Game: Aapep

Thread: Re: [Review] Aapep

nello — 2008-03-25T05:09:37+00:00

Geosphere wrote:
Quite a fair review, Tom, thanks.

I, too, wish for better components, but we work within the framework we're given.

I designed the game to teach my son observation, knowing that each move has several measurable pros and cons. That was the original 'design theory', manifest in the changing of each sides 'views' each turn. In the end, this is what became the "wait till the other guy makes a mistake" feeling.

It is definitely a silent and defensive game.

Its certainly understood that this won't suit everyone. Maybe I'll impress you more with whatever I do next.
========================================================================basically , Aapep is a simple abstract produced in a NO FRILLS package..it plays quick and has some tension.....
Well done to Cambridge Games

Thread: Re: [Review] Aapep

Geosphere — 2008-03-13T12:39:29+00:00

TomVasel wrote:
Paul, I eagerly look forward to what you design next. Thanks for responding!

Interestingly, if there was one person on the 'Geek who I would expect NOT to design an abstract game, it would be you. I did a doubletake when I saw the name of the author, and looked for the goblins in the game. Good job on being diverse in your designs!

Thanks, Tom. I strive for diversity, I really do.

I actually rate a bunch of abstracts 8 or 9, and all of them have very simple rulesets and play in under 30 minutes with a lot of thinking.

The next thing where you'll find my name in the credits (not as designer this time but as "Additional Help")is Corunea, which is a bit more in my usual field.

I have a bunch of designs being looked at by a bunch of folks, and I have no idea what will come next.

Thread: Re: [Review] Aapep

TomVasel — 2008-03-13T02:46:45+00:00

Paul, I eagerly look forward to what you design next. Thanks for responding!

Interestingly, if there was one person on the 'Geek who I would expect NOT to design an abstract game, it would be you. I did a doubletake when I saw the name of the author, and looked for the goblins in the game. Good job on being diverse in your designs!

Thread: Re: [Review] Aapep

generalpf — 2008-03-12T20:54:44+00:00

Wow, Paul, J C Lawrence played your game and didn't hate it. That's a success by anyone's definition.

Thread: Re: [Review] Aapep

Geosphere — 2008-03-12T18:52:43+00:00

clearclaw wrote:
I would not play Aapep with 3, just 2 or 4.

I have to say that while it was designed as 2 player, I really do find 4 player surprisingly engaging.

I know that sounds strange to say about your own design, but it really is quite strikingly different.

That said, 2 player is still the heart of it for me.

Thread: Re: [Review] Aapep

clearclaw — 2008-03-12T18:25:17+00:00

TomVasel wrote:
I"Wait!", you may cry, "I thought this game is for two to four players!" This is true, but the game really only works well with two players, and even then I'm starting to have my doubts about the fun factor of the game.

I've played a few 2 player games and a few 4 player games now and much prefer the 4 player game. Aapep is unusually prone to forks.

With observant players the 2 player game is usually resolved, as you say, by a glaring mistake on one player's part, or one player managing to construct an n-look-ahead sequence of forks which finally results in a win for themself -- not an easy task but quite rewarding when successful.

The 4 player game is much more impenetrable than the 2 player game as fork chains are far more difficult to construct reliably. Instead the games tend to become battles of threat versus value, which each stone participating in multiple player's threats and values. Thus the focus moves off the fork chains into positional play, which I prefer.

This continues until at the end of any player's turn - there are four light tiles visible from any of the four board's edges, in which case Ra wins. If the same thing happens with dark tiles, then Aapep wins. Shadow chips do not block visibility.

The game can be played with three or four players - with the third player becoming White Ra and the fourth player Red Aapep. Game play is the same, except that the winner is determined by which side of the board the four light/darkness tiles come from. For example, Yellow Ra wins if the light tiles line up at the top or the bottom of the board, while White RA wins if the light tiles shine from either side of the board.

The 4 player game makes this more interesting in that a player may only win if their side is correctly monochrome on their turn. Thus a player will often make their opposite or right hand player's side monochrome for them in order to force the players to their left to fix it before it is that player's turn.

I would not play Aapep with 3, just 2 or 4.

Thread: Re: [Review] Aapep

Sam The Girl — 2008-03-12T17:36:39+00:00

That looks like a nice classy response by the author.

I know Paul.

He's really not that classy.

Thread: Re: [Review] Aapep

Geosphere — 2008-03-12T15:54:32+00:00

Quite a fair review, Tom, thanks.

I, too, wish for better components, but we work within the framework we're given.

I designed the game to teach my son observation, knowing that each move has several measurable pros and cons. That was the original 'design theory', manifest in the changing of each sides 'views' each turn. In the end, this is what became the "wait till the other guy makes a mistake" feeling.

It is definitely a silent and defensive game.

Its certainly understood that this won't suit everyone. Maybe I'll impress you more with whatever I do next.

Thread: [Review] Aapep

TomVasel — 2008-03-12T14:29:02+00:00

I'm sure that some people will find the theme of Aapep and Ra in eternal combat as interesting - the battle between light and darkness really is a good thought for a strategy game. Aapep (Cambridge Games, 2007 - Paul A. DeStefano) is an abstract strategy game in which two players feud off on a sixteen square grid, attempting to shine light (or darkness) in one direction.

"Wait!", you may cry, "I thought this game is for two to four players!" This is true, but the game really only works well with two players, and even then I'm starting to have my doubts about the fun factor of the game. Aapep takes place in two distinct stages - the first in which players fill up a grid board; and the second in which they rearrange the pieces, attempting to win. Aapep is the sort of game in which the first player who makes a mistake loses, which may be okay for some folks; but that's not really my style.

