Chess-Different-Armies type 3-player chess, 3d, 10x11x3 = 330 cells. No erudition in theme but adequate puffery to peak interest. Each team 1K, 4N, 4R, 4 Camels...(incomplete) tapering off to incomprehensibility. Enormous disrespect for reader, no reaching across with clarity in terms like 'root-3', 'root-2', when 'vertex' and 'edge' suffice. 'Triagonal' recalls pedantically its expatiated 100 Comments yr 2003. Redundancies: Occidental King 'must be kept out of check'; three times we are told there is one(1)King per army. Calculating the 'nearest army' for Pawn move is where AOF crashes not only because complications inhibit strategy but also 'nearest' would usually entail two other armies equidistant, whatever the set-up. Forgive Gilman's overreaching since 3p-3d is problematical, generating these poor ideas, or cheap excuse just to plug in such admired themed ones as Ibis(1,8) narcissistically or Falcon (three-square multi-path) spitefully, bad choices for 3d. Ibis' only four, or nine, cubes to move might work on stretched board but this 330 3-deep? Sin omission: no explication of Bishop Root-2 or Root-3? Over years Gilman may often aspire to mock-style of equally-incoherent Gridlock, never matching that one's wit and energy. Sin commission: over-use of leapers like Anu(2d 4,3 or 2d 7,1) etc. Crocodile is a self-described 'cheat' piece, tailor-made differently in each domain, in order to paper over unbalanced design among armies. Yet AOF is less a CV than recapitulation of Gilman's favourite obsessive nomenclature. And please take Gilman's AOF as first approximation, rough-edged, only to be subjected later to a 'refinement'; an awkward position, as Greg Strong says, to be spammed from within, or below.