I can't say if it's inspired by the site you link, but basing your suspicion on the hexagonal shape is very weak, at best.
Also, the data seems to be in different resolutions, and the actual jamming data is quite different just looking at both sites.
I've seen hexagons used for maps and boardgames for years.
That's utterly awesome and I hope the links didn't come across as "this has already been done"—quite the contrary—the intention is just "here are cool similar things if anyone's curious". A hexagonal version is a noble and clever addition!
Doesn't using a one-hex-per-state model basically defeat most of the benefits of using hexagons in the first place? This seems like a bit of cargo-culting the idea that hexagons are good for maps without actually understanding why.
The ideas sound nice, but whenever I've seen actual code that says it's been based on hexagonal architecture.... it's been an over-engineered difficult-to-work-with mess.
I might be the only one pedantically annoyed here, but... the very first image on this page contains a mix of hexagons and pentagons.
Which is it - an inaccurate image, and the system is really hexagon-based, or does the system also use pentagons? My guess is that it is actually all hexagon-based since the overlap between granularity is already only approximate.
And I want to encourage everyone to try their hand at making one of these. They're deceptively more interesting than they would appear to be at first glance.
And plus-one on the recommendations for Vi Hart's videos on Hexaflexagons also mentioned here.
I've seen hexagons used for maps and boardgames for years.
reply