Having enjoyed the series of Samurai Battles scenarios using Basic Impetvs on a grid and 15mm figures, I wanted to expand this combination to include my many 28mm collections based for Impetvs. Given that the hexes used in the 15mm Samurai games were four inches and too small for my 120mm 28mm BMU frontages, I needed a new plan. That plan was to build hex tiles that were five inches. Well, I finally got around to making that plan a reality this weekend.
 |
| Hex tile piles ready for deployment. |
130 wooden hexes were painted, textured, and topped off with a clear matte sealer to create a 13 x 10 hex grid. Large enough for a reasonably sized battle but not too large to prevent the remote webcam from covering the entire battlefield. This layout can also be utilized for Commands & Colors if I so choose.
 |
| 130 hex tile grid laid out on table. |
Well, that was fast, a parade and a new terrain system! Great looking Sumerians and quick work on the new hexes.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Joe! Today, a two-fer-one!
DeleteNice work on the tiles. The Sumerians look superb on mass
ReplyDeleteThanks, Neil!
DeleteVery nice Jonathan, I fully understand going with the 5” hex, it strikes me as the best compromise in still keeping the right number of hex cells v table size, while creating enough space for both figures and terrain items to fit the hex at the same time.
ReplyDeleteMy own preference though is to use the hex in its other position, so that the apex rather than the flat faces forward as this visually seems to give more intuitively realistic battle lines.
The only consideration is whether to allow ‘ganging up’ again, my own preference is not to allow it, though I would allow supports.
Thanks, Norm.
DeletePreference is a funny thing when it comes to hex facing. For me, I weighed the pros and cons and (for now) will give the hex side orientation a try. Your "visually..more intuitively realistic" battle lines really comes down to whether you are fighting with the grain or against it. Doesn't it?
As for support, in hexside facing attitude, a supporting unit (however it is defined) can be placed directly to the main unit's rear and not offset.
This could be an interesting discussion with possibly no right or wrong approach forward.
Definitely no right or wrong.
DeleteThat is my thought!
DeleteYou managed to get a very consistent look to your hex tiles, and they all fit together very well.
ReplyDeleteThanks! The trick to consistency is to have a mix of ballast to provide slight variation.
DeleteThe tiles look brilliant Jonathan, as do the armies on them. Great job. How did you stop the tiles from moving?
ReplyDeleteThank you, Richard!
DeleteMy foundation is made up of large, square terrain tiles. Those tiles are flocked so that the flocking provides friction to hold the hexes in place. Of course, I have not tested under real game conditions. If I discover that the hexes do move a bit, I can lay down a large felt cloth as an underlayment.
Looks good. Norm's point on the apex is a good one, and that's effectively what offset squares allow. However, I like the chequerboard look to the set up. As for massed archers....well, I only have a couple of units too.
ReplyDeleteThanks! Do you recall the trouble you had with the Samurai games and understanding flank attacks? Well, this resolves that issue. Another benefit is that rigid linear formations can move one hex directly to the front rather than wiggling left and right as they advance forward. As noted to Norm above, the choice of point v side depends upon your attitude toward the table and whether you fight with or against the hex grain.
DeleteGreat work on the hex tiles Jon....did you make them from scratch or are they from Litko or someone similar? The finishing looks great, either way, and the armies of course are wonderful, as always!
ReplyDeleteCurious readers want to know!! ? (me too).
DeleteThere are a lot of good points to using hexes, for some things.
Thanks! The hexes are not from scratch. I did a scratch build once 30+ years ago and my quality control was not up to tolerance. I still have those hexes and they still see service.
DeleteRoss, the hexes were purchased commercially via mailorder.
DeleteThe tiles look great Jonathan!
ReplyDeleteThank you, Ray!
DeleteThe tiles look good Jonathan and I really like the two Sumerian armies facing off!
ReplyDeleteChristopher
Thanks on both counts!
DeleteMost timely post: I've just been going through various options for expanding into hexes to add to my gridded playing areas: one kicker has been hex size--for some reason, I was stuck on either 4" or 6" but 5" hadn't occurred to me (duh!). It might be the Goldilocks standard (Juuust right). We'll see. I like the idea of having a tile set as an option vs a mat (another option staring me in the face that I hadn't considered). Very good post!
ReplyDeleteEd, we all must make our own choices. I have hex systems in 2", 4", and now 5". Who is to say that 6" may not be in my future?
DeleteI like the choice of tiles over a mat since I can alter the footprint of the battle area easily and the hex boundaries are easy to see without being overpowering.
