I previously noted a simple method I’ve used for quite a while to note the location of something within a hex when a detail map isn’t really needed. I’ve always used the 3-subhex-across approach I displayed in that post, figuring that, whatever the size of the hex, dividing it into sevenths (or so) would be close enough for the sort of medium-level detail this approach provides. However, my current project is going to utilize 5-mile hexes, and in trying to decide how to designate 1-mile hexes on detail maps, I’m wondering if using a similar approach might not work:

5 Mile Subhexes at Lord Kilgore

Subhexes in a 5-mile hex.

So if I’ve got a detail map of hex 171,092, the 1-mile subhex in the center would simply be labeled 171,092A.

I’m not sure about this, and it might just be better to give each detail map it’s own set of numbers. But this would have the advantage of the detail map coordinates being directly tied to the overview map coordinates. It also leaves the question of what to do with the subhexes at each corner of the large hex.

5 Comments to “5 Mile Subhexes”

  1. Roger GS says:

    I know, those subhexes are vexatious, best to assign them consistently in one direction (i.e., the ones at NE, SE and S go with the current hex). Except then you need 25 letters, not 24.

  2. The Bane says:

    Works for me. Especially since I am going with a 25/5/1 hex setting. I am curious as to why the letters go counter-clockwise? Instinctively I would have expected them to go clockwise. Some dislike of “I” and “O”?

    Yep, I like it,
    TB

    • Kilgore says:

      Wait. There’s supposed to be a REASON for the decision to go counter-clockwise?

      Seriously, I just sketched that out one day and counter-clockwise it was. So, usually, counter-clockwise it remains. I agree that it might make more sense the other way.

      Also, in response to someone’s question somewhere about why A isn’t at the top or “first” or whatever, I guess I just liked the idea of subhex A being the dead center of the big hex.

      Also, I wanted to copy the letter layout from the earlier version for the core of this version for consistency.

      Obviously, others are free to use their own (better?) layouts.

      • The Bane says:

        Wasn’t trying to give you any kind of a hard time. I just thought I might have been missing some kind of intentional design consideration. I am still banging my head on how to annotate what scale map (25/5/1), grid, and sub-map to find something on, for my homebrew setting, as my maps typically show 2 of the 3 levels. Perhaps Scale/Map Name/Hex/Sub-hex layout? I don’t know, but thanks for making the post. It gives me direction, which I desperately need at the moment.

        Best,
        TB