The Binding Coil of Bahamut, Act 2: Tail Slap is frontal, guys.

[Araius]

I appreciate ideas from anyone on mechanics they know how to handle, regardless of clear, personally. For example if you're failing on the last phase of T6, but have the first 2 phases down to a science, I still consider your advice on those phases as valid as someone who's cleared T6. But I digress.

One thing on bind/heavy mechanics (and I've never seen the fight, so who knows if it even applies, see how useful I am). Generally the duration of Heavy after the first cast is so low that it's barely worth casting, same with Bind. What I've done in some fights is Bind at first, and then break the bind with a Heavy skill when sufficiently far away (Fluid Aura followed by Stone, in my case). Obviously this requires more coordination than it might be worth though.

In other words, shit's situational.

[Seravi Edalborez]

In hindsight I would edit my "never bind" comment to "don't bind if you're not comfortable with the fight mechanics". Since it was specifically directed at a person who was having trouble with handling ogre spawns I kind of assumed that went without saying. I stand corrected.

Otherwise...

"not sure I would take advice from someone who has yet to clear it" is a pretty douchey thing to say.

[Serdapi]

It is especially ironic when you consider that "just zerg the last phase" was the prevailing wisdom shortly after T6 was cleared.

And I'll say that if you're group can't "zerg the last phase" then you'll never beat T8 until you're gear improves enough to make up for your lack of skill. Zerging the last phase, in my opinion, is the best way.

Then again, I haven't cleared T8 so I wouldn't listen to me.

[Kipling]

And I'll say that if you're group can't "zerg the last phase" then you'll never beat T8 until you're gear improves enough to make up for your lack of skill. Zerging the last phase, in my opinion, is the best way.

Then again, I haven't cleared T8 so I wouldn't listen to me.

You do realize that there are groups who did it the legit way (IE: non-dps burn for Turn 6) and had enough to down Turn 8, right?

The two are not always related. In fact, it's silly to suggest they are actually. I've seen this line of reasoning a few times and I feel like it's just something people persuade themselves into believing because they don't feel like changing their strategy. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with either way, but don't act like one is superior when it quite clearly does not matter because it achieves the same result.

[Judai]

And I'll say that if you're group can't "zerg the last phase" then you'll never beat T8 until you're gear improves enough to make up for your lack of skill. Zerging the last phase, in my opinion, is the best way.

Then again, I haven't cleared T8 so I wouldn't listen to me.

I wouldn't either. ofc, if you can't clear T6 at all, T8 doesn't really fucking matter, does it. Oops, my bad, I said something mean to Rocl's super wise bff again.

[Rocl]

I wouldn't either. ofc, if you can't clear T6 at all, T8 doesn't really fucking matter, does it. Oops, my bad, I said something mean to Rocl's super wise bff again.

is this irony going to persist throughout the rest of forever now

[Judai]

My comment was clearly in response to him acting all high and mighty about not giving advice if you haven't cleared something, not because Seravi is my bff. You came running to white knight some retard.

[Rocl]

You came running to white knight some retard.

pretty sure it's you tripping over yourself white knighting seravi who admitted a fault in his own wording already. i have literally no connection to the guy other than i agree with him that it's silly to say NO BINDS EVER

i mean unless you're talking about the don't take advice from people who don't know wtf in which case you can read Araius' post

[Judai]

Not sure this is great advice. Bind can be useful in skilled groups. Not sure I'd take advice from a person who has yet to clear it?

Not sure I give a shit about what someone who hasn't contributed anything has to say.

Not sure where I defended him here?


oh hey, looks like I never actually agreed with Seravi on never bind it.

Just kite it? I don't get the problem, they are slow enough you should be able to kite it easily, even while hiding from Shriek. Binding them removes the heavy effect as well, so once it wears you are screwed if it hasn't been petrified yet.

I have thought about using Shadowbind to make petrifying them easier but as you can see;



my group doesn't like that idea.