I've pondered using individual mdf hexes in the past but have yet to really need them, but never say never. Both armies look great I hope to see them in action soon.
ReplyDeleteI have been using individual hexes tiles for quite a while for a variety of miniatures games. For me, they work since I can alter the arrangement easily. Now, we need to discuss needs vs wants...
DeleteLooking really great Jonathan!
ReplyDeleteThanks!
DeleteLovely parade and I take your point on hex orientation as having played Command and Colors the way you have them laid out plays well. I take Norm's point about the lines, but can remember playing SPI boardgames in the 80's and it always felt a bit strange when counters would zig-zag their way forward and end up facing two units, having to then choose which one to combat.
ReplyDeleteLawrence, you are a true diplomat!
DeleteA splendid parade Jonathan…
ReplyDeleteI am looking forward to seeing their baptism of fire…
All the best. Aly
Thanks, Aly! These ruffians are on the table for a Thursday contest.
DeleteGreat looking set-up and presentation, Jonathan! On the matter of hex orientation, your tile system will enable you to try one or the other as the preference takes you. On the whole I like Norm's idea about unit/hex/table orientation, but only if the rule set allows units to face hex-corners.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I have no real problem with that. Flanks and rear are simple enough to define; as are ranged shooting arcs. But they do have to be defined. I think I did some work on this in my blog two or three years back...
Cheers,
Ion
Thank you, Ion! Good to see you dropping by and leaving a comment.
DeleteYou are right. With mobile tiles, the table can be set either with the hex grain or against it. I can try hexsides or hexpoints freely. As I mentioned in my reply to Norm, I weighed both options. For what I am wanting to accomplish, facing a hexside made more sense. Of course, no plan survives contact with the enemy (or rules system) but I have used the hexside attitude in othr games and it works perfectly well for my purposes.
The hexes came out looking great and the 5” look the perfect fit for the bases. Armies are impressive also. 😀
ReplyDeleteThanks! Yeah, the hexes came out nicely.
DeleteSplendid parade there Jonathan they look a most grand array, I look forward to seeing them in action. Don't have any experience with hexes so can't comment on orientation but they do look the part and are ideally suited to remote games.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Phil! What? You have never played on a game on hexes?
DeleteFantastic idea Jonathan, and those Sumerians look splendid, definitely one for my future plans.
ReplyDeleteThank you! A Sumerian project in your future? Great!
DeleteHexes! Brings back memories of Geo-Hex and my own feeble efforts to make a Terrain-Maker set.
ReplyDeleteFashion is cyclical, Greg!
DeleteGreat looking Sumerians and splendid hexes, I think it was the 1980s that I last played on hexes, SPI, it was all the rage, does make sense as I play To the Strongest! in boxes!
ReplyDeleteBest Iain
Thanks, Iain! Playing on a grid has some benefits whether on hexes or squares. Having come up through the ranks playing SPI, Avalon Hill, and GDW board Wargames, hexes playing on hexes seems natural.
DeleteThe hex tiles look awesome, and the appearance of the Sumerians en masse is epic!
ReplyDeleteSome of my very first wargames used hexes (Frappe! including the 3" hex application sheets- I still have a number of the 2/3 foot Masonite boards that I used to cover my table. The hexes came back for a lot of use with my gridded ancient rules based upon FGU's Legion!
I've always used the hexes oriented as you are. Joe also pointed out years ago that bricklay squares give similar effects, and I have used that system as well in the past. Grids have a number of advantages, which are especially apparent with remote gaming. Charlie Sweet was a big proponent of a gridded table, as was Joe Morschauser.
Peter, happy to see you approve of the look of table and troops!
DeleteFrappe’ used hexes? Gosh, I don’t remember that. Very good to see that I am not alone in the hex-flat facing orientation. For this application, I think it just works. We will see if I change my mind after contact with an enemy. Hexes or a grid of any kind speed play in a remote game for me, at least. No measuring and commands are more easily and precisely translated from player to umpire. On grids, we are in good company!
Must have taken an age to get all those done!? Bonkers bloke.
ReplyDeleteStill, the finished effect looks great though and those smashing Sumerian collections on parade! Lovely Jon, just lovely.
Thanks, Dai! Well, the hexproject consumed part of a weekend but the task is much better behind me than in front.
DeleteThe hexes weren't used as one unit per hex, but were still used for movement, firing, and rocket/howitzer shells.
ReplyDelete