UnitedCardists.com - The forum for Cardistry, Magic, Custom Decks and All Things Playing Cards.

Really anything that has to do with decks would be understandable as a name, it doesn't have to be completely literal as long as the association can be made between name and theme

That said lots of things would work: Tank deck, rolling death, panzer, or better: Panzerdeck, mobile armor

Anyways, I think you can be a little creative with the name of the deck as long as there is a relative association with the theme, and people will appreciate a catcy/good deck name than a literally naming of the deck's theme, especially if the name of the deck looks good on the tuck

Box WIP

What about 'Masters" instead of 'Lords.' Also conjure up the idea of playing for high stakes.

.... 'Spose Tank Vankers is out of the question then ?
Tźzzzzź, well it do beg for it.

Chill people, even Michael Winter had a sense of humour.
And Rommel certainly did. It was part of his success ....
Innovation and Wit.
And why the little national psychopaths failed, big time.

Thank you all for the ideas! I've decided to rename my deck - soon I'll show you the box with the final name

Kurt Tank.
Now *he* was a designer !

Tank commander
Commanders Of tanks

When I read out tank titans, 1St thing that came to mind was teen titans.


Masters of tanks has a nice ring....(rousselle)

rousselle wrote:What about 'Masters" instead of 'Lords.' Also conjure up the idea of playing for high stakes.

This

Box cover and new name. WIP.

Moderators! Thanks for renaming!)

Sviatoslav Pashchuk wrote:Moderators! Thanks for renaming!)

Hello, guys! My project is ready and it'll soon be launched on the KS.

The project will go live on KS on Tuesday, August 16.
Los Angeles 10am PST
NY 1pm EDT
London 6pm GMT+1

Here is the preview link:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/21 ... n=93b72909" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sounds wrong but thanks for keeping the Nazi logo for historical fact / reason :jab jab:


Now i only hope the shipping price doesnt kill Mt wallet :/

I like it and will be backing this most likely.

This is a small nitpick but could you redo the tuck so that it won't say World War 2, but World War II instead. So could you change the number 2 to a latin number? I think that it would look more classy and classic and overall better.

I'm a big mobile armour buff and have to say I can't wait for this deck. And now I have a present for one of my best friends too, he used to work for Jacque Littlefield and was one of the crew that restored his Panther (and damn was it awesome seeing / listening to / feeling it move).

Also, I agree with Räpy, change it to World War II or WW II instead of 2



[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KauAxwx ... e=youtu.be[/youtube]

Thank you for the comments, I changed the name of the deck as you've asked - World War II.

You may want to consider changing " Invasor" to "Invader". According to Dictionary.com, "invasor" is not an English word.

The artwork of the deck is outstanding. Best on luck on your campaign.

flashcards wrote:You may want to consider changing " Invasor" to "Invader". According to Dictionary.com, "invasor" is not an English word.

The artwork of the deck is outstanding. Best on luck on your campaign.

Both words - Invasors and Liberators are from Latin. I've chosen Latin for the names, as I used a lot of decorative elements from that epoch.

Thanks!

chach wrote:I'm a big mobile armour buff and have to say I can't wait for this deck. And now I have a present for one of my best friends too, he used to work for Jacque Littlefield and was one of the crew that restored his Panther (and damn was it awesome seeing / listening to / feeling it move).

Also, I agree with Räpy, change it to World War II or WW II instead of 2



[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KauAxwx ... e=youtu.be[/youtube]

The tank looking superb!

LIVE

I don't get why this one isn't moving faster. I understand the concerns about NPCC, but the other recent NPCC deck (Midgard) funded in a day so that can't be the only reason. Is the general theme just overdone along with NPCC the main issue? I agree the tucks could use work and have better details like embossing/foil, but they are priced pretty well considering that is lacking.

I'm really surprised that the project isn't moving faster - so many people liked the deck and I hoped it would be funded quickly. But this is not the end, there is still some time and I'm not going to give up.

I just added my pledge to the pot.

Have you done much marketing for it? I wonder if Kardify is willing to do a write up on it? Send prototype to Victor or others?

ecNate wrote:Have you done much marketing for it? I wonder if Kardify is willing to do a write up on it? Send prototype to Victor or others?

Could you give me some contacts? I'll try to send them information about the project. Thanks in advance!

Max at Kardify posted this just a couple days ago:

http://www.maxplayingcards.com/en/2016/ ... om-a-tank/

Invasors Kings!

Liberators Kings!

Sviatoslav Pashchuk,

I was excited to see the pictures as you went on this deck and ready to pledge. You even quickly answered a question about the numbered tin when the project went live. Love the map and hedgehog when both tucks are side by side and could live with the bland looking gray/silver banners. I don't even care that some people feel NPCC is a poorer quality card. If I like the design I back it.

Unfortunately now, to my eye, the courts are a mess. I wish I saw it earlier but these two pictures of all 8 Kings is a turn off. Why? You devote 1/3 of the card area to the man and 2/3's is taken over by the skull and sword. (I must admit reading your campaign I loved the info for the graphic on the K/Q/J and Ace and how well they tied together.) But to me the edge graphics overtake the men and women, pushing them into the background.

This is just my opinion and no offense meant to you Sviatoslav. Sorry.

Thank you for the comment! I've spent a lot of time on designing the cards and this variant was the most appropriate. I can explain why: I really devoted 1/3 to the man because of the proportions of the whole card - if I used a bigger "had", it wouldn't look nice. Also if the decorative element were smaller, they wouldn't be clear and readable when printed. And in this case the card would look like a big photo and a mess of the elements. Here is the example how it could look like.