is rather: what fits your design intent best? The player's experience is what counts in the end. Squares and hexes are discretized environments. Again, this brings benefits and drawbacks. The advantage of hexes in this scenario lies in the fact that they often provide a richer medium for quantized moveme…
>There are trade-offs involved with any paradigm,...
Reminded me of the aphorism, "All models are wrong, but some are useful" [0]
Re: The Problem With Hexagons
#10There's this great thing called a flexible curve ruler. Assign each unit a movement speed in centimeters of map per turn, apply penalties and bonuses, and measure out the path that you want them to take. They're expensive compared to cheap dice and cheap compared to expensive dice. With high-end board game prices the way they are now, bundling one in is reasonable. Then you can use any map of the right scale.
But hexes are good enough and they're easy and cheap. :)