Search

hexagon>square

Copy this Storyboard CREATE A STORYBOARD!
Create your own at Storyboard That

Hey… on this chess board… is a diagonal one or two spaces?



Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?

It’s the square root of two spaces… and it corrupts the meaning of space, because if you start in one corner on a chess board and go straight to all the other ones with a straight line, the opposite corner will not make it there in the same amount of tiles. Gross!

Yes.

Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?


What shape?

Yes.

The hexagon, because it has 6 “true” neighbors, unlike the square who has 4 “true” neighbors and 4 “fake” ones. 6 4 therefore the hexagon is better, because, like I said earlier, it doesn't corrupt the laws of the universe..

Bruh why do you care so much about this?

Shut up. For a very long time there has been massive arguments and bickering over which is better for game boards—

HMMMMM…. I wonder who wins…

the hexagon, or the square. The hexagon is better for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but also for many others that I don’t feel like explaining. Square seems simple and good at first, but usually anything that is the first thing you think of, and is easy to implement, is never good.



Why not?

Because they’re terrible, inefficient, and cause spacial and existential suffering.

But how would we implement this into chess?

Anything could work with extensive thought and effort.





hmm

hmm

Create your own at Storyboard That

Hey… on this chess board… is a diagonal one or two spaces?



Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?

It’s the square root of two spaces… and it corrupts the meaning of space, because if you start in one corner on a chess board and go straight to all the other ones with a straight line, the opposite corner will not make it there in the same amount of tiles. Gross!

Yes.

Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?


What shape?

Yes.

The hexagon, because it has 6 “true” neighbors, unlike the square who has 4 “true” neighbors and 4 “fake” ones. 6 4 therefore the hexagon is better, because, like I said earlier, it doesn't corrupt the laws of the universe..

Bruh why do you care so much about this?

Shut up. For a very long time there has been massive arguments and bickering over which is better for game boards—

HMMMMM…. I wonder who wins…

the hexagon, or the square. The hexagon is better for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but also for many others that I don’t feel like explaining. Square seems simple and good at first, but usually anything that is the first thing you think of, and is easy to implement, is never good.



Why not?

Because they’re terrible, inefficient, and cause spacial and existential suffering.

But how would we implement this into chess?

Anything could work with extensive thought and effort.





hmm

hmm

Create your own at Storyboard That

Hey… on this chess board… is a diagonal one or two spaces?



Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?

It’s the square root of two spaces… and it corrupts the meaning of space, because if you start in one corner on a chess board and go straight to all the other ones with a straight line, the opposite corner will not make it there in the same amount of tiles. Gross!

Yes.

Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?


What shape?

Yes.

The hexagon, because it has 6 “true” neighbors, unlike the square who has 4 “true” neighbors and 4 “fake” ones. 6 4 therefore the hexagon is better, because, like I said earlier, it doesn't corrupt the laws of the universe..

Bruh why do you care so much about this?

Shut up. For a very long time there has been massive arguments and bickering over which is better for game boards—

HMMMMM…. I wonder who wins…

the hexagon, or the square. The hexagon is better for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but also for many others that I don’t feel like explaining. Square seems simple and good at first, but usually anything that is the first thing you think of, and is easy to implement, is never good.



Why not?

Because they’re terrible, inefficient, and cause spacial and existential suffering.

But how would we implement this into chess?

Anything could work with extensive thought and effort.





hmm

hmm

Create your own at Storyboard That

Hey… on this chess board… is a diagonal one or two spaces?



Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?

It’s the square root of two spaces… and it corrupts the meaning of space, because if you start in one corner on a chess board and go straight to all the other ones with a straight line, the opposite corner will not make it there in the same amount of tiles. Gross!

Yes.

Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?


What shape?

Yes.

The hexagon, because it has 6 “true” neighbors, unlike the square who has 4 “true” neighbors and 4 “fake” ones. 6 4 therefore the hexagon is better, because, like I said earlier, it doesn't corrupt the laws of the universe..

Bruh why do you care so much about this?

Shut up. For a very long time there has been massive arguments and bickering over which is better for game boards—

HMMMMM…. I wonder who wins…

the hexagon, or the square. The hexagon is better for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but also for many others that I don’t feel like explaining. Square seems simple and good at first, but usually anything that is the first thing you think of, and is easy to implement, is never good.



Why not?

Because they’re terrible, inefficient, and cause spacial and existential suffering.

But how would we implement this into chess?

Anything could work with extensive thought and effort.





hmm

hmm

Create your own at Storyboard That

Hey… on this chess board… is a diagonal one or two spaces?



Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?

It’s the square root of two spaces… and it corrupts the meaning of space, because if you start in one corner on a chess board and go straight to all the other ones with a straight line, the opposite corner will not make it there in the same amount of tiles. Gross!

Yes.

Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?


What shape?

Yes.

The hexagon, because it has 6 “true” neighbors, unlike the square who has 4 “true” neighbors and 4 “fake” ones. 6 4 therefore the hexagon is better, because, like I said earlier, it doesn't corrupt the laws of the universe..

Bruh why do you care so much about this?

Shut up. For a very long time there has been massive arguments and bickering over which is better for game boards—

HMMMMM…. I wonder who wins…

the hexagon, or the square. The hexagon is better for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but also for many others that I don’t feel like explaining. Square seems simple and good at first, but usually anything that is the first thing you think of, and is easy to implement, is never good.



Why not?

Because they’re terrible, inefficient, and cause spacial and existential suffering.

But how would we implement this into chess?

Anything could work with extensive thought and effort.





hmm

hmm

Create your own at Storyboard That

Hey… on this chess board… is a diagonal one or two spaces?



Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?

It’s the square root of two spaces… and it corrupts the meaning of space, because if you start in one corner on a chess board and go straight to all the other ones with a straight line, the opposite corner will not make it there in the same amount of tiles. Gross!

Yes.

Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?


What shape?

Yes.

The hexagon, because it has 6 “true” neighbors, unlike the square who has 4 “true” neighbors and 4 “fake” ones. 6 4 therefore the hexagon is better, because, like I said earlier, it doesn't corrupt the laws of the universe..

Bruh why do you care so much about this?

Shut up. For a very long time there has been massive arguments and bickering over which is better for game boards—

HMMMMM…. I wonder who wins…

the hexagon, or the square. The hexagon is better for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but also for many others that I don’t feel like explaining. Square seems simple and good at first, but usually anything that is the first thing you think of, and is easy to implement, is never good.



Why not?

Because they’re terrible, inefficient, and cause spacial and existential suffering.

But how would we implement this into chess?

Anything could work with extensive thought and effort.





hmm

hmm

Create your own at Storyboard That

Hey… on this chess board… is a diagonal one or two spaces?



Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?

It’s the square root of two spaces… and it corrupts the meaning of space, because if you start in one corner on a chess board and go straight to all the other ones with a straight line, the opposite corner will not make it there in the same amount of tiles. Gross!

Yes.

Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?


What shape?

Yes.

The hexagon, because it has 6 “true” neighbors, unlike the square who has 4 “true” neighbors and 4 “fake” ones. 6 4 therefore the hexagon is better, because, like I said earlier, it doesn't corrupt the laws of the universe..

Bruh why do you care so much about this?

Shut up. For a very long time there has been massive arguments and bickering over which is better for game boards—

HMMMMM…. I wonder who wins…

the hexagon, or the square. The hexagon is better for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but also for many others that I don’t feel like explaining. Square seems simple and good at first, but usually anything that is the first thing you think of, and is easy to implement, is never good.



Why not?

Because they’re terrible, inefficient, and cause spacial and existential suffering.

But how would we implement this into chess?

Anything could work with extensive thought and effort.





hmm

hmm

Create your own at Storyboard That

Hey… on this chess board… is a diagonal one or two spaces?



Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?

It’s the square root of two spaces… and it corrupts the meaning of space, because if you start in one corner on a chess board and go straight to all the other ones with a straight line, the opposite corner will not make it there in the same amount of tiles. Gross!

Yes.

Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?


What shape?

Yes.

The hexagon, because it has 6 “true” neighbors, unlike the square who has 4 “true” neighbors and 4 “fake” ones. 6 4 therefore the hexagon is better, because, like I said earlier, it doesn't corrupt the laws of the universe..

Bruh why do you care so much about this?

Shut up. For a very long time there has been massive arguments and bickering over which is better for game boards—

HMMMMM…. I wonder who wins…

the hexagon, or the square. The hexagon is better for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but also for many others that I don’t feel like explaining. Square seems simple and good at first, but usually anything that is the first thing you think of, and is easy to implement, is never good.



Why not?

Because they’re terrible, inefficient, and cause spacial and existential suffering.

But how would we implement this into chess?

Anything could work with extensive thought and effort.





hmm

hmm

View as slideshow
Storyboard That Characters Storyboard That

Create your own Storyboard

Try it for Free!

Create your own Storyboard

Try it for Free!

Storyboard Text

  • Hey… on this chess board… is a diagonal one or two spaces?
  • Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?
  • It’s the square root of two spaces… and it corrupts the meaning of space, because if you start in one corner on a chess board and go straight to all the other ones with a straight line, the opposite corner will not make it there in the same amount of tiles. Gross!
  • Yes.
  • Well then how do you solve that? With another shape?
  • What shape?
  • The hexagon, because it has 6 “true” neighbors, unlike the square who has 4 “true” neighbors and 4 “fake” ones. 6>4 therefore the hexagon is better, because, like I said earlier, it doesn't corrupt the laws of the universe..
  • Yes.
  • Bruh why do you care so much about this?
  • HMMMMM…. I wonder who wins…
  • Shut up. For a very long time there has been massive arguments and bickering over which is better for game boards—
  • the hexagon, or the square. The hexagon is better for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but also for many others that I don’t feel like explaining. Square seems simple and good at first, but usually anything that is the first thing you think of, and is easy to implement, is never good.
  • Why not?
  • But how would we implement this into chess?
  • Because they’re terrible, inefficient, and cause spacial and existential suffering.
  • Anything could work with extensive thought and effort.
  • hmm
  • hmm
Over 30 Million Storyboards Created
No Downloads, No Credit Card, and No Login Needed to Try!
Storyboard That Family

We use cookies so you get the best experience, Privacy Policy