Brad Wardell on why we have squares instead of hexes.
"I hate hexes," says Wardell when asked what he thinks of Civ 5's big new feature. "One, I like being able to move in eight directions. I don't like only being able to move in six. Two, it makes the game feel like playing on a hardcore board tile game. I just don't like that look."
The "i like being able to move in eight, instead of six" is completely arbitrary; obviously it cannot be supported by any solid argument, but it CAN be attacked with the argument that FOUR of those directions basically break the system. It's always better to move diagonally in a "square grid" system, because you are covering MORE GROUND. This is stupid.
From Wiki's article on Hex Grids:
The primary advantage of a hex map over a traditional square grid map is that the distance between the center of each hex cell (or hex) and the center of all six adjacent hexes is constant. By comparison, in a square grid map, the distance from the center of each square cell to the center of the four diagonal adjacent cells it shares a corner with is greater than the distance to the center of the four adjacent cells it shares an edge with. This is desirable for games in which the measurement of movement is a factor. The other advantage is the fact that neighbouring cells always share edges; there are no two cells with contact at only one point.
It's a bit ironic that Brad doesn't want the game to "feel like playing on a hardcore board tile game", given that it's definitely the most hardcore big game to get sold in probably 10 years, and given that it has the cloth map mode which feels a little boardgamey anyway. Also, nobody knows strategy and tactics like the guys who made those hardcore board tile games he's talking about. He should look to learn from them rather than reject them because he "doesnt like" the look.
In short, I'm a bit sad that Brad isn't the kind of designer who can look past his own personal preferences and figure out what is actually best for the game.
