Foo lions: spamming repair

[Klapaucius]

Post raid bug recap thread number 1

This foo lion is repairing the barricades once for each time someone attacked the forts, resulting in the log shown.

I think this isn't intended

[Nayru]

it might be since the alternative is bobbo had them do one 25 fort rebuild in the pet tick's worth of time it took to obliterate them in the first place, either it's crazy or a complete non-factor and seems somehow a singular lightspeaker mechanic exists in this era that is actually powerful, how quaint

[Klapaucius]

Since it uses ap you can also infinitely rejuv your lion, so that you essentially have to directly kill it, or have an everlasting fountain of fortification on your hands

As it stands this foo lion added pretty much a full 500 additional points of fortification in one pet tick.

We'll kill the lion first next time, but put me on record as thinking this isn't the powerful but balanced version of the skill, if it's intentional.

[plscks]

Post raid bug recap thread number 1

This foo lion is repairing the barricades once for each time someone attacked the forts, resulting in the log shown.

I think this isn't intended

I believe that this is functioning as intended. Now, as to if this is overpowered or underpowered, that is open to debate and possible subsequent change.

[Nayru]

that was about enough ap spent in one tick to instantly despawn the pet, which i presume occurred, if through some freak occurrence it survived that and the ls was active it's 30 mp to refresh the pet that virtually every attacker on that raid is going to hard focus after seeing that log, prol wouldn't've amounted to much and the problem was playing into it

the other end of it is that a fac with 50+ high hp pets got them taken out for 58 damage (a bit over 1 damage per pet) by a nigh-uncontestable inherent kinship seraph soak + es def class (neither of which can be status tick eroded in this titan spam = god-tier gamestate) with built-in wormhole mechanics and casting blur a bit/using 1 blood ice and regen but heyho

from what i could tell foo was designed exactly like aethersprite's 'if you don't kill this before X a bad thing will occur' bit

[Skouth]

What exactly is the counterplay to multiple foo lions?
Deglypher walks in, braving a petwall to blow up slowing glyphs?
nope glyphs are back up automatically

Right, so maybe a corruptor can desp-
nope

Ok so no deglyphing, no despawning, got it. Maybe we can sac a character to blow up forts and uhh, I guess kill the LS or something?
nope foo lions also build forts

... I guess we manually kill the foo lions? through the glyph of slowing?
Yes . You could also try sitting a tank there immobile and wait for pet ticks to happen at the tank.

[Nayru]

i guess about as much as a tank that can't have their soak/def tick eroded and can also curse/defiler anything that tries to dislodge it, as it's not like they've got anything better to do or ticks to worry about

unlike conduit/council wizard maybe/spell cor/curse do angel classes don't have any recourse vs a god tank

i'd take the 'kill foo lions' approach myself, ain't like they're 20 damage pets that heal for 20 most times a 0 ehp attacks

[Skouth]

I think god tanks would not be needed if lightspeaker petwalls weren't so easy to amass and maintain
Nerf DOs and IBs if you must, but you'll just be making good factions literally unraidable without a massive numbers advantage
As it stands now an IB has to eat anything from 10 to 20 blood ices to get through a petwall, not mentioning the potions required. Bigger evil factions have the logistics to support that but not every evil faction is big enough to sustain that.
"just raid smaller factions"
yeah like uhh... nexal crusaders... golden bold? maybe?

[Klapaucius]

Yeah - it popped after recreating the forts once. However, if the pet page is to be believed it's based on AP, so rejuving the lion would increase the amount of fortification that is possible.

This wasn't intended to be a discussion thread about where DO sits on the power scale, it's obviously pretty high. I'm reasonably confident status ticks affect stygian presence? Yes, Legion master isn't subject to status ticks. If and when the hammer falls, I'm not going to be complaining about it.

I don't object to foo lions being strong. Let me list a few ways in which I think it's bad:

1) It's janky to have a pet act 20 times on the pet tick. It made me think it was a bug.
2) One foo lion isn't worse than multiple foo lions. If a faction had 3 LS with the foo lions all rejuved up to have a bunch of AP, you would hope it would be better but it's not particularly, since you can just rejuv one foo lion to have the same hp. All it does it mean you have to kill 3 instead of 1, it doesn't really improve the effect
3) It adds to the raid chore list, and particularly the level of coordination required
4) It can lead to a unlimited refortification with enough prep

[Khaze]

I'm not sure how I really feel about Foo Lions having so much passive utility, as it starts to encroach on the realm of active defenders, but in this particular case I think the issue is communicating this to the players adequately. Now that you know you must kill the Foo Lion first, it changes things.

Mechanically, I think I'd rather see Foo Lions inherit the Imp feature, where they tank hits for their master. So the male Foo Lion would stand in front of the fortifications, forcing you to kill it before you could touch the forts. This way don't end up wasting AP, as reading logs in the middle of a raid is difficult enough as it is. If a raid is to be successful, the Lion has to die eventually anyway, so this would naturally put it at the top of the target list without burdening players further.

If passive fort building is still desired, I would move it to the pet tick, so a LS could still summon a lion to do the building afterwards (or in the middle of) a raid.