Give us hexes, please!!!

[Cheesehead]

Civilization meets Tactics II (Avalon Hill)!

Real wargames are played with hexes. I hope it's not too late to change this. I'd be willing to wait another year if I could get our hexes back.

[Curry]

This seems to be the top complaint so far. But I'm willing to give this new system a try. I'm sure they didnt switch without thinking long and hard about it.

[Panzeh]

Wargames can be played by any system of dividing the ground, be it hexes, dots and lines, or squares.

[KDG]

I wonder if they have to leave the Hex system in order to enlarge the map, thus the move to tiles.

Edit

This was done for programming reasons per Hubert.

Read this topic:

I dont understand two things. :( Please help

[ April 14, 2004, 03:18 PM: Message edited by: KDG ]

[pzgndr]

Tactics II (Avalon Hill)! For only $5, Tactics II was my first wargame purchase way back when and I still have it. Using that old classic, I have already started an adaptation of Tactics II for SC2. I think with FoW, research, air and naval forces, etc. it will play out great. :cool:

[GIL]

I joined this board because I am very dissappointed at the use of squares instead of hexes.

I haven't seen any comments by the testers. What are the differences working with squares? What kind of tactics and how do they change.

Without playing the game it's hard to say, but it seems to me the game will be over-simplified, at least as far as the movement and attacks go.

[J P Wagner]

GIL, and others.....Have a good read of the subject here:

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=34;t=000050

I hope this helps.. smile.gif

Perhaps the original thread should be a sticky!

[pzgndr]

I haven't seen any comments by the testers. Oh? Feel free to try a search using "pzgndr." I'm sure you'll find something. ;)

[waltero]

It seems Squares will be ok on a game like this!
Being that the units and combat are vary simple.
there is no forced retreats, no surrounding and forcing units to surrender. And no mandatory attacks on adjasent units, and not much in the way of zone of control.
and units will be easier to kill. (front lines easyer to manage and maintain control).
Real War games have nothing to do with hexes or squares! It has to do with play testing and more play testing, and good game designers, to keep it balanced.
Let them play test this game a little further, maybe they will do better with this one then they did with SC.

[Victor Reijkersz]

Mmhh.. it could be intriguing to create a traingle based wargame. Would that oversimplify things even more than squares? or would it become more complex then? Or is it a question that squares are associated with simple games?

[Kuniworth]

Hubert has already decided on tiles. Hubert; you have my full support - do what you believe in and follow your ideas. No matter what I will support you, Bill and the others.

Keep up the good work.

[Desert Dave]

Or is it a question that squares are associated with simple games? LOL, nix Victor,

It is not squares, nor triangles nor hexagons neither... nor equilateral anythings (... O 'tis the Season, so these latter are decorated with - isosecles! - hanging quite shiny from every acutely angled limb! ;) )

Actually, it is more the case of TILES (... not "squares") which can indeed make a WW2 GS game as precisely COMPLEX as... it NEEDS to be, as you'll see.

While yet maintaining that which SC the Original possessed in mighty massive abundance, IE,

Simple, and X-tremely... fun to play.

O it's coming 'round soon,
Like a wintering solstice moon,
To a Cine-ma-plex - nearest you! :cool:

Wherever that might be!

[waltero]

Tiles Are fine if they are staggered? otherwise it would not be symmetrical! and movement would suck.

[ December 22, 2004, 01:11 AM: Message edited by: waltero ]

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by waltero the SC quite original:

Tiles Are fine if they a staggered? ????

Do you mean?

Like, only recently,

At the every-other annual BF
Blow-out in-combination
Christmas & Arbor Day
Bobby Darin MC'd
"Splish-splash"... bash? :cool:

When one of the Top Dudes, I shouldn't EVEN
Wish to mention - who,
Tripped! :eek:
Over a wandering Deb-Celeb's
Slim comely ankle,
And... staggered - yes!
Of course!

Across the scarlet & black tiles,

Directly! on a straight line
Toward that ersatz glass punch bowl,
Which someone, and again, can't say who,
Spiked! it with hi-octane 196 proof
Happy Holly sprigs (... ha-ha!
so they said!)

Well,
That was some most amazing stagger
You might (... secretly) laugh
Behind yer ruffled black Tuxedo
Sleeve (... required attire) about, too!

O/W, waltero, :confused:
Not sure what you meant in saying
Whatever it was... in the first
Place - that you did?

[waltero]

picture two blocks on floor, then put a block on top of the two. (right in the middle)
tiles would save on space vs hex. (Squares are smaller then hexes).
If they are not staggered the diagnal movement would not work so good!

[GIL]

Wagner, thank-you for the link. I see this issue has been rubbed raw.

Reading the many many responses to this issue, and especially Huberts pictures gives me some pause. A game of this scope looks to be okay working with "tiles" (anyone remember Avalon Hills' manuals starting with: "hexes -- henceforth called squares"? Oh how things come full circle).

Anywho, the best advice from the long thread on this subject is to wait for the demo and see if you like it.

Victor, you are a funny guy. If you need any opinions on where to store those triangles...

[waltero]

Indeed, Hexagony has a bord that is triangles, it is vary simple game!

[Lars]

Originally posted by Victor Reijkersz:
Mmhh.. it could be intriguing to create a traingle based wargame. Would that oversimplify things even more than squares? or would it become more complex then? Or is it a question that squares are associated with simple games? Yep, squares are associated with simple games.

Like Chess, for instance... tongue.gif