The TNT Trial of Boomerang (whitestuff)

[hi1hi1hi1hi1]

A hero representing it's creator's own homeland, here's Boomerang by the one and only whitestuff!

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb279/bwhit89/Boomerang3.jpg

Here is a link to the Peer Review (http://heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=15074) for Boomerang, and a seperate link for additional information (http://www.marvel.com/universe/Boomerang)pertaining to Boomerang.

Judges on this TNT:
-Hi1hi1hi1hi1
-GreyOwl
-

Suggested play-testing - There are no synergies available to Boomerang, so basically any combination of similarly costed heroes would work for this figure.

Good luck to a speedy trial!

[whitestuff]

*EDIT*

After the update to the first post, this didn't need to be here, so let me just say...

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb279/bwhit89/netpic/AUSSIE_20OI_.jpg

[hi1hi1hi1hi1]

I thought there was, I just couldn't fnd it. Thanks white, it's updated now.

[GreyOwl]

Do you need a 2nd judge for this? I'm available if you do since Michaelangelo is finished.

[hi1hi1hi1hi1]

Do you need a 2nd judge for this? I'm available if you do since Michaelangelo is finished.Yep, I added you to the list. Is it only two judges required now? I know the stamp requirement has come down to two.

[GreyOwl]

I'm not sure if it's only 2 judges, or if it's still 3 judges but only 2 stamps required.

[allskulls]

I'm not sure if it's only 2 judges, or if it's still 3 judges but only 2 stamps required.
2 judges and 2 stamps. I realize that we are not always as available as we would like to be and 2 should do.

Thank you, GreyOwl and hi1hi1hi1hi1 for taking this one on!

[CStrife07]

Hmmm, I need to playtest him. Compared to Red Skull I think he should be in the 190-200 point range beacuse their stats are so similar, however he has a special attack and double attack so 200 seems right.

[GreyOwl]

So since this guy has already had a peer review, the only thing we're supposed to do here is adjust the cost, if needed, right?

Hmmm, I need to playtest him. Compared to Red Skull I think he should be in the 190-200 point range beacuse their stats are so similar, however he has a special attack and double attack so 200 seems right.

And don't forget that Boomerang has Flying, as well.

[NecroBlade]

"Doubling Attack" could be "Double Attack" and should probably say that he can only attack twice with his normal attack (unless, of course, you want him to do two Shatterangs, but so far no Double Attacker has a special attack, and remember the wording on the original Iron Man card).

[GreyOwl]

In the peer review, whitestuff explained why he called it Doubling Attack (a boomerang term) and also discussed the double attack for the special attack.

[CStrife07]

Oooh Flying I would possibly add 10 or 15 points. (Ranged Flyer with Double attack, weaker than Ironman in defense, one more life and a double specil attack.)

I think 200-210 points and just adding a sentence to doubling attack that says that his special attack may attack twice as well as his normal attack would be all I see needing to be changed, until I playtest him.

[NecroBlade]

In the peer review, whitestuff explained why he called it Doubling Attack (a boomerang term) and also discussed the double attack for the special attack.Ok then. Like CS07 said, compare him to Iron Man. He'll probably need to cost a tad more.

[whitestuff]

Oooh Flying I would possibly add 10 or 15 points. Yes but it is slow flying. One-on-one with Iron-man, Boomerang would lose just about every time.

I think 200-210 points and just adding a sentence to doubling attack that says that his special attack may attack twice as well as his normal attack would be all I see needing to be changed, until I playtest him.Do I really need to add that sentence? Do I have to be that prescriptive? I see it as if I'd need a sentence if he couldn't use the Shatterang twice.

He'll probably need to cost a tad more.I toyed with a higher cost but when ever I played him, his low defense meant he never really hung around for very long.

If others play-tests show otherwise, I'll increase his costing accordingly. :)

[NecroBlade]

I see it as if I'd need a sentence if he couldn't use the Shatterang twice.Agreed.

I toyed with a higher cost but when ever I played him, his low defense meant he never really hung around for very long.This is probably true, especially of high-powered Marvel games.

[IAmBatman]

I was a bit thrown by the double attack being used for the special attack at first too, but you're absolutely right that if you :rtfc: that's the only way to interpret it. So, for people used to Double Attack, it's a bit counterintuitive, but I think the slightly different name will help with that. I'm sure once this is TNT'd, that'll be the first line in the FAQ. But I don't think it needs to be or should be changed. That said, back to the talk of cost, as far as I'm concerned.

