2009 Game Award evaluation
First, some minor components issues: The squares on the board are too small to place large pyramids on. The cards' bounding rectangles are of different sizes -- the columns have varying widths and the two rows have very different heights.
This has the potential to be a very interesting abstract strategy game, I think. I like its use of moving both the pyramids and the candy pieces/beads, and how you get more points for capturing with the slower pieces.
I believe the game to be broken as it is written, though. If you set things up for a capture, then the opponent can carry it out; so no one will want to set anything up, and the game is stalled. Now, it is possible to allow your opponent to do the capture, after which you can use the same pyramid to capture a different bead; but then, the opponent may often be able to capture the third bead, so the advantage will still lie with him.
Possibly there are things about the play that I have missed; if so, I'd love to have them pointed out. But as it stands, the rules need some major tweaking to give it the sort of advantage to the attacker, with tradeoffs to weigh, that would make this a good game.
My assessment for the award: this doesn't make the cut.