I have seen games using hex boards but none using systems to refer to specific hexes (like you can do in Chess with numbers and letters). Is there a standard way to refer to a specific hex without numbering each hex on the board? A bit like a system of coordinates but that would be fairly clear and user-friendly?

  • 1
    It is far from unheard of to number every hex on the board, The magazine Strategy & Tactics, which includes (or at least once included) a board game in every issue, always did that in a light grey colour. Nov 3, 2017 at 9:53
  • Honestly outline the system you want to use in the rules and have an easy reference for players to use
    – Styxsksu
    Sep 6, 2023 at 20:46

6 Answers 6


There is no standard way, but as it's a two-dimensional grid you can easily project a coordinate system on it.

You can either go in a 90° angle then every second row or column is offset for one half to the bottom or right.

Or you can go in a 60°/120° angle to have straight lines but that looks unusual (and depending on your starting point can easily go into the negatives).


This example is from the game Lyngk

enter image description here

Here a system is being used to name intersections of triangles where the top line is just A1, then then next line is B1-B4. You can see on the side of the board how this is done. I know the question is for hexagons but this method could easily be applied in the same way.

ie. if you use Settlers or Catan the top row of land would be A1-A3, the next row down B1-B5 etc.

  • 1
    Your link requires a login to access, which not all users may want to go through. Can you provide a picture directly in the post here? Nov 3, 2017 at 13:48
  • 1
    @SouthpawHare Done, and link changed to game page rather than the image. I hadn't thought of that so thanks for suggestion. Nov 3, 2017 at 15:29
  • I really like this as it could keep the hexes themselves clean. It's not super useful to have numbers on them if they eventually get populated with tokens and such...
    – curious
    Nov 5, 2017 at 18:03

This site has a pretty thorough discussion of hexagons, most importantly for your question the section on "Coordinate systems". There are a few ways you can set it all up, but certainly you can do some row and column numbering to identify the hexes but at least one of those will be a bit "wobbly". Or you can choose a different coordinate system that counts things on an angle, but then your numbers are what get wobbly.

Visually, you could mark the wobbly direction with bands of colour to make it clearer which hexes are in the same column (or row).


Building on ConMan's answer and link, I think a combo of axial coordinates and the offset system would have a lot of advantages. Here's how the system works:

1) Every row has a letter, A, B, C, etc, just as in Lyngk illustration above. 2) Starting with the leftmost, topmost hex, assign it "column" 1. So, for example, in the Lyngk illustration above, the leftmost hex on row C would be C1. 3) A given row has only even or odd numbers on it, so the next hex to the right of C1 is C3, not C2. 4) The hex up and to the right of C3 is B4...so there's no B1, B2, or B3, and the single spot on row A is A7. 5) The hex to bottom right of C1 is D2... there is no D1, since D is an evens row. 6) The spot to right of B4 is B6, since there is no B5, because B row is also evens row.

Get it? The advantage is both that this is intuitive (once you get over the lack of evens or odds in a given row), but the math is always easy...up and to the right is minus one letter, plus one number, no matter the row you're in, and all the other moves between hexes are likewise stable (unlike the offset system cited in that link) but there are rows with letters, which is easier to follow intuitively (unlike the axial system cited in the link).

The advantage of having easy coordinate math isn't obvious for casual games, but I think for programming purposes it's a lot more attractive to have simple rules for hex relationships.


I think that, to make the coordinate system easy to understand, all the hexes which have the same value for a coordinate should be in a straight line. If coordinate lines wobble, the players, and people trying to understand each other's notation, would never remember which way the wobbling is to go.

My preferred system is something like the diagram below. If each player has an edge of the board nearest them, let the hexes with "1" coordinates be nearest the player who plays first. If each player has a corner of the board nearest them, let the hexes with "a" coordinates be on the left of the player who plays first. (Note that chess notation has already established the equivalent conventions for square boards.)

    c5  d5  e5
  b4  c4  d4  e4
a3  b3  c3  d3  e3
  a2  b2  c2  d2
    a1  b1  c1

Take your board. Choose one side and label each line touching it A, B,C,D.... Take another side adjacent to the first and label the lines a,b,c,d... Take the untouched set of lines, and label them 1,2,3,4... Now, you have a coordinate system in the format Ab4, or Hg5, or Dc3

However, there are risks, such as it is case sensitive.

Please tell me if it is not clear, and I will clarify tomorrow morning

  • 1
    Three-dimensional coordinate systems for a two-dimensional surface add unnecessary complexity. Yours in particular could be turned into either of the suggestions by Mildly Perilous or Andreas Hüttig, being simpler and easier to work with, as they remove ambiguity in text case and require fewer references outside the hex-grid.
    – Nij
    Nov 4, 2017 at 4:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .