EM Garuda melee.... how?

[Traek]

About Garuda XM : the fight isn't melee friendly. To me, "not melee friendly" is "we need to create a strategy for the melees". Titan XM hasn't this problem.

You realize the playerbase are the ones doing it the wrong way right? They designed it to be done in a split method (how JP does it), and most are too lazy, or incapable of doing it different then how a YouTube video showed them first. It is really not worse for melee at all if done how the devs designed it. Even without doing it the way devs designed, there are lots of ways to make it melee friendly. This is a player issue more then a dev one.

[Viridiana]

About Garuda XM : the fight isn't melee friendly. To me, "not melee friendly" is "we need to create a strategy for the melees". Titan XM hasn't this problem.

I really don't think this is a valid criterion. If your criterion for saying something is not melee friendly is that changing the boss location will significantly reduce the chance of a party member taking lethal or near-lethal damage, then the final boss of AK is unfriendly to everything but tanks.

This is a player issue more then a dev one.

To continue my example of AK's final boss, facing it inward instead of to the wall opens up the entire middle of the arena for people to deal with adds and with orbs. Instead of taking a tail swipe to the head and nearly dying, players can instead run freely through the middle area to kill things and drop orbs. By Alcyon's criteria, this fight is neither melee friendly nor ranged friendly. Nevermind that the entire issue boils down to Traek's point, which is that players pigeonhole themselves into the first strategy they see/learn, even if it's nowhere near optimal and directly endangers half the party needlessly.

[Vodomir]

About Garuda XM : the fight isn't melee friendly. To me, "not melee friendly" is "we need to create a strategy for the melees". Titan XM hasn't this problem.

There is no issue with Garuda EM not being melee friendly. There are various ways to do this fight and for all I know only one of them is not melee friendly as it was designed around ranged DPS (read this as: the player base designed this method to beat the encounter; it's not a fundamental issue of the encounter itself). There is no issue with this fight. The only issue is players opting for a ranged strat while bringing melees in their group - bad idea.

They designed it to be done in a split method (how JP does it)

Wow, wait ... you actually know one of the developers who told you how they designed the fight? I'm impressed. I honestly don't know how the fight was designed and I don't really care. There are melee friendly ways of doing this encounter without using a 3-way split - nothing wrong about that. There's also nothing wrong about using the ranged strat, unless you bring loads of melee DPS to the fight and still refuse to adopt to a more melee friendly strat.

[Traek]

Wow, wait ... you actually know one of the developers who told you how they designed the fight? I'm impressed. I honestly don't know how the fight was designed and I don't really care. There are melee friendly ways of doing this encounter without using a 3-way split - nothing wrong about that. There's also nothing wrong about using the ranged strat, unless you bring loads of melee DPS to the fight and still refuse to adopt to a more melee friendly strat.

I love when people argue with people they agree with, just to argue. It doesn't take much brain power to realize Chirada's only damaging move, that can be split between party members, is supposed to be tanked by the group. Chirada and Suparna being to close doesn't work, so we know one tank shouldn't have both. Garuda + Add will 2 shot a full i90 tank with no CDs up, sometimes still destroys them with CDs up, and if a healer isn't on their tip toes for these hits, its a wipe. Lets not forget min item req for this fight is... i65 I believe? All other EX primals involve tank swapping, Chirada at half health = Tank swap, which if done in split method means both tanks are MT, and it swaps just like every EX primal fight. With Chirada dead, any amount of melee can be on Suparna with the split method, then move safely to Garuda. Anyone with a sense of game mechanics can realize how the fight was intended to go.

This is all just deductive reasoning of course, it is what I always felt of the fight knowing the mechanics while doing it every other way. As far as your snarky dev comment, I was mostly mentioning it because of recent talk from Yoshi-P that seems to undoubtedly point to this as well. Granted its translation so..

Y: That's right. That's why for these fights we have made solid mechanics and have clear themes for each one. For example with Garuda Extreme you'd have to figure out the mechanics relating to where Garuda, Suparna, and Chirada needs to be positioned, and keeping in mind that Suparna and Chirada will buff each other if they're too close together, the players would need to distribute their roles clearly, and on top of that ensure the DPS members share the damage from Chirada's attack, for example. (I think he just gave away the official strategy for the fight...)

For Garuda Extreme, the theme is role distribution. People need to split up and fight in 3 separate places, and even have to account for things like how damage should be taken. But once you're through the clone phase, people can then gather at the center and go "ok we got past the clones, just two more times".