[whitestuff]

I was a bit thrown by the double attack being used for the special attack at first too...He is Australian. We are upside down you know :D

[CStrife07]

Yeah it makes sense that way I just think that it would be easier to interpret if you just add one sentence to the card, it has room on it. Also can you do normal and shattering in one turn?

[GreyOwl]

I don't see why people are saying that being able to do a special attack twice is not what "Double Attack" normally means and that it needs clarification here. The official version never specifies "normal attack". It just so happens that no official figure with that ability has a special attack. Perhaps that was intentional and perhaps not, who knows. But I think people are just making an assumption that it refers to normal attacks only. I think the wording as it stands is sufficient.

[allskulls]

I don't see why people are saying that being able to do a special attack twice is not what "Double Attack" normally means and that it needs clarification here. The official version never specifies "normal attack". It just so happens that no official figure with that ability has a special attack. Perhaps that was intentional and perhaps not, who knows. But I think people are just making an assumption that it refers to normal attacks only. I think the wording as it stands is sufficient.
I agree. The card is done. Let's playtest :D

[hi1hi1hi1hi1]

I don't see why people are saying that being able to do a special attack twice is not what "Double Attack" normally means and that it needs clarification here. The official version never specifies "normal attack". It just so happens that no official figure with that ability has a special attack. Perhaps that was intentional and perhaps not, who knows. But I think people are just making an assumption that it refers to normal attacks only. I think the wording as it stands is sufficient.
I agree. The card is done. Let's playtest :DGood way to put it GreyOwl. The wording on Boomerang is perfect in my mind.

[NecroBlade]

I don't see why people are saying that being able to do a special attack twice is not what "Double Attack" normally means and that it needs clarification here. The official version never specifies "normal attack". It just so happens that no official figure with that ability has a special attack. Perhaps that was intentional and perhaps not, who knows. But I think people are just making an assumption that it refers to normal attacks only. I think the wording as it stands is sufficient.I brought it up because the sentence was added to negate double special attacks OFFICIALLY on our first look at Iron Man's original card. But, if you guys want to disagree with Craig, fine. ;)

[allskulls]

I don't see why people are saying that being able to do a special attack twice is not what "Double Attack" normally means and that it needs clarification here. The official version never specifies "normal attack". It just so happens that no official figure with that ability has a special attack. Perhaps that was intentional and perhaps not, who knows. But I think people are just making an assumption that it refers to normal attacks only. I think the wording as it stands is sufficient.I brought it up because the sentence was added to negate double special attacks OFFICIALLY on our first look at Iron Man's original card. But, if you guys want to disagree with Craig, fine. ;)
I think what is going on with Boomerang is that he can use his special attack as part of his double attack so there is no need add another sentence or disagree with Craig :wink:

[NecroBlade]

I don't see why people are saying that being able to do a special attack twice is not what "Double Attack" normally means and that it needs clarification here. The official version never specifies "normal attack". It just so happens that no official figure with that ability has a special attack. Perhaps that was intentional and perhaps not, who knows. But I think people are just making an assumption that it refers to normal attacks only. I think the wording as it stands is sufficient.I brought it up because the sentence was added to negate double special attacks OFFICIALLY on our first look at Iron Man's original card. But, if you guys want to disagree with Craig, fine. ;)
I think what is going on with Boomerang is that he can use his special attack as part of his double attack so there is no need add another sentence or disagree with Craig :wink:But that version of Iron Man HAD a special attack, thus the need for clarification. I understand what you want to do and I'm not saying you can't (especially with a different ability name), but read GO's quote again and see if you can' figure it out. :P

[allskulls]

I'll try to get some testing in some time in the next few days.

[PochoMan]

I don't see why people are saying that being able to do a special attack twice is not what "Double Attack" normally means and that it needs clarification here. The official version never specifies "normal attack". It just so happens that no official figure with that ability has a special attack. Perhaps that was intentional and perhaps not, who knows. But I think people are just making an assumption that it refers to normal attacks only. I think the wording as it stands is sufficient.I brought it up because the sentence was added to negate double special attacks OFFICIALLY on our first look at Iron Man's original card. But, if you guys want to disagree with Craig, fine. ;)
I think what is going on with Boomerang is that he can use his special attack as part of his double attack so there is no need add another sentence or disagree with Craig :wink:But that version of Iron Man HAD a special attack, thus the need for clarification. I understand what you want to do and I'm not saying you can't (especially with a different ability name), but read GO's quote again and see if you can' figure it out. :PIve always thought you either use a Special Ability or Special Attack. If the Attack was meant to use the ability then the attack wouldnt have an additional range and or attack? Look it Kaeman Awa, he has a range but its decreased in the spcl att to add the spcl abil of double attack also. Then theres cap's shield, he doesnt have shield thow and double attack listed its a combined attack. So comon sense would state you either use an ability or an attack not both.

[GreyOwl]

You can use either a special attack or a normal attack. An ability may or may not affect either or both, depending on what the ability is. That's the way I understand it, anyway.

[hi1hi1hi1hi1]

I just figure read the card. It says you may attack twice. a special attack takes the place of an attack, so with double attack, you attack twice and both/one/none of the normal attacks may be substituted by the special attack.

[whitestuff]

A few days since any interest. Is the issue of the double special attack causing this to stall?

Anyone...?

[hi1hi1hi1hi1]

A few days since any interest. Is the issue of the double special attack causing this to stall?

Anyone...?Not for me, I'm in the process of testing. It is just slow thanks to mid-terms. :(

[GreyOwl]

Same here...no issues with the card, just trying to find some time to playtest.

[allskulls]

There is no issue.

Playtest:

Boomerang & Omnicron Snipers x2 vs. Ironman & Spiderman

The first round I gave the Snipers OM1 & 2 to get into position and possibly attack on at least the 2nd turn. By OM3 I assumed the good guys would have had a chance to get in striking distance of Boomerang. I was right. The Snipers did no damage and takes some losses but Boomerang got a good roll and found a nice hiding place to chuck some attacks from. Ironman takes a wound.

Second round the Snipers get OM1 to maximize their use before Boomerang takes the full lead. They manage to wound Spidey and continue drawing fire from Ironman. Boomerang takes advantage of this and, although he has to come out into sight this time, he manages to take down Ironman with his second attack...ALL SKULLS, BABY! No shields.

Third round, Spidey uses his spidey senses to ditch the remaining 2 Snipers and go after Boomerang. He takes Boomerang out on the third OM.

Not relevant but, Spidey goes back after the Snipers, dodging bullets (or lasers) on the way. Game over on OM3. Spidey wins.

So he took down Ironman for 240pts. I credit it mainly to his ability to hade and shoot. It made Ironman have to choose between hunting him down or keeping his high ground and taking out Snipers. If Ironman went full force after Boomerang, I'm sure the outcome would have been different.

Still want to see reports from games that he faces squads.

[hi1hi1hi1hi1]

BOOMERANG Play-Tests: 1 vs 1 Marvelscape Heroes

vs. Venom: Win, Received 2 wounds, Points killed - 150
vs. Spider-Man: Win, Received 3 wounds, Points killed - 160
vs. Red Skull: Win, Received 2 wounds, Points killed - 190
vs. Captain America: Win, Received 4 wounds, Points killed - 220
vs. Iron Man: Win, Received 4 wounds, Points killed - 240
vs. Doctor Doom: Win, Received 4 wounds, Points killed - 245
vs. Silver Surfer: Loss, Inflicted 0 wounds, Points killed - 0

Ok well after the battles against Captain America, Iron Man, and Doom I was pretty much convinced I must be the best dice roller for Boomerang ever. The defeat to Captain America was so close I could have seen it going either way. Boomerang was able to use height across a river to his advantage. Unfortunately it was lava field, so he did not stay for three consecutive turns. Then against Iron Man it seem Boomerang would go down early, however after grinding away 2 wounds, Boomerang rolled 3 skulls to only 1 shield. Bye bye Iron Man. The next game, vs. Doom, took only two turns. Boomerang hit for one wound in his first turn, then rolled 4 skulls to 1 shield from Doom. Luckily Surfer shut Boomerang down, rolling 6 skulls in his first attack and inflicting 5 wounds.

So I can definately see Boomerang's points being boosted to 221/220. The match with Captain America was so close and Boomerang had no need to use his special, which would only boost his cost slightly. However this test also led to two questions, 1 thematic and 1 play-ability.

1)I don't really know much in this field, but it seemed odd when battling that Boomerang could out-range Cap's shield throw, which essentially is a boomerang. A six range just seemed 1 space too many. Thoughts?

2)This needs to be added at the bottom of Shatterang Special Attack, can Boomerang be affected by his own Shatterang Special Attack? The official cards with Explosion powers all say whether a figure can or not, it is not mentioned on Boomerang.

[allskulls]

vs. Iron Man: Win, Received 4 wounds, Points killed - 240

1)I don't really know much in this field, but it seemed odd when battling that Boomerang could out-range Cap's shield throw, which essentially is a boomerang. A six range just seemed 1 space too many. Thoughts?

2)This needs to be added at the bottom of Shatterang Special Attack, can Boomerang be affected by his own Shatterang Special Attack? The official cards with Explosion powers all say whether a figure can or not, it is not mentioned on Boomerang.
I think the orange looks better :wink:

1) I would personally have any thrown projectiles have a range of 4 or 5 with exceptions. Boomerang may be one of those exceptions. I'm sure he could throw a boomerang farther than Cap can throw his shield too. But a 5 range would make sense for him, considering the range of the hi-tech blasters like Ironman and Doom. I think this was brought up way back in the day but whitestuff wanted 6. Either way works for me but a 5 would help him feel more in place compared to the other ranged figures...in effectiveness as well as cost.

2) Good catch!

[hi1hi1hi1hi1]

vs. Iron Man: Win, Received 4 wounds, Points killed - 240

1)I don't really know much in this field, but it seemed odd when battling that Boomerang could out-range Cap's shield throw, which essentially is a boomerang. A six range just seemed 1 space too many. Thoughts?

2)This needs to be added at the bottom of Shatterang Special Attack, can Boomerang be affected by his own Shatterang Special Attack? The official cards with Explosion powers all say whether a figure can or not, it is not mentioned on Boomerang.
I think the orange looks better :wink:

1) I would personally have any thrown projectiles have a range of 4 or 5 with exceptions. Boomerang may be one of those exceptions. I'm sure he could throw a boomerang farther than Cap can throw his shield too. But a 5 range would make sense for him, considering the range of the hi-tech blasters like Ironman and Doom. I think this was brought up way back in the day but whitestuff wanted 6. Either way works for me but a 5 would help him feel more in place compared to the other ranged figures...in effectiveness as well as cost.

2) Good catch!There made it gold. :D

Anyway I do agree on the 5 range, and I guess I don't remember it being brought up before. It would certainly bring his cost down however. Right now I picture him equal or slightly better than Cap, which may be too high for his power level in the comics.

[IAmBatman]

Sounds like Boomerang is faring better in your tests than Wolverine is in mine, against a similar field. And Wolverine is tenatively priced at 230.

[whitestuff]

1)I don't really know much in this field, but it seemed odd when battling that Boomerang could out-range Cap's shield throw, which essentially is a boomerang. A six range just seemed 1 space too many. Thoughts?A range of 5 brings Boomerang closer to the action, but that may not necessarily be a bad thing. I could live with a 5 for range. Just a thought, DW9000's explosion special attack has a range of 7...

2)This needs to be added at the bottom of Shatterang Special Attack, can Boomerang be affected by his own Shatterang Special Attack? The official cards with Explosion powers all say whether a figure can or not, it is not mentioned on Boomerang.Not the Airborne Elite's Grenade Throw :twisted: but I'll add the line to Boomerang as it probably should be there.

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb279/bwhit89/heroscape/Boomerang4.jpg

[GreyOwl]

Just a cosmetic note, the new line you added should probably start at the end of the previous line, not on a new line. Otherwise, it looks good.

[hi1hi1hi1hi1]

2)This needs to be added at the bottom of Shatterang Special Attack, can Boomerang be affected by his own Shatterang Special Attack? The official cards with Explosion powers all say whether a figure can or not, it is not mentioned on Boomerang.Not the Airborne Elite's Grenade Throw :twisted: but I'll add the line to Boomerang as it probably should be there.
Hmm, never knew that. Anyway the new card looks good (other than that I agree with Greyowl), it'll try to get some more testing in.

[whitestuff]

Your wish is my... whatever. Here's the card.

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb279/bwhit89/heroscape/Boomerang5.jpg

[UranusPChicago]

I do have some playtesting data of Boomerang to share this evening. My notes are at the house I will try to get the stuff posted tonight.

