Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Wasteland Wasteland 2 Pre-Release Discussion Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

Self-Ejected

Excidium

P. banal
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
13,696
Location
Third World
Just go with the D&D answer to diagonal movement in square grids: movement to any square costs the same. It's ok because the monsters do it too!

A peek into the mind of squaregridders.

Yep. I can't understand it too.
E.g. there is no hex grid in JA2. And still it's the king of turn-based combat.
In the land of the blind...
 
Last edited:

tuluse

Arcane
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
11,400
Serpent in the Staglands Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Shadorwun: Hong Kong
3E does is every other diagonal movement costs double. This leads to interesting movement as you try to avoid the penalty when you can.
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
3,144
Imweasel's thing looks like it represents 3/2 AP for diagonal/straight and then 5 AP to spend (so you can't move two diagonal). But like lots of people have already said, squares with diagonal, while a lot better than squares without diagonal, is impossible to implement elegantly (it's not actually a 1.5-1 ratio, but 1.41-1; what do you do with diagonal melee attacks? same damage but less to hit?; how do you do AOE? half damage for the squares mostly outside of the "circle"?) They're all not really huge issues, but it just means that hexes are a nicer all in all.

It becomes irrelevant once they introduce diagonal movement, though (which they will afaik).

Where did you hear this?
 
Self-Ejected

Excidium

P. banal
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
13,696
Location
Third World
3E does is every other diagonal movement costs double. This leads to interesting movement as you try to avoid the penalty when you can.
Yeah, it's just a more intuitive way of diagonal movement costing extra where you don't have to deal with fractions. Such is life with square grid, you need some workarounds to make it almost as good as hexes.
 

Darkzone

Arcane
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
2,323
Imweasel this is my first post here, and i hope also my final. Why? Because i think that you are A (a mathematical zero) or B ( a liar). I hope for your sake only the first one. If the cost for a diagonal transition is 1, then the number of possible fields are 24 not 20. You have forgoten the corners. If the cost is 2 then it is still only 12. q.e.d does not stand for 'quite evil dummy', but for quad erat demonstrandum translated to: "which had to be demonstrated". Now again to the costs. How does a circle look like in a square grid if the cost for transition is from the set of whole numbers and the costs for the diagonal transitions are the same as the other transitions? Answer: A SQUARE!
To others: Don't let be fooled by nonsens.
 
Last edited:

imweasel

Guest
You move from the center of one square to the center of the next square on the grid. The total distance (which is ideally a straight line) is indicated by the red circle. Because of the maximum distance (as I said, indicated by the red circle) you cannot move to outmost corners in one turn. And yes, I rasterized the grid to make it fit optimally (which is a what a game developer does too. Obviously).

It really is not that hard to understand.

BTW, I prefer hexes too, but they are not perfect. Neither is a square grid for that matter.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
99,636
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
:lol: It's Darkzone, one of the Wasteland 2 official forum "celebrities".

imweasel's trolling is super effective :thumbsup:
 

Darkzone

Arcane
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
2,323
Still nonsense. The measurement is in APs in Wasteland and you can move as far as you have APs. The circle is a indication for the max movement in the real world, and the cost for this movement are 2 fields. If you apply costs of 1 diagonal movement it results in a square. The circle is not a hard border which you cannot leave. And yes you will leave the circle if you have 2 APs and the cost for all form of transitions is 1 AP. Do the math.

Yes Infinitron in persona. But i get angry if someone is on purpose dishonest. I have lost my calmness. It would not happend if it was not about math and planar movement.
 
Last edited:

DeepOcean

Arcane
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
7,404
I just prefer hexes because they do the same thing as squares with diagonal movement but they don't have the problem of you invading two other tiles when you do a diagonal movement, that can be problematic while doing a tile based movement system on an cRPG, unless your character can just teleport to the diagonal square intended or they find a way to make your chacarter don't invade any other tile until the movement is complete but in that case hexes is a more elegant solution.
 