Aapep takes place on a four by four board, next to which are placed eleven tiles - which are a combination of yellow (sunlight) and black (darkness). The player playing Yellow Ra (light) goes first, and the play alternates for the rest of the game. Each game has two phases, the Daytime phase and the Nighttime phase.

During the Daytime phase, players simply place one of the tiles in any open space on the board. They then take one of two shadow chips, moving it to an empty space of their choice, preventing tiles from being placed there. This continues until one player wins, or until all event tiles are on the board; at which point, the game goes into Nighttime phase.

During the Nighttime phase, players first must move a tile on the board to any open space, rotating it in any direction. The player then places a marker of their color on the tile, preventing any other player from moving that tile until the player's next turn. After this, the player moves one of the two shadow chips to the spot from which the moving tile originated.

This continues until at the end of any player's turn - there are four light tiles visible from any of the four board's edges, in which case Ra wins. If the same thing happens with dark tiles, then Aapep wins. Shadow chips do not block visibility.

The game can be played with three or four players - with the third player becoming White Ra and the fourth player Red Aapep. Game play is the same, except that the winner is determined by which side of the board the four light/darkness tiles come from. For example, Yellow Ra wins if the light tiles line up at the top or the bottom of the board, while White RA wins if the light tiles shine from either side of the board.

Some comments on the game...

1.) Components: I understand that Cambridge Games is putting out affordable games (although their new Glory to Rome edition I'm quite pleased with) over superb components, but I found the components in this version a bit lacking. Perhaps that's because I'm spoiled by beautiful, abstract games from other places, such as Hive, Pentago, and Yinsh; but also because when there is no theme, you have to concentrate on the pieces. The artwork I have no problem with - with a black snake threatening to swallow the yellow sun - it's nice and the contrast works well. But the tiles, which are moved constantly throughout the game, are very thin cardboard - easily bent and annoying to pick up and move. The other chips and counters included with the game work fine, and the plastic case it comes packaged in is functional; but I just can't kick the feeling that the game should have better production values.

2.) Rules: The rules are very simple, printed on only two pages with clear formatting. The game itself is very simple to explain, but some folks may have a bit of trouble understanding how light and darkness "shines" completely across the board. Still, it's one of the easier abstracts to explain, reminding people that the tile they move is replaced by a shadow chip. Many times a new player will feel a growing excitement, as they set themselves up for the win, forgetting that they are placing a shadow chip where they move the chip.

3.) Phases: The game is composed of two phases; but the designer mentioned to me that he considered the first phase to be a "set up" phase, and I agree. I can't imagine anyone losing in the first part - each move can be easily countered, although, obviously it can and does occur. The night phase is the more intriguing part of the game, as players have to set up moves in advance - sometimes three or more moves. For me, I actually found the daytime phase more interesting, but it's over quite quickly - almost too quickly.

4.) Strategy: At first, strategy seems quite simple. Place the tiles in such a way as to line up sunlight (or darkness) on one or more sides and block your opponent's tiles. This is the basic strategy, but it's soon compounded by moving the shadow tiles and realizing that you can't move the tile just moved by your opponent. The board begins to feel more and more crowded, and you soon realize how important the initial placement was. The main problem is that very rarely can a player make a "killer move" - a move that will outright win the game. In every game that I've played, the winner won because the other player messed up, allowing them to slide in and win. This, for me, makes for an unsatisfying experience. I want to win a strategy game because of something that I've done, not because of an error by my opponent. Well, I don't mind the occasional victory by error, but more often I want the satisfaction of seeing my well laid plans come to fruition. In many games I would set up a scheme to win, but every time it would lead to a mistake on my part causing my loss. It seems almost easier to play defensively and wait for your opponent to get careless.

5.) Players: The game works well with two players, but I'm not sure it's as interesting with more. With only one side of the board to concentrate on, the game takes a long time, and often, I found the game to be annoying because one of the other players made a mistake that gave the game to a third or fourth player. My play had no bearing on the outcome - and that can be a bit frustrating. Multi-player abstract strategy games rarely work, and although simulated teamwork makes this slightly interesting, it's still too chaotic with an extra player in the mix.

6.) Fun Factor: Aapep will likely entertain those who want a completely silent game, in which each player analyzes the board. However, I'm not necessarily amongst that group; and I found that the game could occasionally get monotonous, as we moved back and forth until finally someone goofed up. I want to play a game that has occasional bursts of excitement, and the only time that happened in Aapep was when I realized that I won/lost. The rest of the game was a fairly dull affair.

Look, the theme is okay; I can live with the lower component quality, but there is nothing that I find just fun or exciting about the game. Aapep isn't like any other abstract strategy game - I appreciate the novelty and thought put into the game; it's the completed package that fails to stimulate me. Perhaps some will find it exciting - I found it more mediocre - and with the growing number of quality, fascinating abstract games in existence; that means it will see very rare play.

Tom Vasel
"Real men play board games"
www.thedicetower.com

Thread: Re: Aapep as PDF?

Geosphere — 2008-02-07T14:28:06+00:00

I had seen those pyramids early in the development of Aapep (back when it was called Kwadrule in playtests). They're a little too small.

In a perfect world, they'd be about 2" per side.

I'm constantly looking for production methods that I like (and can afford).

Thread: Re: Aapep as PDF?

hudarklord — 2008-02-06T19:29:37+00:00

I am either going to ask Ed for a review copy (to review for the Ogre Cave Audio Report) or buy a copy when Pandemonium Books in Cambridge, MA starts carrying the product. That said, I'd be more inclined still to own it as a PDF.

If you want to do solid pyramids, I've got a suggestion for you.

They are NOT regular pyramids, but Plastics for Games does make 5-sided pyramids. You could order them in yellow or black and then get stickers. It would probably be relatively inexpensive if you let the players label the pyramids themselves. More labor intensive for you otherwise.

http://www.plasticsforgames.com/specifications/spec.asp?prod...

http://www.plasticsforgames.com/specifications/spec.asp?prod...

Like I said, may not look perfectly like Egyptian pyramids, 'cause the faces may not be perfect equilateral triangles, but it would get you in the ball park.

You could probably get them in yellow for $60.00 per 1000 + shipping, and then see if Online Labels could make you triangular gloss labels that you could print in black on a laser printer.

3D solids are doable for this game. I like the PDF idea, though, because it lets players choose between hollow folded pyramid models and 2D square pieces. Buying hollow paper pyramids seems to be a waste, because you and I know that they'll probably get damaged. As a PDF product, the end user will just print more.

But if you did them in plastic, as I've suggested, that would be really cool.

Good luck.

Lee Valentine

Thread: Re: Aapep as PDF?

Geosphere — 2008-02-06T19:15:16+00:00

Thanks for the kind words, Lee. I'm sure the CGF guys will see it and give some consideration to the PDF idea.

In all truth, yes, it plays better with pyramids. Its the production thats a killer. There's some ideas being kicked around now.

I have a feeling that even if there is a 3D version that the present version will live on as the "portable" or "Travel" edition.

Thread: Re: Aapep as PDF?

hudarklord — 2008-02-06T17:45:37+00:00

This just seems like a game that CGF could offer as a PDF, and then offer a discounted upgrade to those who purchase the PDF and who want to order a professionally printed copy. It would also allow CGF to get pyramids into the hands of people if a 3D version of the game is too expensive to produce.

From a tactile perspective, I think this would be much easier to play with pyramids. And I have some vision problems, and found that some of the yellow tiles faded into the yellow background on the board, making it somewhat difficult for me to ascertain how Ra was doing in the game.

I have only played it once, and I haven't firmed up my opinion on the replay value of it yet (i.e., if one side has an advantage), but it's a neat game concept, I had fun playing, and the game was well executed by Paul and the folks at CGF. I also really liked how portable the game is.

Lee Valentine

Thread: Re: Aapep as PDF?

Geosphere — 2008-02-06T12:16:56+00:00

Yeah, it looks like Yellow won in that pic to me, too. I'm not sure who played that game, but they missed a win.

The sale and marketing of Aapep is in the hands of CGF. While there are hundreds of game that could go PDF without much change, most don't. The exposure is a very different audience. Maybe one day, maybe not.

Thread: Aapep as PDF?

hudarklord — 2008-02-06T02:08:47+00:00

Aapep is one of those few games that would lose almost nothing as a PDF game. Why not offer this on RPGNOW.COM?

It could be offered as a 2D game or with cutouts to make 3D pyramids or both.

BTW, one of the game photos in the archive says "black just won", but it looks like yellow must have won on a previous turn.

Lee Valentine

Thread: Re: Game makes my brain hurt

Sam The Girl — 2008-01-15T19:56:43+00:00

That will make the game soOo much better.

Thread: Re: Game makes my brain hurt

rseater — 2008-01-15T16:41:22+00:00

Sam The Girl wrote:
Its a tiny game, which I guess is good, but I wish there were big pieces and not cardboard squares.

CGF is working on a 3d 'deluxe' version that will have folded cardboard pyramids. Using 3d pieces makes your brain hurt a bit less...a bit.

Thread: Game makes my brain hurt

Sam The Girl — 2008-01-10T16:44:48+00:00

I know the guy who made this game, so I don't want to review it, thats unfair.

The game does make you think in odd ways. Not like chess or Blokus. Its just really hard to think like this.

Its a tiny game, which I guess is good, but I wish there were big pieces and not cardboard squares.

I think I like it as far as thinking games go, but its real hard to grasp this one.

It is so simple it hurts.

I cant explain it good, but it is very interesting at least.

Image

guru_mod — 2007-12-16T18:03:36+00:00

components in the game

Image

guru_mod — 2007-12-16T18:02:15+00:00

tiles

Image

guru_mod — 2007-12-16T18:01:55+00:00

board

Image

guru_mod — 2007-12-16T10:19:12+00:00

Everything in small box

Thread: Re: Battling for supremacy : good versus evil

Geosphere — 2007-12-04T14:13:37+00:00

Thanks for the review of my game!

echdareez wrote:
why do I keep on coming back to Abalone to give a small example? Another easy to explain abstract and that's where the comparison ends but there's something addictive about it which will not grow repetitive after 10 plays.

This is an amazingly interesting comment to me, as I adore Abalone, rating it a 9. To say that Aapep is more addictive is a wonderful comment, thanks.

There's an old chess saying (I'm sure someone out there can tell me who said it) that the winner of a chess game is the person who makes the next to last mistake. Aapep often has that feel, of setting the trap and seeing who mis-steps. Whether or not that's a good thing is a purely personal choice. Sometimes I feel like a game like that, sometimes I don't.

As far as material in the game's construction, well, lets see how this first print run goes...

And for someone who is not a native English speaker, you certainly write better than a lot of the locals.

I hope you continue to enjoy it as the little mental filler it is!

Thread: Battling for supremacy : good versus evil

echdareez — 2007-12-04T08:29:46+00:00

A gem in the rough, there's more to it than meets the eye, harder than you might think initially.
These are some statements that could describe this game in a nutshell and furthermore, they offer me a great opening to start my review of the game.
The usual disclaimers apply : English is not my native language, yadda yadda and so on. On to the details!

