| WorldWorksGames http://www.worldworksgames.com/forum/ |
|
| I'm going to Hex you up! http://www.worldworksgames.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=7003 |
Page 2 of 2 |
| Author: | Highland_Piper [ 03-21-2009, 03:16 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
This actually seems to be working. The only problem I can see (and it is a really minor one) is if your using any stone tiles they don't match up when you rotate the tile. No big deal if it is dirt or using a hex stone. I wish the tiles where not so big, but I just don't think it would work well any smaller. Here are some tile layouts I created using CC3 I've been messing about with them in photoshop and they appear to work really well. I post a pick of them when I get more layouts figured out. Andorax, I would still like to see what you come up with. |
|
| Author: | Andorax [ 03-23-2009, 05:39 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Split down the middle between the hexes. Divided in this manner, it should prove possible to twist, turn, and reorient these tiles any which way. Highland_Piper, in all the examples you posted, you still appear to be consistantly trying to make square terrain happen on hexagonal tiles, which makes your job about 300% harder than it has to be. Reenvision the actual terrain itself, the "cityscapes" and all, to no longer be built on a square philosophy, but instead to fit in with the hexagonal tiles you're using in the first place. Roads run at 120 degree angles to each other, as do river junctions (that'll take some serious texture bending, but it can be done). Suddenly, your workload of what all you have to create to fit the setup drops dramatically...you only need a similarly-few number of tiles to what you'd need if you were working in squares to begin with. To take your roads and platforms for an example...straight across, bent one way, full Y for road connectors. A platform that doesn't quite to the edges (except for the road in/out on the sides). A platform that goes to just the edges, and a platform that cuts halfway across, RIGHT through the middle. Basically, DC001, DC005, a "Y" version of 005, DR 10010, DR 1006 and 1006A (that wind up as hexes, not squares), and DR 1008 (that goes exactly through the middle) would be all you really need. If I were designing a hex-base tile system from the ground up...that's how I'd do it. |
|
| Author: | Highland_Piper [ 03-23-2009, 06:18 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think I understand what your getting at. Your tiles are also smaller than mine. I will try to play around with it, but I'm still not 100% sure of what your suggesting. |
|
| Author: | Kane [ 03-23-2009, 07:09 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
If I understand Bob correctly, what he is suggesting is a different alignment of the small hexes in the large hex. See how his has a complete line down the middle? All those tiles will match up any direction with any other tile. Then again, your design may as well. I'm having trouble visualizing from your pictures. Of course, I may totally be missing Bobs point. 
|
|
| Author: | Andorax [ 03-23-2009, 07:55 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Both methods can be aligned any-which-way...it's just two different methods to achieve the same end result. It *might* be possible to take my method and go one ring still wider with it...have to measure out how it fits on the page. The main difference is that Highland Piper is sticking to the edges of the hexes on the tile's six "corners", and only splits a minimum number of hexes down the middle. My approach splits ALL the hexes down the middle. |
|
| Author: | Kane [ 03-23-2009, 10:41 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
OK, I see. Forgive me for being dense, but I am still not seeing the advantage of having a border of split hexes. What exactly does that accomplish differently from HPs design? |
|
| Author: | anvil [ 03-23-2009, 11:20 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
With half hexes all around, they will always line up, with a mix there is a danger of a half hex aligning with a whole hex, throwing off the grid. |
|
| Author: | Highland_Piper [ 03-23-2009, 11:39 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I must be exceptionally thick this week. I still don't see what either of you are talking about. Especially with the half hex. Having half and whole hexes match up just as well. I'd like to add this was just quickly thrown together. I'm not opposed to trying new things so I'm going to try out Andorax's idea and see how well it works for me. I don't know why I'm having such a difficult time wrapping my head around what he is talking about, probably a side effect of being an at home dad with four kids  tends to leave you a bit frazzled some weeks.
