Home Forums General Game Design Some more thoughts on grids and miniature wargaming

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #95711
    Phil Dutré
    Participant

    I’ve written up some more thoughts about using grids for miniature wargames, and whether we could use irregular grids:

    https://wargaming-mechanics.blogspot.com/2018/07/grids-and-miniature-wargaming-never.html

     

     

    Tiny Tin Men Blog: http://snv-ttm.blogspot.com/
    Wargaming Mechanics Blog: http://wargaming-mechanics.blogspot.com/

    #95734
    Norm S
    Participant

    Good read Phil. The hex has worked in the boardgaming industry for almost 60 years and with good reason 🙂

    As someone who is rather partial to WWII tactical, I like the hex because it gives me fire arcs, establishes armour facings (front / flank / rear), it is easy to count out hexes for range and the uniform pattern allows us to say ‘that is a woods’ hex, whereas irregular shapes need to be formed by the shape of the wood and other geography and not just be an irregular shape for its own sake.

    But you know, perhaps the real reason why I like the hex is that it is just so familiar to me and there is a second nature relationship between my brain, eye and the hex, I can so easily read the battlefield in terms of hexes.

    As an aside, I think squares exist because they are easily drawn by gamers, rather than the difficulties of keeping a hex uniformed in size, orientation and axis as one draws it across the board with a felt pen and ruler …. thank you Hexon 🙂

    #95758
    Phil Dutré
    Participant

    Norm,

    I do agree. The hexgrid is so well-known that is often not questioned. Actually, some people go as far as claiming that “if it doesn’t have hexes, it’s not a proper (board) wargame”. I don’t agree with such a dogmatic statement, because there are plenty of good games that use area-movement or point-to-point movement.

    Although irregular grids are probably not very feasible for miniature wargaming, it doesn’t harm thinking about the concept. As in any good research, exploring even unfavourable alternatives might provide a better understanding of why current practices are the better solution.

    Nevertheless, I am still intrigued about the possibilities of a triangular grid 🙂

    Tiny Tin Men Blog: http://snv-ttm.blogspot.com/
    Wargaming Mechanics Blog: http://wargaming-mechanics.blogspot.com/

    #95759
    Norm S
    Participant

    I like area movement games, though the essential ingredient here is that the area needs to be mapped against to terrain features for it to use its full potential. Years ago I played GDW’s Ardennes, which is a point to point, but that difficult terrain and the reliance on the road network worked hand-in-glove with the point to point system.

    I am of course wedded to grids for my boardgaming, but for figures I have a less certain relationship, as I revel in the functionality of the hex, but enjopy the aesthetic of a non-gridded open board.

    #95763
    Don Glewwe
    Participant

    Two ideas mentioned: “…enjoy the aesthetic of a non-gridded open board” and “…easily read the battlefield in terms of hexes” combine to argue for the use of subtle marks at the vertices (rather than the entire hex) to impose a grid on the tabletop.

    Gamers have no trouble seeing the hexes when needed, but they fade into the background (to an extent) when the action is the focus.

    (There are two different-sized grids shown in the photo: white and black.)

    https://brawlfactory.net/

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.