Once upon a time, when animals spoke with each other and dino's held delicious barbeques (hey, if you have one ridiculous statement involving conversating hedgehods, there's always room for another), there was a small gaming company that threw Glory to Rome on the unsuspecting gaming market. Let us just say that this is an AAPEP review so we will just quickly and very briefly stick two thumbs up for Glory to Rome. If you don't have it, consider purchasing this brilliant game :-) Especially if you think that San Juan with "more" and "better" sounds like a good thing.
So from that same company, I got hold of Aapep and initially thought : "Does the world REALLY need another abstract?".

Production :
The game doesn't come in a typical box (like you except from a bigger publisher) but in the same material as Glory to Roam : a sturdy plastic container that I suspect being more resistant to pressure than a plain cardboard box. What else is in there? The gameboard, the 11 tiles, some glass beads (the markers), some pokerchips to denote the colours and the manual. All decently produced (coming from a smaller gaming company) and decent enough but of course, lacking the 'professional' feel. My only major concern is the fact that the tiles are a bit too thin. I did't have problems picking up the tiles myself but my friend (poor guy : he has somewhat chubby fingers ;-) ) did find it difficult to juggle the tiles around.

Gameplay (for 2 players) :
It's not a difficult game : you have 16 spaces (4x4 spaces) which can be filled with thin tiles (11 in total), each containing a number of yellow and/or black sides (always 4 in total of course yet each tile will have different `distributions` : there`s a tile with 4 black sides, 4 yellow sides, 2 yellow and 2 black sides alternating, 3 and 1, and so on...). They might represent pyramids (seen from above) but as it's an abstract, they are the abstracted representations of their greater counterparts. These 11 tiles are placed next to the gameboard before the game begins. Next up are also two shadow markers, which are placed on two opposite corners during the setup.
During your turn and while there are still any unplaced tiles, the day phase evolves. Each player can now pick a tile, place it somewhere on the board where he can spot a free space (there`s no previously played tile nor a shadow marker on that space) and after the placement, move one of the two shadow markers to another free space. This goes back and forth until one player can 'see' 4 sides of his/her colour from one of the sides of the main board. If the black player spots 4 black sides after placing one of the tiles, he/she has won. The manual also states to place a blocking marker (more of that later on) but frankly : I was wondering what the use of that would be (except for the last two tiles in the day phase). Have all the 11 tiles been finally placed without any player reaching a winning situation, the night phase will take over.
During this night phase, you will also be using two markers to 'block' your previously played piece (those blocking markers I mentioned before). A typical turn now changes : instead of placing a new tile, you will be picking up a tile (mandatory) and place it somewhere else (rotating is allowed as long as you don't place the tile on the original location!) + put your blocking marker on this tile. Move a shadow marker and that's it. The players will be moving (/rotating) the 11 tiles during their turn until one of the two players will succeed in establishing 4 same-coloured sides.

Strategies :
As there are two phases to the game, you always have to think one or two steps ahead and always have to consider the available tiles and which tile you will be playing next : during the day phase, we quickly discovered that it's rather easy to block each player from reaching a winning condition so after our second game, nobody ever won a game during this phase. Furthermore : we also discovered that the 4 corners can be quite powerful when two sides of your colour are thus immediately visible (without your opponent being able to block those during this phase).
Before reaching the second phase, it would be wise to 'prepare' the tiles during the `day` for a future nightly victory and think ahead of the possibilities : what if situations raise their wondering heads and you start thinking along the lines of : 'if I place that marker there or there, if I rotate that tile so or so, etc...'
There are some strategies but as said before : you won't be crunching those grey cells to death At least, we didn`t

Conclusion :
Hmm... After having played this game now for over a week at work and bring this game along to a gaming night (so I'm now close to 10 plays with 2P and 2 plays with 4P), I have some mixed feelings about this game. The following only applies for the 2P part of the game as I don`t feel that my experience with 3P or 4P doesn`t warrant an honest review on more than two players.
It's certainly NOT a bad game, offering a quick abstract that's extremely portable (just bring along the board, the 11 tiles, 2 blocking markers and 2 shadow markers), it's quick to explain and almost as quick to play (each game clocking in around 10 to 15 minutes when both players are somewhat experienced). But the strategies get thin after a while and you are somewhat wishing for a little bit more. Alas, I can't accurately describe that "little bit more" but why do I keep on coming back to Abalone to give a small example? Another easy to explain abstract and that's where the comparison ends but there's something addictive about it which will not grow repetitive after 10 plays. That might be the word that best describes my current feel about the game : it has a somewhat repetitive nature as the strategies become quite clear after a few plays and then the victory is awarded to the player that didn't make a mistake while playing. I might be wrong, we might be playing this wrong but feel free to correct me, I always welcome the feedback!

So : Aapep is certainly a decent game and my rating is momentarily swinging between a 6 and 7 (with a small and slight preference towards the 7)

Thread: Re: It all starts with the rules...

Geosphere — 2007-11-25T03:08:09+00:00

rseater wrote:
two skilled players will always reach the night phase.

Unless one of the suddenly turns into an idiot, thinking 4 or 5 moves ahead and ignoring the immediate...

Which happens to me far more often than I will admit in public.