Keep trying Rocl

[Rocl]

lol, some guy calls seravi on shitty advice and you come rushing in with "why should we listen to some low post count noob?"

i don't know what hardon you developed for me within the past 2 hours but put it away

[Judai]

lol, some guy calls seravi on shitty advice and you come rushing in with "why should we listen to some low post count noob?"

i don't know what hardon you developed for me within the past 2 hours but put it away

Same one you acquired for me? Where did I mention post count or call someone a noob? I am even pretty sure I know who the poster is but npnp. My comment was 100% about "don't speak unless cleared" which is the dumbest fucking thing to say. Defend away tho, as he keeps posting gems.

[Rocl]

Not sure I give a shit about what someone who hasn't contributed anything has to say.

"has not contributed anything" i have to wonder what this means then

i just assumed since we were on a forum you were talking about someone's (lol) contributions to said forum unless we're on about some glorious xiv zeitgeist now

[Judai]

"has not contributed anything" i have to wonder what this means then

Exactly what it says, he hasn't contributed anything to the discussion, but he wants to talk down to people who haven't cleared things? I am pretty straightforward, not my fault you read "post count noob" there. This is silly though, and I don't want to keep going off track about it.

[Serdapi]

You do realize that there are groups who did it the legit way (IE: non-dps burn for Turn 6) and had enough to down Turn 8, right?

The two are not always related. In fact, it's silly to suggest they are actually. I've seen this line of reasoning a few times and I feel like it's just something people persuade themselves into believing because they don't feel like changing their strategy. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with either way, but don't act like one is superior when it quite clearly does not matter because it achieves the same result.

Sauce for the "legit-way" statement?


Also, from a stand point of superiority, if someone takes 7 mins to do T6 and another person takes 10mins to do T6 I would say the 7 mins strat would be superior. One is superior because you don't get the same result. Different times are different results. You don't win races by just finishing a race, you do it by doing it the fastest. My point isn't that T6 is a race, my point is that winning in 7 mins is optimal than winning in 10, therefor superior.

You are correct that just because you do T6 the "legit-way" doesn't mean that you won't have the DPS for T8 but I would bet that if you can do it the zerg way, your chances of failing to T8 because of the enrage lessen.

My comment was 100% about "don't speak unless cleared" which is the dumbest fucking thing to say.

Was trying to stay away from white knight trolls but....

I guess my first comment should have said, "Don't give absolutes about a fight you have yet to master enough to clear". Same reaction would have ensued though from a person like Judai.

Last edit: Also, calling out bad advice, especially bad absolutes, is contributing. Judai seems to be unable to comprehend that.

[Pooke]

Serdapi has the longer join date, who is the scrub now? Rocl wins, carry on. Absolutely do not talk about absolutes.

[Kaixin]

Anyway. Passive aggressive comments aside, fun little tidbits about t7 from a tank's perspective:

The pattern of which ring becomes lava is always the same.

Abusing the application speed of your second step aggro skill may help if you're having trouble with picking up the first new add.

With average DPS cadence, melee adds will tail swipe twice, once near the beginning of their HP bar and once near the end. These are the moves that hurt the most. It's definitely something like Auto-Auto-Tail Swipe-Auto-Auto-Circle Blade-Auto-Auto-Tail Swipe but I haven't bothered to write it down and it hasn't been vital for me to know. Triple melee add phase is by far the most damage intensive portion of the fight, so its best to abuse cooldowns here.

OT HG into Sentinel into Rampart makes surviving the last add trivial. On the other hand you can use HG to help 3x melee add phase. Whatever works for you.

Single target LB3 (with supplemental DPS) after first petrifaction has proven more than enough to destroy Big Add before her hysteria spell.

Look out for Venomous Tail!

100%-80% is boring as hell. 60%-35% is boring as hell. If you can stay mentally locked in for these phases you should be good to go.

4 ranged adds will put a target marker on a certain person, who they will then proceed to hit once each. If all four adds are up and the target person has B4B active you're gonna have a bad time.

Also: Tail swipe is a frontal cleave and a frontal cleave only. I know every other tail move in the game is a rear cleave but this time it's frontal only, I promise.

Now can someone give me tips on t8 plz

[Avarice]

Sauce for the "legit-way" statement?

Well, if the last 40% was intended to be a DPS race, there wouldn't be a way to remove the Potent Acid debuff that the slimes inflict. You would therefore be on a schedule to kill Rafflesia before the damage from Acid Cloud got so high that it oneshots everyone. However, since there is a way to remove Potent Acid through feeding the slimes to the slugs, it seems pretty clear that Square made the intended mechanic (i.e. "legit way") to be removing the slimes from the field. That's certainly not saying you can't zerg the last 40% if you feel so inclined to do so, as both methods work as stated above; it's just up to the group. It was the same with Caduces; sure you could just not spawn any slimes and deal with the stacks, but that's certainly not how Square developed it. I fail to see how you can choose one method to be inferior or superior to the other when both get you a win, which in the end, is what the goal is.

Also, from a stand point of superiority, if someone takes 7 mins to do T6 and another person takes 10mins to do T6 I would say the 7 mins strat would be superior. One is superior because you don't get the same result. Different times are different results. You don't win races by just finishing a race, you do it by doing it the fastest. My point isn't that T6 is a race, my point is that winning in 7 mins is optimal than winning in 10, therefor superior.

You are correct that just because you do T6 the "legit-way" doesn't mean that you won't have the DPS for T8 but I would bet that if you can do it the zerg way, your chances of failing to T8 because of the enrage lessen.

Just because you can zerg Rafflesia at 40% doesn't mean that's going to do anything for you on The Avatar. Damage that a DPS outputs is highly correlated to how much experience they have and how comfortable they are with the fight. I'm willing to bet that almost any static group that has killed Rafflesia with the slug method, can go back, now that they've killed it once, removed the stigma of not having a clear before, and with the same gear as before, clear it from 40% to dead via zerging if they so chose to.

[Mina]

This is a warning. Stay on topic. I don't care who you are or who started what. Potentially another mod will come in here and add infractions behind me but this goes for everyone.

[Serdapi]

First, I wanted sauce for groups that killed it "legit way" and cleared T8 - I know of none that exist, all groups I've seen who cleared T8 have zerg'd T6. I understand that the mechanic is to feed the slugs, not dps race.

I fail to see how you can choose one method to be inferior or superior to the other when both get you a win, which in the end, is what the goal is.

For the inferior to superior lack of understanding, let me break it down.

Taking 7 mins to accomplish a task is superior than taking 10mins to accomplish the exact same task with the exact same results.

This means that a person or persons had better processes, skills, or strategies in place that others did not.

I'm willing to bet that almost any static group that has killed Rafflesia with the slug method, can go back, now that they've killed it once, removed the stigma of not having a clear before, and with the same gear as before, clear it from 40% to dead via zerging if they so chose to.

I wouldn't completely disagree with that statement. I would just bet less groups would be able to than you think.

Edit: In the case of this game gear can also play a factor. But my example is assuming 2 groups killing T6 with the same gear just using different strategies. (zerg vs "legit way")

Even if both groups played flawlessly, the legit way would always take longer due to the mechanics of it. My argument is that if you have the ability to kill it the zerg way, then killing it any other way would be inferior, unless you find a strat that allows for quicker kills.

[Araius]

For the inferior to superior lack of understanding, let me break it down.

Taking 7 mins to accomplish a task is superior than taking 10mins to accomplish the exact same task with the exact same results.

This means that a person or persons had better, processes, skills, or strategies in place that others did not.

I dunno, that's arguable. Can the people zerging it do it consistently, or does it require being lucky with procs? Is it dependent on job setup? Do we even have the answers to those questions yet considering the age of the content?

I'm not saying the answers to those questions are no, necessarily. But for example if a group "could" in theory have cleared turn 2 with the intended mechanic (passing rot) in 6 minutes with an 80% success rate, vs. enraging in 14 minutes with a 98% success rate, which is better? All in all, having multiple options to clear the content is better for the community as a whole, as people can tailor it to the strengths/weaknesses of the individual group. I know plenty of groups who enraged T2 because it was so failsafe even though it took longer, but could clear Turn 5 with their eyes closed.

Just seems like there's a lot of argument over the best method when 1) it doesn't matter, and 2) there's such a small sample size of clears to evaluate accurately.