Y: Regarding tanks, the concept of tank swap has now permeated through these Extreme fights, so you can expect future applications of this idea as well.

Hmm yes. Be impressed by my dev connections. /flex

[Sibyll]

Anyone with a sense of game mechanics can realize how the fight was intended to go.

I tried to get a group in DF to run this strategy. The DPS wanted nothing to do with this once I mentioned that they'd have to dodge slip stream.

The difference between 2-split and 3-split is that one is a gear check and the other is a mechanics check, and as we all know gear comes easier than skill.

And I agree, given the mechanics of the fight and the mechanics of Garuda HM it seems obvious that the fight was intended to be done using the triangle method, but more options are available once people over gear it, similar to ADS enrage method.

[Traek]

I tried to get a group in DF to run this strategy. The DPS wanted nothing to do with this once I mentioned that they'd have to dodge slip stream.

The difference between 2-split and 3-split is that one is a gear check and the other is a mechanics check, and as we all know gear comes easier than skill.

And I agree, given the mechanics of the fight and the mechanics of Garuda HM it seems obvious that the fight was intended to be done using the triangle method, but more options are available once people over gear it, similar to ADS enrage method.

Well technically just 1 DD has to dodge slipstream. If they are the one with hate, they can just move to the side for slipstream, and back in for downburst. I get what you are saying though, and its never a guarantee.

I agree with all you are saying. Don't get me wrong, just because a fight is "designed" a certain way, I certainly don't think it should be the only one implemented. Especially considering overgearing and such. I just wish NA playerbase would have caught onto the *intended* strategy from the get go. If that were the case, Melee wouldn't be quite as ostracized as they are now, and full ranged parties would be more of a flavor thing instead of an expectation.

I realize some servers are better then others, but on Sargatanas its 90% ranged only parties (at least), and any group with a melee is one started by the melee, still implementing the ranged strategy. Really rather sad.

[Kimura410]

snip

Youre right about your full 90 tank getting 2 shot by double WW with no CDs up, but why would you not have CDs up? You really dont need CDs for any other part of this fight, so why not use your best on the toughest parts? First tornados, I use sentinel on the first WW, while my healers adlo/SS me. Does like 1000 hp of dmg to me. When Im with my static, we dont get to a second WW. If im in a party finder, ill use rampart/foresight/convalescence on the second WW. Second tornados, first WW- HG, repeat the 2nd WW CDs. Then sentinel on the third tornado phase and repeat.

Same for war. I dont play it much but you could get vengeance on every first WW with inner beast, then the second WW inner beast with foresight and TOB maybe, but I think that may be a bit overkill if the healers put shields on you.

WW is no longer an issue for me. It shouldnt be for melee either if they know when it is coming.

Yes, your correct that WW is a 2 shot mechanic without CDs but so are a lot of endgame boss mechanics. The fact is if your tank is somewhat skilled, he will know what CDs to pop when he needs to.

[Sibyll]

.....Yes, your correct that WW is a 2 shot mechanic without CDs but so are a lot of endgame boss mechanics. The fact is if your tank is somewhat skilled, he will know what CDs to pop when he needs to.

The point you are missing is that it's an i65 instance, so it really doesn't matter what someone in i80-90 is doing because they are ignoring the mechanics of the fight to turn it into a gear check.

A tank should be skilled to know when to use their CDs, you are right. However, even more so a tank should be skilled enough to rethink their strategy and tactics when they are getting hit for 3/4s of HP when a CD is popped and they over gear the instance, but people refuse to do this.

[Viridiana]

Youre right about your full 90 tank getting 2 shot by double WW with no CDs up, but why would you not have CDs up?

You're right that an i90 tank can survive with CDs, but why assume i90 in an i65 instance?

[Kimura410]

You're right that an i90 tank can survive with CDs, but why assume i90 in an i65 instance?

I didnt bring this point up, the guy I was replying to said this: "Garuda + Add will 2 shot a full i90 tank with no CDs up, sometimes still destroys them with CDs up, and if a healer isn't on their tip toes for these hits, its a wipe"

Even so, who actually does this is i65 gear? People at that gear level are doing hard mode. 100% of the party finders I see for this fight are minimum ilvl of 75, but usually 80-84. Sure, the minimum requirement is 65, thats a fact, and if my paladin was wearing i65 gear, then it would be a different story and maybe a different strategy, but still. My CD rotation with healer shields, as I stated, does about 1K damage. convert that to an i65 paladin, im guessing 2-3K dmg? Still doable.

Im sure for fun statics will do this fight in crap gear, but the norm is definitely much higher ilvl than the requirement.