Let’s say, hypothetically speaking, that I was working on a project that involved a large wilderness hex map. And that this map exceeded 99 columns and/or rows, meaning up to three digits for each.
What sort of hex numbering scheme do you prefer?
The typical 1079 is out as there are too many rows and/or columns for two digits each unless separate maps (east and west halves, for instance) each had their own set o four-digit (two plus two) hex ID numbers. So there would be a hex 1079 on the east map and also a hex 1079 on the west map. Which I don’t like, but call that option ‘A.’
A few ideas I’ve been looking at:
Option A — 2 separate 4-digit numbers with duplication (1079, 1079, and 4593)
Option B — 3-digit rows and columns (010079, 010169, and 045183)
Option C — 3-digit rows and columns with a dash (010-079, 010-169, and 045-183)
Option D — 3-digit rows and columns with another separator (010’079, 010’169, and 045’183)
Any other ideas?
I’m not a fan of the “count your own rows and columns” systems like on the old Greyhawk maps and I do want a hex map, not a hexless map with a hex overlay.