Talk:Binary Homeworlds

Why Separate?

Does Binary really need a separate page aside from the main page about Homeworlds? - Cerulean 13:09, 25 July 2007 (EDT)

It's a different game entirely, so I'd say it does. Further, once a game "variation" has different piece requirements or player numbers, it can't be listed under the same sorting categories or in the same table cells on What Can I Play?. Further still, a variation could have totally different attribution, credits, or copyrights. By the time you try to clarify all that in sections on a single, catch-all page, it's gonna be a mess.

Besides, a "new page" is still just a few bytes on the wiki, compared to a "new section" on the main game's page. So even in terms of resources, there's no real significant cost. But in terms of sortability, attribution, and reference, to merge a major variation into the main game page has a very real cost in utility. In short: leave it as is, please; it's perfect. We've got bigger fish to fry. --David Artman 13:23, 25 July 2007 (EDT)

Inventor

I thought that Andrew Looney was the inventor of this variant, Binary Homeworlds? Cuc (talk) 03:51, 10 March 2020 (PDT)

Basically the only differences between Homeworlds and Binary Homeworlds are that you don't have Good and Evil hidden roles, and you use fewer pieces. If Andrew decided those changes, then add him as a co-creator, I guess, but it's still John's game. JorWat (talk) 10:37, 11 March 2020 (PDT)

Thx. I'll look for a reference before I add the co-creator. Cuc (talk) 12:15, 11 March 2020 (PDT)

Thank you very much for improving the accuracy of the information here! I don't know the complete history of Binary Homeworlds, but I do know that John Cooper is listed as the sole creator in all Looney Labs rulebooks since at least 2011 (i.e. the oldest pdf I have access to). It is probably reasonable to assume John has always been given credit. The rules are essentially the same; the reduction in the size of the bank is recommended in the full Homeworlds rules on John's website and the win condition is identical to the case of one "good" player vs one "evil" player - they don't really ignore the rule as much as sidestep the unnecessary formality. I think we should leave the designer credit as-is and just add a note of trivia if you can figure out whoever first suggested playing with just 2 players. -- Umjahwa (talk) 13:41, 11 March 2020 (PDT)

Here's a quote from Andrew himself on a Facebook post about this very issue: "Homeworlds is John’s game. All I did was to reduce the size of the bank when playing with 2, and to evangelize the two player as the best way to play." He might be a co-designer of this version (personally, I don't think this is enough of a change to count), but he's definitely not the sole designer, as had been listed on this page between its creation in 2005 and earlier this month. As for when two-players was added, it's been listed as suitable for "Two to six players" in the online rules since at least 2002 (that's as far back as the Wayback Machine goes), with the addition of "(for a two-player game, use three pieces of each size/color)" some time before August 2004. JorWat (talk) 16:09, 11 March 2020 (PDT)