Thread: Re: It all starts with the rules...

rseater — 2007-11-25T02:41:14+00:00

echdareez wrote:

- second question : a turn consists of the dayphase and the nightphase for each player, do they go a little bit something like this (for 2P) :

TURN A
dayphase P1
dayphase P2
nightphase P1
nightphase P2

OR

TURN B
dayphase P1
nightphase P1
dayphase P2
nightphase P2

Neither! (although the first one is closer to being right)

Players alternate taking just Day phases (placing tiles) until all the tiles are placed, then alternate taking night phases (moving tiles) until someone wins. The full turn order for a 2 player game is this

DAY BEGINS: all 11 tiles are off the board
1 Yellow Ra: place 1 tile (day)
2 Black Aapep: place 1 tile (day)
3 Yellow Ra: place 1 tile (day)
4 Black Aapep: place 1 tile (day)
5 Yellow Ra: place 1 tile (day)
6 Black Aapep: place 1 tile (day)
7 Yellow Ra: place 1 tile (day)
8 Black Aapep: place 1 tile (day)
9 Yellow Ra: place 1 tile (day)
10 Black Aapep: place 1 tile (day)
11 Yellow Ra: place 1 tile (day)

NIGHT BEGINS: all 11 tiles are on the board
12 Black Aapep: move 1 tile (night)
13 Yellow Ra: move 1 tile (night)
14 Black Aapep: move 1 tile (night)
15 Yellow Ra: move 1 tile (night)
16 Black Aapep: move 1 tile (night)
17 Yellow Ra: move 1 tile (night)
.
.
.
[repeat until winner]

DAWN & DUSK
As such, Ra always takes the first day phase ("dawn") and black Aapep always takes the first night phase ("dusk"). Ra gets 6 placements during day, while Aapep only gets 5, but Aapep gets the first night move. The first night move is very powerful, and beginners often find that Aapep wins on that move. As you get your head wrapped around the game, you will probably find that the two sides are balanced.

It is currently not known if either side can always force a win or always force a draw. It is known that neither side can force a win during Day -- two skilled players will always reach the night phase.

Thread: Re: Dark versus light - the snake swallows the sun

Geosphere — 2007-11-24T02:20:47+00:00

Thank you so much for such a glowing review.

That 3D version you speculate about is obviously a dream for us, but we can all dream, can't we?

Sometimes dreams come true ...

Thread: Dark versus light - the snake swallows the sun

batdog — 2007-11-23T11:14:05+00:00

Aapep is a wonderful little abstract strategy game from the Cambridge Games Factory.

Background

First off, who or what is Aapep? Aapep was part of the ancient Egyptian pantheon of deities and, to them was an evil demon representing darkness. Based on the hieroglyph for Aapep he was seen as a snake or serpent. He was considered to be the sworn enemy of Ra – the bringer of light – and there were numerous stories of the battles between them. For example, it was believed that the setting sun (Ra) was attacked by Aapep just as it crossed the horizon. As the tag line for the game describes it, it is a “swallow the sun strategy game”.

Components

The game comes in a small plastic box (about 7 inches by 5 inches) and contains a board, rules, 11 tiles (1.5 inch square), 12 glass stones and 6 poker chips.

The board is thin laminated card and is divided into a grid of 4 by 4 squares (i.e. 16 in total). The board is simply, but effectively, decorated with sun and snake symbols.

The rules take up about a page and are reasonably clear and concise. I believe that a new version is being produced at the moment which will make the rules completely clear.

The tiles are the same card stock as the board and are designed to represent pyramids. If you can imagine an aerial view of a pyramid you will see 4 triangles which are the faces or sides of the pyramids. The triangular sides are coloured either yellow (to represent light or Ra) or black (to represent darkness or Aapep). One of the tiles is all yellow (with a sun symbol) and one tile is all black (with a snake symbol). Four tiles have two adjacent sides coloured black, three tiles have opposing sides coloured black, one tile has three sides coloured black and one tile has one side coloured black: all other sides on the tiles are coloured yellow. Therefore, looking at any edge of a tile you will see either black or yellow; this is important to understand when determining the winning conditions (see below).

]]>

The glass stones come in four colours: yellow, black, white and red (three of each).

The poker chips also come in yellow, black, white and red with an additional two grey chips.

The components are reasonable quality and make it a good serviceable and very portable game.

Gameplay

Two player

The board is laid out in front of the players, with the tiles laid out face-up next to the board. The players decide who should play as Ra and who should play as Aapep. Ra takes the yellow poker chip and one yellow glass stone. Aapep takes the black poker chip and one black glass stone. The poker chip is used merely to remind players of which colour (or character) they are playing. The glass stone is a player marker used later in the game. One grey poker chip is placed on the top right square of the board and one is placed on the bottom left square of the board. These are known as shadow markers and they prevent a player from placing a tile in the square in which they are present.

The game has two phases: Daytime and Nighttime.

Daytime: Ra plays first and play alternates, with each player taking one of the face-up tiles and placing it on the board in any empty space (i.e. one not already occupied by a shadow marker or another tile). The player then moves one of the shadow markers and places it in another empty space. Once all tiles have been placed then the Nighttime phase takes place:

Nighttime: Aapep plays first and play alternates with each player taking one of the tiles (without a player marker on it – see below) and moving it to another empty space on the board. The tiles may be rotated to enable the black or yellow edges to point in a different direction. The player then places their coloured player marker onto the tile just moved (removing it from the tile it was on previously). Finally the player moves one of the shadow markers and places it in another empty space.

So what is the aim of the game? Imagine that the tiles are little 3D pyramids. If you are sat on one side of the board then you will be looking along four columns (each consisting of four squares). As long as there is a pyramid tile in one of the squares in each column then note the colour of the side or face of the first pyramid you can see in each column. If they are all yellow then Ra has won (and has escaped from Aapep); if they are all black, then Aapep has won (and has swallowed the sun). Note that the shadow markers are ignored in determining the first pyramid tile that can be seen in each column. This winning condition is checked on all four sides of the board after each player’s turn. If in placing a tile both players have gained the winning condition then the player who placed the tile loses.

Multiplayer

The interesting thing about Aapep is that it can be played with 2, 3 or 4 players. This is not usually the case with an abstract strategy game. In a 3 player game the players play as Yellow Ra, White Ra and Black Aapep; in a 4 player game they play as Yellow Ra, White Ra, Black Aapep and Red Aapep. In either case they take the relevant coloured poker chip and player marker. Play is similar to the two player game, with alternate moves, Yellow Ra starting the Daytime phase and Black Ra starting the Nighttime phase. General player order is yellow, white, black (3 player) or yellow, red, white, black (4 player).

But how about multiplayer winning conditions? They are the same as the two player winning conditions but cleverly it can only be achieved on certain sides of the board. In a 3 player game Yellow Ra can only win by getting their full colour on the top or bottom sides of the board, White Ra (left/right) and Black Ra (all sides). In a 4 player game Yellow Ra again wins on the top or bottom sides of the board, White Ra (left/right), Black Ra (top/bottom) and Red Ra (left/right). As a reminder, the remaining coloured glass stones are placed on the sides of the board that the player needs to win from.

]]>

Based on these winning conditions the multiplayer game can occasionally create loose alliances of the Yellow and White Ra against the Black and Red Aapep.

Basic Strategy

The first few games begin with a lot of random placing of tiles until the interaction between the Daytime and Nighttime becomes more apparent. It seems that the winning conditions are less likely to be met during the Daytime phase so it’s more of an establishing phase where players will set themselves up for the almighty Nighttime struggle. As Geosphere has suggested in another thread, it is possible to open aggressively using one or other of the solid coloured tiles. Place your own in a corner which gives you two unblockable faces or place your opponents near the middle and then susequently block it.

Remember that Ra will have the last turn in the Daytime phase and Aapep the first turn in the Nighttime phase. Ra must ensure that Aapep cannot win using their first movement; Aapep must neutralise any useful tiles for Ra, preferably by moving them and then placing a marker on them which means the tile cannot be moved until after Aapep’s next turn.

Don’t forget the importance of the shadow markers as these are useful to protect tiles in the second row.

During the Nighttime phase there will only be three spaces available to move your tiles (and shadow marker) into, so orientation of the tile is often key to your strategy. Limited placement opportunity also allows you to anticipate, to an extent, your opponent’s best moves.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this is a superb abstract game, with a simple rule set, but deep, deep strategy. I anticipate this will attract a very strong following in 2008 on BGG. Additionally, it is begging for a computer version to be created.

Theme

You may have noticed, however, that I haven’t touched on theme. Unfortunately it is as thin as the card stock that the board and tiles are made from. Despite the pyramid tiles, the game is merely yellow versus black. As previously mentioned, the production quality of the game is fine and is well produced by CGF but I feel that it lacks any wow factor. This may put it at a disadvantage compared to other, similar, abstract games.

I am a massive fan of Hive (I rate it a 10) and it is visually very attractive, particularly the latest Bakelite version. Aapep could easily achieve the same heights with its simple rule set and ability to accommodate up to four players.

My suggestion would be as follows. Create small 3D Bakelite pyramids - their faces obviously coloured the same way as the tiles. This gives a greater visual impact, adds to the theme and makes the achievement of the winning condition more obvious. If each pyramid is missing its capstone then each player can have a capstone in their character colour which enables them to indicate (by completing the pyramid), which pyramid they have just moved. The shadow markers and player character indicators could take the form of small Bakelite snakes or suns or combination of the two. The pieces could come in a drawstring bag with the board printed on it (in fake papyrus), together with subtle, stylized hieroglyphics to indicate the sides of the board and the colours that win on those sides in a 2, 3 or 4 player game.

But to get to that stage of production, I guess CGF need some idea of interest and feelings about the game. I have rated it a 9 and would urge those of you, like me, who have received preview copies to give it a try. Those of you who like simple but deep abstract games like Hive should certainly consider purchasing it.

EDIT: I posted this before I saw the images of a giant demo version of the game using 3D (cardboard) pyramids - much more effective than 2D tiles...

]]>

Thread: Re: It all starts with the rules...

echdareez — 2007-11-23T08:04:42+00:00

Hi there Ed!

:-D Guess the weaving part is almost figured out? Just saw your new posting concerning the rules : which we will be trying out in a couple of hours. Thanks btw for this copy of Aapep!

We've been playing the game yesterday evening (still not enough times to warrant a decent review) with 3P and 4P and it's certainly quite a nice abstract. And how it changed when we first did the daytime and then the nighttime I except the review to be written and uploaded by next week.

With pleasure of course! Glad to hear and see that I wasn't the only one that was 'confused' by the rules but more importantly : that they have been corrected (ps : the typo was still in the webcopy of these rules)

Cheers,
/dimi

PS : I already mentioned the 2 missing shadow markers from my copy of the game > perhaps it would be a great "pro-active" move to throw a quick glance through all the printed copies? For now, we've used pink wooden discs to substitute these : now if only I could come up with some sort of deity that can be represented by that pink colour

Thread: Re: It all starts with the rules...

cambridgegames — 2007-11-22T15:52:53+00:00

echdareez wrote:
I must say though that I asked for a review copy (purchased the 2nd edition of Glory to Rome and Ed included this game) so I suppose it's one of the prototype versions? As there's also some Latin text as a placeholder on the back of it?
Hi Dimi,

Wow, this web got tangled... The copy you got was part of the secret "Thank you for pre-ordering Glory To Rome!" offer; I've added you to our reviewers list but haven't sent out review copies yet.

There were a couple of proto-type rulebooks in the factory which have got mixed in with the real ones so I'm afraid we sent you a bad rulebook -- although it sounds like you have found the latest version on our website (www.cambridgegames.com)

Even the correct rulebook isn't entirely clear on your turn order question though (Paul had the same thing come up yesterday in blind testing), so I have some homework for Thanksgiving to clean up the flow (suggested new wording here : www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/244535).