[UranusPChicago]

My Boomerang playtest results:

------Boomerang vs. Red Skull (190, 5)
R1T3 W - 1
R1T3 W - 4
R1T3 W - 1
R1T3 W - 4

------Boomerang vs. Braxis (210, 8 )
R1T2 W - 1
R1T2 ------------------ W - 3
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T3 W - 3

------Boomerang vs. Major Q9 (180, 4)
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T3 ------------------ W - 2
R2T1 W - 3
R1T2 ------------------ W - 3

------Boomerang vs. Charos (210, 9)
R2T3 ------------------ W - 1 (Charos won with a Counterstrike)
R1T2 ------------------ W - 9
R1T3 ------------------ W - 8
R1T2 ------------------ W - 6

------Boomerang vs. Spartacus (200, 5)
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T2 W - 2

------Boomerang vs. SGT Drake v2 (170, 6)
R1T2 ------------------ W - 4
R1T1 ------------------ W - 6
R1T2 ------------------ W - 3
R1T2 W - 5

------Boomerang vs. Krug (120, 8 )
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T2 ------------------ W - 3
R1T2 ------------------ W - 5
R1T2 ------------------ W - 4

Quick explaination...
Each series alternated initiative starting with the visitor.
(Points, Life)
R = Rounds
T = Turns
W = Win
# = Amount of life left after victory

Over all, I think that Boomerang's obvious glass jaw is his low defense as highlighted in the second game with Drake v2. Drake hit with 5 skulls on his first turn and Boomerang blanked out; game over.

I also highlighted a "lights out" game with Braxis, game 1. Boomerang was able to take down the dragon in only two turns, but Braxis shares the same glass jaw as Boomerang.

[hi1hi1hi1hi1]

So from your testing it would seem that Boomerang is way too high at 200 points. He didn't seem to fare to well against anyone except Red Skull. I'm interested in how these results are so much different than the ones I had vs. the Marvel heroes. Did the lowering by one range really change that much? I'll have to go through and test some more.

[NecroBlade]

So from your testing it would seem that Boomerang is way too high at 200 points.Maybe in 1-on-1 games, but vs Classic 'scape armies? He's still got the offensive power of Iron Man (less due to range, but more due to Shatterang), not to mention the ability to completely ignore LOS, which I have a feeling doesn't come into play much in 1-on-1s. I'd say dropping below 200 by much would be a bad idea.

[UranusPChicago]

I would not say that he is too high at 200 points, but I think we may have found a "ceiling" of 200. I haven't tested him yet against Squads, but that is where he would be fully worth his points. 1 on 1 against heavy hitters, he falls pretty quick because of his low defense.

If used correctly, on the fringe, away from the main melee battles, he should do a fair amount of damage with his double attacks be it Shatterangs or normal attack.

[whitestuff]

Any movement here play-testers?

[GreyOwl]

All my (limited) playtesting time lately has been consumed by the playtesting spreadsheet that allskulls and I are working on, so I've been relying on other testers' results for this. Based on their comments, it seems that the cost hasn't been quite narrowed down yet.

[IAmBatman]

I've been kind of waiting on the completion of these spread sheets and some sort of conclusion from our "best way to determine cost" discussion before proceeding with my efforts to playtest any of these.

[whitestuff]

That's OK. I'm happy to keep waiting... :)

[GreyOwl]

I wouldn't hold up any trials waiting on the spreadsheets (unless the creator wants to), because I don't know how long it will take before they're done. The primary hold up is time to playtest, because we need to test several official figures to check the method.

[IAmBatman]

But it's good that you're asking - these threads have a tendency to die if the creator's not on them regularly, pushing them forward.

[hi1hi1hi1hi1]

Guilty along with IAmBatman. With all the talk of determining a standard play-testing arrangement, I've withheld my testing. How long to you apporximate before we see this spreadsheet, GreyOwl?

[GreyOwl]

Well, once we get a few more kinks worked out, we'll need a lot of playtesting on official figures to optimizie and calibrate the formulas. For that, the more assistance we have the better.

[whitestuff]

Well, once we get a few more kinks worked out, we'll need a lot of playtesting on official figures to optimizie and calibrate the formulas. For that, the more assistance we have the better.Any more word on this?

[GreyOwl]

Well, once we get a few more kinks worked out, we'll need a lot of playtesting on official figures to optimizie and calibrate the formulas. For that, the more assistance we have the better.Any more word on this?

Yes, I'll be posting about this a little later today. Stay tuned.

[whitestuff]

Well, once we get a few more kinks worked out, we'll need a lot of playtesting on official figures to optimizie and calibrate the formulas. For that, the more assistance we have the better.Any more word on this?

Yes, I'll be posting about this a little later today. Stay tuned.http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb279/bwhit89/netpic/s_4c1b3972aecafb53c82ac25a48ed95f5.gif

[GreyOwl]

See here: http://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=16562

[UranusPChicago]

I will try to get some playtesting in on Boomerang over the next week.

