Hex vs. Quad (Diamond) shaped tiles?
Author
Why do people say Hex based systems are better for tactical games?
I am making a rpg, and thinking about tile shapes. I think 8-way movement on a diamond shaped tile is best, simplest to make art for and easiest to program.
The only reason for me not choosing diamond shaped tiles (2:1) right now is that I have heard a lot of people say hex tiles are better for tactical games, and my game will be fairly tactical.
I can''t think why hex = better for tactical games - will someone explain why?
Author
sorry, I think I know the reason; most hex games don''t use a 3/4 view and are more overhead, so you can see easier so its more tactical, is that right?
Well im sticking to 3/4 view, fallout did ok.
(yes I know fallout used hex!)
Well im sticking to 3/4 view, fallout did ok.
(yes I know fallout used hex!)
using hex instead of diamonds won''t make your game more tactical. only the rules you set will increase the tactical aspect of your game...
That''s not the reason. The reason is that you get more acurate movement on a hex map than a square one. If you have the following square tiles(just rotate for diamond):
If you want to move from the square marked ''X'', the distance from ''X'' to 2,4,5,7 is the same, but the distance covered from ''X'' to 1,3,6,8 is farther, so in this case you have to take that into account programatically.
With hex:
If you move from ''X'' to any one of 1-6, you are always moving the same distance. Also, once you have the drawing routines set up, I think it is actually easier to calculate distance and paths.
---
Make it work.
Make it fast.
"Commmmpuuuuterrrr.." --Scotty Star Trek IV:The Voyage Home
+-+-+-+|1|2|3|+-+-+-+|4|X|5|+-+-+-+|6|7|8|+-+-+-+If you want to move from the square marked ''X'', the distance from ''X'' to 2,4,5,7 is the same, but the distance covered from ''X'' to 1,3,6,8 is farther, so in this case you have to take that into account programatically.
With hex:
__ __/1 \__/6 \__/2 \\__/X \__//5 \__/3 \\__/4 \__/ \__/If you move from ''X'' to any one of 1-6, you are always moving the same distance. Also, once you have the drawing routines set up, I think it is actually easier to calculate distance and paths.
---
Make it work.
Make it fast.
"Commmmpuuuuterrrr.." --Scotty Star Trek IV:The Voyage Home
With hexes you have equidistant movement in 6 directions. With diamond tiles, you 8 directinos, but two different distances: diagonal movement covers more distance than moving through the sides of the tile. This can be a headache to manage, because the ratio is the square root of 2 - not exactly a whole number 
.
That''s why hexes are more "tactical", they have a fair movement scheme.
People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
.That''s why hexes are more "tactical", they have a fair movement scheme.
People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
You beat me to it, captain jester, and a much clearer explanation too 
People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
quote:Original post by MadKeithV
You beat me to it, captain jester, and a much clearer explanation too
People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
Thanks.
---
Make it work.
Make it fast.
"Commmmpuuuuterrrr.." --Scotty Star Trek IV:The Voyage Home
Author
ok, Thanks a lot -
I actually just realised why after my last posting
In some games (with diamond tiles) the difference in distance along the diagonals and normals isnt even noticeable- you don''t realise (well I dont!) that they are slightly walking one way faster than the other (although they are).
My game will be point based and so it will cost equal points to go to any space around you, so it doesnt matter if the diagonals are a few pixels worth more of travel.
That, as well as the fact that I think the downer of hex is 6 way movement (N/E/S/W is more normal) I am still sticking to diamonds
I actually just realised why after my last posting
In some games (with diamond tiles) the difference in distance along the diagonals and normals isnt even noticeable- you don''t realise (well I dont!) that they are slightly walking one way faster than the other (although they are).
My game will be point based and so it will cost equal points to go to any space around you, so it doesnt matter if the diagonals are a few pixels worth more of travel.
That, as well as the fact that I think the downer of hex is 6 way movement (N/E/S/W is more normal) I am still sticking to diamonds
quote:Original post by CaptainJester
That''s not the reason. The reason is that you get more acurate movement on a hex map than a square one. If you have the following square tiles(just rotate for diamond):+-+-+-+|1|2|3|+-+-+-+|4|X|5|+-+-+-+|6|7|8|+-+-+-+
If you want to move from the square marked ''X'', the distance from ''X'' to 2,4,5,7 is the same, but the distance covered from ''X'' to 1,3,6,8 is farther, so in this case you have to take that into account programatically.
With hex:__ __/1 \__/6 \__/2 \\__/X \__//5 \__/3 \\__/4 \__/ \__/
If you move from ''X'' to any one of 1-6, you are always moving the same distance. Also, once you have the drawing routines set up, I think it is actually easier to calculate distance and paths.
---
Make it work.
Make it fast.
"Commmmpuuuuterrrr.." --Scotty Star Trek IV:The Voyage Home
oh. well, i haven''t tought of it in this way... but i guess that if you use SQUARE diamonds, it''s slicely the same, but with more moving options (2 more actually ;-) )
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