Sorry about the mix up--thank you for taking the time to work through it!

Cheers,

Ed Carter
Managing Director
Cambridge Games Factory
www.cambridgegames.com

Thread: Rules Update (a.k.a. Homework for Thanksgiving)

cambridgegames — 2007-11-22T15:35:27+00:00

Oops -- it looks like I messed up while I was trying to squeeze the 'Shadows' rule in -- sorry guys! Right now there are only a few copies of Aapep out in the market (mostly given away with GtR pre-orders), so once the rulebook is right I'll put a copy in the post to you.

Firstly, a version control issue -- a few proto-type rulebooks got mixed in with the real print run. You can spot them by checking the 'Thank You' section at the bottom of the back page where they have latin filler text. The current version is on our website (www.cambridgegames.com)

I was planning to do some family (i.e. non-geek) testing over the holiday but Paul got there first -- based on the feedback of 2 college professors and a squad leader player, he's sent me the following suggestion for cleaning up the rules explanation:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Game Play

DAYTIME (Placement Phase): Yellow Ra always starts the Daytime. Play continues for each player alternating moves in Daytime until no tiles remain to be placed. Then play proceeds to Night.

In each turn, a player must take the following steps:
1) PLACE PYRAMID: place any unplayed Pyramid Tile in any orientation into an empty space on the board (i.e., no tile or shadow chip)
2) MOVE SHADOW: move one of the two Shadow Chips into an empty space of your choice

Once all of the Pyramid Tiles have been placed then each player alternates taking turns by taking the following steps.

NIGHTTIME (Movement Phase): Black Aapep will always start the Nighttime phase.
1) MOVE PYRAMID: Move a Pyramid Tile that doesn't have a Color Marker on it to an empty space, changing orientation if you wish.
You must move a Pyramid Tile -- you may NOT just rotate a Tile in it’s current position or pass your turn
2) MOVE MARKER: Move YOUR color marker onto the Tile you just moved -- this prevents it from being moved again until after your next turn.
3) MOVE SHADOW: one of the two Shadow Chips into the space that you just took the pyramind tile from.

Ending the Game
Play continues until at the end of any player’s turn, from any edge of the board, there are either four light Tile sides visible (Ra escapes and wins) or four dark Tile sides visible (Aapep swallows the sun and wins). Note that Shadow Chips block tile placement but do not block visibility [See Diagram] If one move makes both players win, then the player who made the move loses.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'll be putting into this into the rulebook format and trying it out over the Holiday; if we don't hit too many pot-holes then we should have a new verion up on Sunday and in the post on Monday.

Incidentally, the purpose of the extra markers in 3 & 4 players is simply to show which player wins in which direction:

]]>

Sorry again for the confusion! The good news is that we've just brought a Technical Editor onto the Cambridge Games Factory team who has several degrees in this kind of stuff and is much, much better at it than I am so I'm confident that we'll be doing a better job of making our rulebooks clear going forwards.

Cheers,

Ed Carter
Managing Director
Cambridge Games Factory
www.cambridgegames.com

Thread: Re: It all starts with the rules...

echdareez — 2007-11-22T14:24:04+00:00

hi there Paul,

Thanks a lot for replying so fast And for releasing this game of course
Let's jump straight into it :
- alas, not sure what version I'm having here but the "Place the game board between the players with the pyramid tiles face up beside the board." isn't to be found in my copy of the manual. I must say though that I asked for a review copy (purchased the 2nd edition of Glory to Rome and Ed included this game) so I suppose it's one of the prototype versions? As there's also some Latin text as a placeholder on the back of it? So the "orienation" could've been fixed in the new version? Lots of questions
- markers : gotcha! Thought they were more useful for 3 or 4P. We played our 2P games without these..
- face up : oef, thought so!
- day / night : we played 3 games during our lunch and played it according to our misconception of the rules : day-day-night-night-day-day-night-night-etc... These proved to be games that were over before you knew it. Some challenges but still : game 1 ended with 6 pieces, 2 with 7 and 3 with 6 again...

So : it's TURN C :-) DAY (times 11) and if there's no victory then NIGHT (times x). Indeed, this does need some clarifying (I'm not the worst guy out there that always struggles with manuals but this section was rather confusing). I didn't know these rules were also to be found online but I will check them out this evening for sure

Thanks a lot again for helping out!
/dimi

*** UPDATE *** Seems I am also missing the rules for the shadow chips in my copy of the game AND the shadow chips themselves And my manual also states how those markers should be placed for 2p (also not present anymore in the new manual ) Couldn`t wait, the game has tickled my interest so I checked the rules online :-)

PS : Is my copy now worth gazillions of $`s ? As it seems to be an extremely rare and hard to find copy (yeah right) ? (just trying to boost the price up here )

Thread: Re: It all starts with the rules...

Geosphere — 2007-11-22T13:49:03+00:00

The markers are more for the multiplayer versions. In 2 player, it should be pretty clear who has line of sight. (And if someone didn't see you already had 3 blocks visible, then, well, take advantage of it...)

echdareez wrote:
FACEUP it is!

Yes - face up! No luck in Aapep!

From the rules:

Place the game board between the players with the pyramid
tiles face up beside the board.

echdareez wrote:
- second question : a turn consists of the dayphase and the nightphase for each player, do they go a little bit something like this (for 2P) :

Nope. It isn't a repeating dayphase/nightphase. EACH player places a single tile per turn in Day. This repeats with players alternating.

Then in each player moves a tile in Night, after all dayphases are complete. This does read a bit confusing right now...