[whitestuff]

I will try to get some playtesting in on Boomerang over the next week.Cool. I'll have to admit I forgot this was still going... :oops:

[whitestuff]

I will try to get some playtesting in on Boomerang over the next week.How'd he fare?

[UranusPChicago]

He has been trying to battle his way out of my Heroclix storage box for the past couple weeks with no success. Even his Shatterangs have proven useless.

Hopefully he will find his way out later this week....

[whitestuff]

He has been trying to battle his way out of my Heroclix storage box for the past couple weeks with no success. Even his Shatterangs have proven useless.

Hopefully he will find his way out later this week....How did you go with this?

Are these dead?

[UranusPChicago]

I will see if I can get some testing in with Boomerang next week. I would like to wrap up some of these TNTs to clear up some more space on the front page.

[whitestuff]

I will see if I can get some testing in with Boomerang next week. I would like to wrap up some of these TNTs to clear up some more space on the front page.I await with bated breath. ;)

[UranusPChicago]

My Boomerang playtest results:

------Boomerang vs. Red Skull (190, 5)
R1T3 W - 1
R1T3 W - 4
R1T3 W - 1
R1T3 W - 4

------Boomerang vs. Braxis (210, 8 )
R1T2 W - 1
R1T2 ------------------ W - 3
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T3 W - 3

------Boomerang vs. Major Q9 (180, 4)
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T3 ------------------ W - 2
R2T1 W - 3
R1T2 ------------------ W - 3

------Boomerang vs. Charos (210, 9)
R2T3 ------------------ W - 1 (Charos won with a Counterstrike)
R1T2 ------------------ W - 9
R1T3 ------------------ W - 8
R1T2 ------------------ W - 6

------Boomerang vs. Spartacus (200, 5)
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T2 W - 2

------Boomerang vs. SGT Drake v2 (170, 6)
R1T2 ------------------ W - 4
R1T1 ------------------ W - 6
R1T2 ------------------ W - 3
R1T2 W - 5

------Boomerang vs. Krug (120, 8 )
R1T3 ------------------ W - 4
R1T2 ------------------ W - 3
R1T2 ------------------ W - 5
R1T2 ------------------ W - 4

Quick explaination...
Each series alternated initiative starting with the visitor.
(Points, Life)
R = Rounds
T = Turns
W = Win
# = Amount of life left after victory

Over all, I think that Boomerang's obvious glass jaw is his low defense as highlighted in the second game with Drake v2. Drake hit with 5 skulls on his first turn and Boomerang blanked out; game over.

I also highlighted a "lights out" game with Braxis, game 1. Boomerang was able to take down the dragon in only two turns, but Braxis shares the same glass jaw as Boomerang.

I some time last night to get in a few games of playtesting with Boomerang vs. Marcus and 2 squads of his Roman Legion. The games were played on a 20 hex long, flat map.

------Boomerang vs. Marcus (100, 6 ) & 8 Legion
R2T1 ------------------ W - 4 & 4
R2T1 ------------------ W - 5 & 5
R2T1 ------------------ W - 2 & 2
R2T2 W - 1
R1T3 ------------------ W - 3 & 4

Quick explaination...
Each series alternated initiative starting with the visitor.
(Points, Life)
R = Rounds
T = Turns
W = Win
# = Amount of life left after victory

I played as vanilla as I could with the Romans keeping them in the diamond shape formation that played right into Boomerang's strength for his special attack. I found that not only does his low defense of 3 come into play, but his range of 6 allows melee figures with move of 5 to counter the next turn if they survive his onslaught. From the outcome of the games, it appears the Romans were able to survive the onslaught most of the time.

I even played that Boomerang could not be wounded by his Shatterang attack even though it was not stated on the card. He would have died much sooner in most games if he could have wounded himself.

I would think that most squads would not be bunched together as much as I played the Romans, so I think his multi attack would be weakened even that much more. Having no height in the game effectively eliminated his flying ability, but it would not have made much of a difference as 90% of the time he was attacking with the Shatterang Special Attack. He might have lasted a little longer having an extra defense die each time, but not enough to scream foul.

After these games, I am thinking that he should be lowered a little more in points. Looking back over the other games I had played with him previously, I am thinking 180-190.

After 33 games of playtesting, I give Boomerang costed at 190 my...
http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb279/bwhit89/approved.gif

[whitestuff]

Thanks for putting in such a big effort. Ok, I dropped him to 190 and made his shatterangs not hurt him.

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb279/bwhit89/Boomerang-2.jpg