Holy trinity.. Or maybe not.

[Saccharin]

How is that an exploit ? If anything, that's clever use of game mechanics.

"Clever use of game mechanics" is what an exploiter calls an exploit to justify their conduct.

The encounter was designed for a specific set of roles. As I understand the pet in question has a 66% reduction in magical damage and due to this is why it can tank Ramuh. What this means is that you can have an extra damage dealer. now with a standard party make up of four damage dealers then an extra is a 25% increase now that's more than the coil buff at 20% and how many people, probably the same people QQed about that. In the end the 'tactic' makes the encounter less significantly demanding, the add are a dps check after all, so it is an exploit.

Will SE take any action against those that do it. I seriously doubt it. Will they patch it? If the behaviour becomes prevalent as it seems it is then I'm sure they will.

If it looks like an exploit, acts like an exploit, it's an exploit.

[reality_check]

If it looks like an exploit, acts like an exploit, it's an exploit.

Let's look at SE's track history since 2.0:

Paladins tanking through multiple stacks without feeding. They decided to buff warriors after saying this was not their intended way of killing turn 1.

People training through turn 3 instead of killing it? Also called an exploit when the first wave of coil players went through.

What about coil turn 2? People were literally saying the exact same thing you're saying now. People were even saying that SE patched it shortly after, which was a complete lie. SE never touched it.

Feeding dreadnaughts everything in turn 4 was also not SE's intended mechanic for the fight. See point 1 with warriors for their reaction.

People cried when they found out the first twintania kill was circumventing death sentences by standing in conflageration. THIS MUST BE AN EXPLOIT, they said.

So, this whole screaming something as an exploit has gotten old. Move along.