So, I've begun tinkering a bit with the layout for the NetEpic Gold army cards.

But in order to do any meaningfull tests, I need to know the maximum ammount of units I would need to cram into a single card, and build a standard layout template around that.
So far I've found the Imperial Guard Airborne Company which weighs in at a whooping 48 units, but is there anything larger out there? or something with an insane ammount of detachments (Like the Eldar Wind Rider Host), that needs to be taken into account?

_________________
Sofa General

Nobody expects the Inquisition!!!
http://theepiclounge.wordpress.com/

A quick mockup.
Unit stats can be placed on the back, but they are extremely fiddly. It may be necessary to drop something from the stat-line, like notes or the unit name (which could be placed above instead). But alternatively the card back could be blank, allowing more cards per page and also making the cards more usefull for fog of war scenarios and such.

_________________
Sofa General

Nobody expects the Inquisition!!!
http://theepiclounge.wordpress.com/

I like this. I like how it matches the army book. I am kinda on the fence on the back. It might be nice to have a 'generic' army back to the cards, but might be nice to have the stats on the back as well, as you would have to look at the book when you need the info. I haven't played in a while so I can't really make an informed choice. What does everyone else think? I just had an idea. Could you do a 'front' page filled with just the fronts and then have 2 'backs' page one where you have all the stats and one where you had a generic back based on what the army is? That way it would give people the choice of which back they wanted/ needed?

While the extra features like unit stats look nice, I am not really sure if having them printed on the cards for reference is any easier than having a printed copy of the unit stat tables at hand.

On thing to bear in mind is that the text will have to be very small on the cards, probably 6 pt, which is readable if the cards have been printed with a good printer on good card, but may get a bit dodgy if you use a cheap inkjet on regular paper.

Obvously keeping them would mean more work for me, but I can manage if there's a definite preference for having them there.
But if people are indifferent and/or use the regular unit stat tables, having just the fronts obviously means 50% less paper and ink consumption when printing the cards. And if a blank back is preferable (Alternatively just a simple one with the NetEpic logo) for Fog of War scenarios, then we might as well save a bunch of time and do them the simpler way.

_________________
Sofa General

Nobody expects the Inquisition!!!
http://theepiclounge.wordpress.com/

Looks good! I vote for no stats on the cards, because I use a copy of the stats tables.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

well. I prefer the stats in the card. but I not sure about the card layout. too much coloured.

o.k. Having thought about this a little bit. I think I would just prefer to have to back of the card more like a deck of cards. But some image for each army would be nice. We could print off the table out of the back of the army books.

Awesome work, looking forward to the final product! I prefer the backs clear, just like a pack of cards as already suggested.

_________________
Bugger I hate it when that happens!

Cheers bans What do you mean by "too much coloured?" Would you prefer a white background?

Just playing around with options at the moment, so ideas, suggestions and requests are most welcome

Based on your experience with previous card NetEpic designs (and the original cards): What worked well? What didn't work?

_________________
Sofa General

Nobody expects the Inquisition!!!
http://theepiclounge.wordpress.com/

I like the idea of having stats on the card. A lot of the new wargames put everything you need on a card, just seems useful.

I had a go at knocking up one of my own (I am no way a graphic artist, just something I did in Visio). I based the size on the dimensions of a standard CCG card (magic, L5R etc) so people could put their cards in sleeves if they wanted and tried to make it look like the original ones (with the shadows), but with the added stat information.
Obviously needs some tweaking for massive companies or ones with lots of different units, I suppose the stats could fit on the back.

Matt

Nice card I see the point of having everything gathered in one place. Of course it also touches upon a different issue: Should the cards even have the same dimensions as the original SM/TL cards?

_________________
Sofa General

Nobody expects the Inquisition!!!
http://theepiclounge.wordpress.com/

I'm really like the mattman layout. We must don't forget that the cards should be simple and easy to read. Maybe we can change the blue-red-green-purple-etc old coloured cards by a background from each army-book.

I like the two faced card, one with the units one with the stats.

cheers bans

I see your point regarding simplicity. The main issue here is that it would take ages to draw up silhouettes for all the different units (we can't reuse the silhouettes from the original cards due to copyright, and there's a lot of new units too). Since we already have pictures of most units from the unit descriptions, it is much easier to use those, but I agree that the result is less graphically tight than the original. I'll see if I can come up with some sort of a compromise

_________________
Sofa General

Nobody expects the Inquisition!!!
http://theepiclounge.wordpress.com/

Hi!

Well, I guess its time to weigh on this.

I like how WMN uses actual images for the units. As WMN silhouettes are onerous and not likely to be done since we cannot use GW's ones due to copyright issues. There is a appealing side to have the cards like a standard playing deck with one "blank side" with just a logo.

Of course having some of the stats on the cards does appeal to the more modern card design where it derives much of its functionality from having ready use stats right on the card. The in game use of this cannot be understated.

So how do we undo this "Gordian knot"? I think the answer lies in answering one of WMN questions:

[/quote] Should the cards even have the same dimensions as the original SM/TL cards? [quote]

The answer is a resounding NO!

Cards already comes labeled as to company, support or special. Everyone knows the rations of support, special cards to company cards as defined by the rules. Thus a preset size is not that important. In any even support cards will be smaller because less info will be on it.

Recommended solution:

1. Use WMN original layout of images and such
2. Make the cards larger as needed and include basic stats ONLY (a simple "see rules" for anything more complex will suffice). I will leave the actual placement of the stats on that face up to WMN, but he can bounce alternative to me as needed.
3. Put all that info only on ONE face, leave the back blank with only a suitable logo representing that army to identify them.

I believe this way we can functionality and a pleasing to the eye format with only the sacrifice of larger cards.

Opinions?

Primarch

I had never thought about making the cards' dimensions different from the originals. I do like the idea of making them the same size as CCG cards to allow utilization of card sleeves. Putting all the info on one side of the card does make sense, but I like having a "broken" side on the card so that the card can be flipped over to show that a company/formation has broken.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart