Strategy games have used hexagons instead of squares to represent terrain for decades, and it's not just an aesthetic choice: it's a design decision that solves several problems at once.
Every tile has 6 neighbors, all at the same distance
On a square grid, a tile has 4 "straight" neighbors and 4 "diagonal" ones, and the diagonal ones are actually farther away in a straight line even though the game often treats them as equally close. Hexagons fix this at the root: all 6 neighbors sit at the same real distance, so moving or attacking in any direction costs the same.
No diagonal ambiguity
Square tiles always raise the same question: can you cross diagonally between two obstacles that touch at the corner? Every game has to invent a rule to settle it. With hexagons that problem doesn't exist, because there are no shared corners to create that ambiguity.
It represents natural terrain better
Real-world maps (coastlines, rivers, mountain ranges) don't follow straight lines or 90-degree angles. A hex grid lets you draw borders and regions with much more natural curves than a square grid, without losing the simplicity of a tile-based board.
More tactical options per turn
Six movement directions instead of four (or an irregular eight, with diagonals) give more variety in decisions without complicating the rules. That's why settlement, war, and building games have used hexagons since the wargames of the 1960s.
It fits naturally with resource and expansion logic
In games where you control territory or gather resources by zone, hexagons distribute space more evenly than squares. Every expansion, every new tile claimed, carries the same relative weight as the last, which makes the game easier for a designer to balance.
If you'd rather see this logic in action than just read about it, try a game on Hexo: head to /play/ai and play free against the AI to see how the game changes when every tile has six neighbors instead of four.
