Please stop with the "no duplicates" and pigeon-holing our DPS into tiny windows

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fynlar

I'm not saying that they intended us to use it.

I'm saying that if it were UNINTENDED, they would have made the tiger 1-shot if ignored (or they would have patched it to make it such after it was discovered).

What I'm trying to say is that anyone who's calling the tank LB3 strat unintended (or worse, calling it an exploit) is full of it, because all the evidence left in the game points to otherwise.

---

To which I (again) say Turn 2 Enrage strategy. When a boss enrages, normally the raid wipes and you have to start over. Not the case with Turn 2. ADS' enrage is survivable, but it requires constant AoE healing. This was clearly not what the devs intended, as it completely negates all mechanics of a fight (not dealing with Allagan Rot being the biggest reason why people did it). Despite this, they never fixed the enrage (and as said before, they had to unfix it when a patch made it impossible to do the enrage strat).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Same. Though unless the whole fight is built around the idea of required deaths, I suspect PLD may become required for the prior Cover. That'd still be refreshing even then, though.

---

To my understanding O4S did have mechanics that required party members to die (specifically to other mechanics and not falling off the arena), so it's a possibility. Personally the reason I like the tank lb strat in Byakko is BECAUSE it isn't needed but is something viable, which Healer LB3 essentially is in quite a bit more content itself (though much more unplanned.) But I wouldn't be unopposed to such a thing...if the Bahamut vids aren't lieing to me technically Phoenix currently has the monopoly on required Healer lb3s casted :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dualblade

To my understanding O4S did have mechanics that required party members to die (specifically to other mechanics and not falling off the arena), so it's a possibility. Personally the reason I like the tank lb strat in Byakko is BECAUSE it isn't needed but is something viable, which Healer LB3 essentially is in quite a bit more content itself (though much more unplanned.) But I wouldn't be unopposed to such a thing...if the Bahamut vids aren't lieing to me technically Phoenix currently has the monopoly on required Healer lb3s casted :p

---

I mean, you had to cleanse a debuff by hitting 1 HP when said debuff also prevented you from dropping beneath 1 HP, like a reversed Living Dead, but, I meant the... corpse-y kind of death.

Have you seen the Argus (Heroic or Mythic) fight from World of Warcraft: Legion? It plays with the concept of death a fair bit. If not, but curious, the "Fatboss" channel on Youtube covers it.

Quote:

---

Lmao. The devs themselves said it was unintended, so are the devs full of it when they didn't see precedent for it?

---

Saying the tank LB strategy was unintended when it clearly lets you survive an ignored mechanic (and isn't being addressed/fixed) makes about as much sense as saying it was unintended for FFXI NINs to be able to tank after giving them an ability that lets them completely avoid attacks. What did they THINK was going to happen there? It isn't fooling anybody, certainly not me.

So yes, I'm saying anyone who is calling this unintended is full of it.

Quote:

---

It's not even an enrage, soft or hard. It's a DPS check, you don't meet it, you don't kill the boss.

---

Except it isn't a DPS check at all because the DPS can completely ignore it and you can very much still kill the boss.

Quote:

---

To which I (again) say Turn 2 Enrage strategy. When a boss enrages, normally the raid wipes and you have to start over. Not the case with Turn 2. ADS' enrage is survivable, but it requires constant AoE healing. This was clearly not what the devs intended, as it completely negates all mechanics of a fight (not dealing with Allagan Rot being the biggest reason why people did it). Despite this, they never fixed the enrage (and as said before, they had to unfix it when a patch made it impossible to do the enrage strat).

---

You're only proving my point.

If that approach were unintended, they'd have made it such that running out of time in turn 2 would just instantly wipe you like it would in any other fight with an enrage. Yet as you say yourself, that isn't how it works (and as I've pointed out already, Coil was *no stranger whatsoever* to mechanics that would just flat out instantly kill individuals/parties for failing them, so the fact that they diverted from that here is notable). Same deal with the tank LB3 on Byakko.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fynlar

So yes, I'm saying anyone who is calling this unintended is full of it.

---

:|

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fynlar

Except it isn't a DPS check at all because it can be completely ignored and you can very much still kill the boss.

---

Tried doing that without tank LB3? Oh wait, that's right, it's "intended" to do it with tank LB3, my mistake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fynlar

If that approach were unintended, they'd have made it such that running out of time in turn 2 would just instantly wipe you like it would in any other fight with an enrage.

---

T2 enrage strat was unintended, and was a side effect of overgearing the content. You're forgetting that T2 enrage strat only picked up when a lot of people were in i90, 20 item levels above the recommended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ErryK

Tried doing that without tank LB3? Oh wait, that's right, it's "intended" to do it with tank LB3, my mistake.

---

There's a large difference between something being intended "intended" and "allowed for", or not strictly unintended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ErryK

T2 enrage strat was unintended, and was a side effect of overgearing the content. You're forgetting that T2 enrage strat only picked up when a lot of people were in i90, 20 item levels above the recommended.

---

People just ran triple-healer until gear was enough, well before even full myth gear.

Quote:

---

Tried doing that without tank LB3? Oh wait, that's right, it's "intended" to do it with tank LB3, my mistake.

---

A DPS check, last I heard, tests the DPS of the party. Please explain to me how it's still a DPS check when a defensive tank action can bypass it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fynlar

A DPS check, last I heard, tests the DPS of the party. Please explain to me how it's still a DPS check when a defensive tank action can bypass it?

---

i think its just semantics at this point. it still a DPS check at the end of the day if people choose not to do the tank LB3, its just that the fail mechanic for not passing it is bypassed. you simply don't "need" to tank LB3 to pass the content, it just slightly faster. they admitted it was unintended, im willing to accept that more than saying "they're full of it".

I can accept it as unintended. I still love the strat because it is a tank lb3 use that isn't scripted beyond belief.

Now, RDM vs Tank Ghost...I can't see that as anything but exploitative cheese.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dualgunner

I can accept it as unintended. I still love the strat because it is a tank lb3 use that isn't scripted beyond belief.

Now, RDM vs Tank Ghost...I can't see that as anything but exploitative cheese.

---

My thoughts exactly. Being able to send one person with little preparation (just dual-cast and oGCDs) to do 8's work is...