|
|
| Author: | LD2062 [ 03-24-2009, 12:18 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I knew working with hex grids was difficult, but I didn't know it would be as bad as this. I hope Andorax's method lines up better than the one you used for that layout. Otherwise I don't see how you could make it work. At this rate I'd suggest building with no grid and just have a mat or 2 dozen sheets of transparencies with the hex grid printed and lay it over top. It might not even cost that much to do it with the sheets if you have access to a plain paper copier. |
|
| Author: | Highland_Piper [ 03-24-2009, 12:25 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
You forgot to read the part where I said it was quickly thrown together. It matches up perfectly, I just threw it together really quickly. Here give me a moment and I will line things up properly and change the picture. I would like to add that there will be thick white lines on some, I forgot to erase those, and some walls may appear to not match up, but that is because of the lighting from the Bevel and Emboss. When rotated the lighting is opposite some times. However the walls appear to line up. I'm not saying this is the best option. Just the one I came up with, I will try messing about with Andorax's version today or tomorrow and see how that pans out. I'm looking for the best solution here. I will start out by making them flat tiles and as soon as I'm happy that I can get a lot of different varieties in dungeons then I will be happy to make 3D. Outdoor tiles have been tested, tried and true for two decades so those are easy enough. Wargaming has been using hex outdoor tiles since the 1970's at least. |
|
| Author: | LD2062 [ 03-24-2009, 01:13 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I stand corrected that seems to work just fine. |
|
| Author: | Andorax [ 03-24-2009, 05:23 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ok, I'm going to try this again. There are two key elements to "my method". One is the half-hex-all-around thingy, which is just ONE way to make the hexes match on all sides of the tile. Highland_Piper's method is ANOTHER way to make the hexes match on all sides of the tile, so they BOTH work without resulting in any broken tiles. They're just two different methods is all. I have not yet had a chance to determine which method makes the best use of page space. Right now, I think Highland's method has the biggest tiles that will fit on a single page, so his is likely the better choice for card conservation. So that's a moot point. The other key element to my "method", which I haven't had a chance to mock up or describe, is getting around the idea of forcing square rooms and corridors to fit into hexagonal tiles. As your example clearly demonstrates, it *can* be done, but it also requires a whole host of tiles and a lot of fiddley adjusting. My proposal is to quit designing dungeons/forests/other terrain around a square-room philosophy ENTIRELY and to suit the room structure to the build methodology. Highland Piper, these are ROUGH quick builds based off of your hexes. Could you take a swing at designing a layout, much like the one above, only using these elements instead? |
|
| Author: | LD2062 [ 03-24-2009, 05:40 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I rather like your approach Andorax. The symmetry appeals to me. And the hex rooms are a good idea too, if nothing else they at least have the benefit of being different. |
|
| Author: | Highland_Piper [ 03-24-2009, 06:34 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I will knock those up tonight. I just finished creating the template for it on DD3. Must run and pick up the kiddies from school. Just reread your post, would you like me to use the template I made or the smaller one that you made? |
|
| Author: | T-G [ 03-25-2009, 12:50 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Dudes, I really like the direction this thing is going. It really looks sharp, and the high chunky wall just add to its... chunky goodness? 
|
|
| Author: | Highland_Piper [ 03-26-2009, 12:30 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I did not forget about your request Andorax. I needed to make a few extra tiles as there was no way to connect the tiles that go to the corners to any of the other tiles, so I had to make a few with passage ways to them. Should have it done in a few days, less if I have no interruptions. |
|
| Author: | Andorax [ 03-26-2009, 12:46 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
No hurry on it...I just think it's a more logical approach to work "with" the hexes instead of despite them. |
|
| Author: | Highland_Piper [ 09-16-2011, 03:36 AM ] |
| Post subject: | |
No hurry? Then you don't mind the two year wait.  
I'm placing all my hex mapping ideas at my new website |
|
| Page 2 of 2 | All times are UTC - 8 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|