From the rules:

If any Pyramid Tiles remain to be placed then on your turn
you must do the following:

it the describes a Day move, which is a Placing move. As long as there are unplaced tiles, there are Day moves.
PLACE a tile
MARK the tile so we know which was just placed (really not needed in Day phase, but there for consistancy at this point)
MOVE a shadow

The key wording: If any Pyramid Tiles remain to be placed then on your turn
you must do the following:

Night:
Once all of the Pyramid Tiles have been placed then on your
turn you must do the following:

it the describes a Night move, which is a Moving move
MOVE a tile
MARK the tile so we know which was just placed
MOVE a shadow to where you took the tile from

So the true turn sequence is 11 day moves alternating between players and, if the game has not ended, night moves until a winning condition is achieved. We'll clean this up a bit.

There`s a tiny error in the manual : it somewhere states orienation instead of orientation... Thought you should know?

Gadzooks! Thanks!

This is why companies place their manuals online. After tons of playtesting, its too hard for our testers to see stuff anymore!

Thread: It all starts with the rules...

echdareez — 2007-11-22T08:31:57+00:00

Hi there!

Thanks a bunch for sending me my copy
As promised, I will be playing this today with 2P and this Friday (if all goes well) with 4P... And a review will be following shortly thereafter

I do have some questions and remarks though :
- the initial setup : the current manual is a bit unclear when starting to read this and left me wondering with some unanswered questions until it finally clicked while reading the end conditions... So : suppose you are playing with 2P, you will each have 5 markers at your disposition > one of these is kept in your hand, the other 4 will each go to one side of the board. They serve no other purpose but to point out the sides where you, as the player, will need to be `seeing` the white (yellow actually) or black sides. With 4P : as you can see in the picture in the manual, there are 2 colors on each side and the same colours on the opposite sides. It doesn`t matter where you place those markers (meaning, next to the 1st / 2nd / 3rd or 4th rows/columns) : as said before : they only serve as a way to know from which side you must look at to spot the 4 black or white/yellow `sides`.

- first question : are the tiles to be chosen from facedown or faceup? Quite a difference I think I`d go for faceup?

Update : FACEUP it is! Just had a look at the pictures posted and as there are pyramids instead of the flat pieces, I have a hunch they started out being faceup

- second question : a turn consists of the dayphase and the nightphase for each player, do they go a little bit something like this (for 2P) :

TURN A
dayphase P1
dayphase P2
nightphase P1
nightphase P2

OR

TURN B
dayphase P1
nightphase P1
dayphase P2
nightphase P2

As you have to place your marker (the one in your hand I suppose?), I don`t think it`s the setup as in TURN B? As P1 will place his marker during the day and having to move it again during the night > so what`s the use of placing the first marker during the day? So I think it`s like TURN A? During the day, P1 places a marker and P2 can not move that tile anymore. P2 will place another tile and place his marker. Night falls and P1 moves and turns another tile, etc...

thanks a lot for the clarification!
/dimi

PS : There`s a tiny error in the manual : it somewhere states orienation instead of orientation... Thought you should know?

Image

rseater — 2007-11-21T04:11:30+00:00

Top-down view of the giant demo version. Black just won (from the left).

Thread: Re: Wow this is a great game! YOU SHOULD BUY IT!

nello — 2007-11-20T04:39:56+00:00

after reading the rules..
.....abstract of the year 2008.....

Image

rseater — 2007-11-18T05:41:27+00:00

Ed Carter teaching Aapep with a giant 3D board at Ellis Con '07.

Image

rseater — 2007-11-18T05:40:11+00:00

Two kids playing Aapep on the giant demo board at Ellis Con '07.

Image

rseater — 2007-11-18T05:38:52+00:00

Giant sized Aapep demo board used at Ellis Con '07. Yellow wins!

Thread: Re: Wow this is a great game! YOU SHOULD BUY IT!

Friendless — 2007-10-30T06:14:17+00:00

I think you should send me a copy :-). It could well be a game I'll like, but when will it be available in Australia?

Thread: Wow this is a great game! YOU SHOULD BUY IT!

cambridgegames — 2007-10-30T04:58:17+00:00

This really is a superb little game (that's why we're printing it!) but this post is really just a place holder until we get some review copies out and build up some real blurb for the back of the rulebook. Feel free to add comments (good or bad) to say what you think of the game so far!

Cheers,

Ed Carter
Managing Director
Cambridge Games Factory

P.S. The latest version of the rulebook is now on www.cambridgegames.com

Image

rseater — 2007-10-11T17:24:56+00:00

Aapep and Ra tiles; the ultimate showdown between god and demon.

Image

rseater — 2007-10-11T17:24:23+00:00

The 11 tiles used in Aapep.

Thread: The Opening Moves

Geosphere — 2007-08-06T14:40:36+00:00

Here's some possible first move strategies you might want to consider:

Your solid piece in a corner.
This is undeniably strong, as you have two faces that cannot be blocked. However, you use your solid piece. This is an aggressive opening. No subtlety here. Great for those just starting out, and even then some.

An angled piece in the corner.
You place your colors to the outer edges. If you plan on winning by either of those edges, you would end up blocking the opponent's sides anyway. This saves you your solid, but you better make sure the opponent doesn't capitalize on the early opening you give them. Its fairly easy to defend and uses a neutral piece, so I really like it.

Obviously, using a piece with only one side of the opposing color is a nice compromise between these strategies.

Now, here's a nasty, dangerous gambit opening to try:

Your OPPONENT'S solid piece in a center square. This plays more off of denial than anything else. Get that solid away from them. You better be able to play a real good defensive game following up after it, though. If you can win before they get to the move portion of the game, this is a really evil tactic.