Self-Ejected

Excidium

P. banal
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
13,696
Location
Third World
If the cost for moving into any square is the same then it's shit compared to hexes in tactical movement. If you make the workaround of diagonal movement costing more it's shit compared to hexes in ease of use.

Verdict: square grid is shit.
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
3,144
I just prefer hexes because they do the same thing as squares with diagonal movement but they don't have the problem of you invading two other tiles when you do a diagonal movement, that can be problematic while doing a tile based movement system on an cRPG, unless your character can just teleport to the diagonal square intended or they find a way to make your chacarter don't invade any other tile until the movement is complete but in that case hexes is a more elegant solution.

I actually think that these types of quirks can potentially become interesting if you start of with the system they used in Civ II (IIRC units "guard" straight adjacent squares from diagonal moves) but apply skill checks to see if the moves a success. Agile characters can slip between baddies surrounding him, that sort of thing.

Doesn't change that having two types of grid distances is just weird or inelegant or whatever you want to call it. Hexes are just plain nicer, and it'd be sad if they'd die out in this chest high cover centered gaming age due to minor graphical issues.
 

HiddenX

The Elder Spy
Patron
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
1,655
Location
Germany
Divinity: Original Sin Shadorwun: Hong Kong
Quote of myself:

If you have natural terrain (fields, caves, etc), you don't really run into the downsides of hex grids. They often look better there, since right angles are not common in nature. they look worse in most man-made areas, though.

The hex grid distance metric is much closer to euclidian distance than any of the reasonable metrics for square grids. This make them superior in tactics games. With a square grid, you have to do strange math things if you want the space to feel like euclidean space (you have to make diagonals work, and it's hard to do so with integer-logic). On the other hand with hex grids the player's intuition about distance is pretty close to the in-game distance.

In a square grid there are only 4 directions you can move that go through an edge. The other 4 go through corners. This can cause issues in games when diagonal movement or range counting is allowed as technically 15 squares diagonally is longer than 15 squares horizontally or vertically (-> see Pythagoras).

Hexagons on the other hand have 6 degrees of freedom and all movement is through an edge, never a corner. This makes range counting easier and more consistent as well.

However it's hard to draw right angles in a hex grid (i.e. if you take the 3 axis approach, there's others, then no axis is at 90° to another). That's why square grids are more common for dungeon style maps with straight corridors and right angle turns while hex grids show up more for over world maps where sharp corners are less likely.

But there's a solution for everything:

Just use Kisrhombille tiling and you can use hexes and draw straight lines!

Tiling Dual Semiregular V4-6-12 Bisected Hexagonal works best.

Hexes are cool, you can even avoid the zig-zag-wandering from west to east, if you use temporary in-between hexes while moving (orange):

Yay8ibl.png
 
Last edited:

imweasel

Guest
If the cost for moving into any square is the same then it's shit compared to hexes in tactical movement. If you make the workaround of diagonal movement costing more it's shit compared to hexes in ease of use.

Verdict: square grid is shit.
A hex grid is more accurate, true, but it isn't perfect either.

67ryxk.jpg


Only free movement would be ideal..... but that would be a pain in the ass to use in PnP. And not that easy to implement in a CRPG either.
 
Self-Ejected

Excidium

P. banal
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
13,696
Location
Third World
If the cost for moving into any square is the same then it's shit compared to hexes in tactical movement. If you make the workaround of diagonal movement costing more it's shit compared to hexes in ease of use.

Verdict: square grid is shit.
A hex grid is more accurate, true, but it isn't perfect either.
It's irrelevant if it's perfect or not, use of a movement grid is already a compromise.

We're discussing which solution is better.
 

felipepepe

Codex's Heretic
Patron
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
17,310
Location
Terra da Garoa
Free movement isn't all that great. It hides the tactical perception from the player, making stuff like flanking, attack range and even movement range feel very arbitrary sometimes.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom