Dynamis Lord - Chainspell Rotation Times?

[Stanislav]

it just obviously doesnt work
we went 10 kills of DL in row.. and for some reason we decided to double stun and we wiped the next 3 lol now we winning againw ith 1 stun only

[Wizerd]

Doubling up on Stuns comes from the idea that stuns can last several seconds sometimes. If a single RDM is stunning, and one of his stuns last long enough to curl into the next stun, he or she will get the no effect message, likely just as the last stun wore off. The RDM will then be unable to Stun again for about 2 seconds at minimum, giving DL ample chance to WS.

A second RDM solves this problem, by (hopefully) landing his stun some time in that 2 seconds.

The fact is, 2 RDM is safer than 1. 3 is safer than 2. 4 is safer than 3, etc. It's usually a matter of how much safer it gets and whether it's more worth it to add time onto the end. For example, if you have a 50% chance to win with 1 RDM stunning at a time, adding a second RDM might make it 75% chance to win. Then adding a third would make it 87.5% chance to win, etc. (Not exact numbers, but you get the idea)

[Raineer]

Doubling up on Stuns comes from the idea that stuns can last several seconds sometimes. If a single RDM is stunning, and one of his stuns last long enough to curl into the next stun, he or she will get the no effect message, likely just as the last stun wore off. The RDM will then be unable to Stun again for about 2 seconds at minimum, giving DL ample chance to WS.

A second RDM solves this problem, by (hopefully) landing his stun some time in that 2 seconds.

The fact is, 2 RDM is safer than 1. 3 is safer than 2. 4 is safer than 3, etc. It's usually a matter of how much safer it gets and whether it's more worth it to add time onto the end. For example, if you have a 50% chance to win with 1 RDM stunning at a time, adding a second RDM might make it 75% chance to win. Then adding a third would make it 87.5% chance to win, etc. (Not exact numbers, but you get the idea)

lol

[Koyangi]

Doubling up on Stuns comes from the idea that stuns can last several seconds sometimes. If a single RDM is stunning, and one of his stuns last long enough to curl into the next stun, he or she will get the no effect message, likely just as the last stun wore off. The RDM will then be unable to Stun again for about 2 seconds at minimum, giving DL ample chance to WS.

A second RDM solves this problem, by (hopefully) landing his stun some time in that 2 seconds.

The fact is, 2 RDM is safer than 1. 3 is safer than 2. 4 is safer than 3, etc. It's usually a matter of how much safer it gets and whether it's more worth it to add time onto the end. For example, if you have a 50% chance to win with 1 RDM stunning at a time, adding a second RDM might make it 75% chance to win. Then adding a third would make it 87.5% chance to win, etc. (Not exact numbers, but you get the idea)

lol

The thing is things are never perfect, I've helped throw in stuns on a RDM's CS stun b4, I did not get a no effect msg, AND the rdm's next stun did not either. The chances of 2 rdm overlapping and fucking each over(both getting no effect msg) is far less likley to happen than 1 rdm getting 1 resist or no effect soloing it(which makes things worse, since he has no backup). The more CS stunners that go at once = more insurance a stun will land.

[Jeryhn]

Doubling up on Stuns comes from the idea that stuns can last several seconds sometimes. If a single RDM is stunning, and one of his stuns last long enough to curl into the next stun, he or she will get the no effect message, likely just as the last stun wore off. The RDM will then be unable to Stun again for about 2 seconds at minimum, giving DL ample chance to WS.

A second RDM solves this problem, by (hopefully) landing his stun some time in that 2 seconds.

The fact is, 2 RDM is safer than 1. 3 is safer than 2. 4 is safer than 3, etc. It's usually a matter of how much safer it gets and whether it's more worth it to add time onto the end. For example, if you have a 50% chance to win with 1 RDM stunning at a time, adding a second RDM might make it 75% chance to win. Then adding a third would make it 87.5% chance to win, etc. (Not exact numbers, but you get the idea)

lol

The thing is things are never perfect, I've helped throw in stuns on a RDM's CS stun b4, I did not get a no effect msg, AND the rdm's next stun did not either. The chances of 2 rdm overlapping and fucking each over(both getting no effect msg) is far less likley to happen than 1 rdm getting 1 resist or no effect soloing it(which makes things worse, since he has no backup). The more CS stunners that go at once = more insurance a stun will land.

At the most, only 2 RDM should Chainspell Stun simultaneously. Three and up and you're just wasting Chainspells due to the likelihood you'll get no effects.

[Stanislav]

having constant perfect runs without anything getting through with single stun and around 30 people..

and then trying double up and wiping constantly its enough proof to what is better

[Koyangi]

having constant perfect runs without anything getting through with single stun and around 30 people..

and then trying double up and wiping constantly its enough proof to what is better

You're confusing good luck, and bad luck in this case, regardless of how many stuns you have, the fight is still luck based to a degree where the amount of stuns you have doesnt make that 0%.

[Cephius]

Anyone who has fought DL more than a few times knows that the fight is 75% luck, 15% skill, and 10% numbers. Sometimes DL will sit there and do nothing through chainspell and die without a death, other times he'll go crazy even while being stunned and split and do dynamic implosion times 4 or something. As long as you have chainspells that are going 5 seconds before or right as the previous chainspell lands, you're giving yourself the best chance possible to win. If you have enough to double up, you might as well save them incase you wipe so you can try again.

[Garret]

Luck may play a big role in the fight but you can also cut down on it to an extent with well timed stuns.

We were 5/5 before our first loss, and although he did use Terrasmash on us which is what actually wiped most of us the stun order had also completely broken apart & he was able to walk down enough to nail all the Blm's with it. Once he really gets down the bridge I feel like the fight gets immensely harder as then even his lesser AoE are a major threat to mages.

I find doubling up to be helpful but a lot of it depends on the numbers you bring too. We're an open LS, and as such our Xarcabard runs often hit 64, so I would feel sorry for a Rdm trying to chainspell through that lag. An LS bringing only 30-40 something people can possibly have someone with a more reliable connection able to do it by themselves & be better off for it than trying to have their guys double up, really situational.

Doubling up has worked for us in all our wins as well, but to each their own.

[Dakin]

Anyone who has fought DL more than a few times knows that the fight is 75% luck, 15% skill, and 10% numbers. Sometimes DL will sit there and do nothing through chainspell and die without a death, other times he'll go crazy even while being stunned and split and do dynamic implosion times 4 or something. As long as you have chainspells that are going 5 seconds before or right as the previous chainspell lands, you're giving yourself the best chance possible to win. If you have enough to double up, you might as well save them incase you wipe so you can try again.

I was led to believe DL fight was 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain, and 100% reason to remember the name

[Shefki]

They do share hate. However, if you aggro them before they get to Dynamis lord the first time, they will just path back to where they popped and wait.

Not heard of anyone doing it this way. So I'm rather interested in how you're doing this.

I assume that since you don't want DL and the dragons to link you fight DL on one of the ledges rather than at the ramp/bridge to the castle. I'd guess you're using someone with movement speed increases to drag them away. Where do they usually go and how much time does it buy you without the dragons?

[Judai]

They do share hate. However, if you aggro them before they get to Dynamis lord the first time, they will just path back to where they popped and wait.

You had to get lucky or they changed this since you killed him. We tried this once. Had two Ninjas use their TP and then go wait for Ying and Yang to pop and voke them. They just kept going for our Ally. Didn't matter cause we killed DL a few moments later.

Now we kill him before them spawn or as they spawn. Which is always as I am casting Thundaga 3... Having 10 BLMs would be nice, but not everyone has that kinda group.

All I can say is, MNK/DRK crushes DL. I reccomned everyone make their MNKs level /drk sub, lol. RNGs with Culverin is pretty hawt too. Obviously DRK w/ Kraken. You have any or all of that and it doesn't really matter what DL tries cause he is going to die.

[masag0]

we got 6 rdm/drk in my dynamis ls, 4 goes at once in beginning, 2 20 vanadiel minutes after teh first stun lands.

chainspell lasts 25 vanadiel minutes

we usually beat DL before the first chainspell is over and no one dies, except nins who mijin for fun.

i dont recomend having a single stunner at all. stun duration varies. 1 single person cannot stun right his stun wears in time, especially with all the lag from the log. the whole key to DL is leaving 0 gaps, because even 1 gap could mean your whole ls dead.

even 2 stunners is a bit dangerous

try to aim to kill in 25 vanadiel seconds. with at least 3 rdm/drk cs stun.

[Kaylia]

Not heard of anyone doing it this way. So I'm rather interested in how you're doing this.

I assume that since you don't want DL and the dragons to link you fight DL on one of the ledges rather than at the ramp/bridge to the castle. I'd guess you're using someone with movement speed increases to drag them away. Where do they usually go and how much time does it buy you without the dragons?

It's been a while since I fought it (~12 months ago) and only did it like 3 times. We were pulling DL a few step down, a ninja was waiting for them to pop and just pulled/mijin on the side of the castle.

I'm not sure what are the aggro condition for pet, but they are often "glitched". You can get ride of Ix'Aern's Qn'Aern the same way in sea and have them unaggro forthe rest of the fight.

[Rasengan]

Anyone who has fought DL more than a few times knows that the fight is 75% luck, 15% skill, and 10% numbers. Sometimes DL will sit there and do nothing through chainspell and die without a death, other times he'll go crazy even while being stunned and split and do dynamic implosion times 4 or something. As long as you have chainspells that are going 5 seconds before or right as the previous chainspell lands, you're giving yourself the best chance possible to win. If you have enough to double up, you might as well save them incase you wipe so you can try again.

I was led to believe DL fight was 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain, and 100% reason to remember the name

Fort Minor, whats up. lol

[FFXIFlux]

having constant perfect runs without anything getting through with single stun and around 30 people..

and then trying double up and wiping constantly its enough proof to what is better

Pure luck. It's 4 seconds between stuns for chainspell and RDM will often get the message of the stun wearing off before the stun landing because it's duration can be ~0 seconds. In 4 seconds DL can kill your entire force. Very very lucky.

Some of our early runs they set the chainspell rotation to 20 seconds, so at points we'd have as many as 6 RDM/DRK chainspell stunning him, and we just don't see this "no effect" lag you're talking about. I've been in parties with 3 bluemages headbutting the fuck out of a mob, and I didn't see the "no effect" lag you're talking about there either. I'd guess you have BLM or DRK in your linkshell who are tossing stuns which you aren't seeing because of chat filters, or you're just plain lagged.

[Ahkow]

the conclusion is...........

That dynamis lord have cheat moves that make the whole ls die ...

luck is what you need

[Raineer]

the conclusion is...........

That dynamis lord have cheat moves that make the whole ls die ...

luck is what you need

obviously it's 100% luck, so everyone who kills DL from now on shouldn't brag ever, it's luck not skill

[Delekii]

People saying that doubling up stun not only doesnt help your chances, but _hinders_ them, is ridiculous. Stun does not last a set amount of time, and unless both a. your stun lasts exactly the amount of time before you recast it, and b. the second rdm is casting at exactly the same time as you, it means there is more chance that someone will stun at exactly the point at which the previous stun wears off.

For example, if it is 4 seconds between rdm/drk cs stuns as someone above mentioned, and 2 rdms are going at once, at WORST an equal number of stuns will land to what would have landed with one rdm (if both rdms are stunning at the same identical time). Going on 4 seconds, say stun wears off after 5 seconds, and your rdms are stunning at 2 second intervals, the second RDM will stun after 1 second of Dlord not being stunned, whereas with 1 rdm there would be a full 3 second interval. Ofcourse it is never this simple in terms of math as people will be slightly slow or quick on stun, etc, but overall, you can see why more is better.

At best, it will be atleast twice as good, as 2 rdms can cover twice the amount of time in which stun wears off before it is re-applied. Ofcourse, luck will play the defining roll overall in whether you get screwed or not, but if you are into increasing your chances, there is no argument whatsoever to be had for multiple stunners being anything but equally (at worst) or more (at best) efficient than a single one.

[Raineer]

People saying that doubling up stun not only doesnt help your chances, but _hinders_ them, is ridiculous. Stun does not last a set amount of time, and unless both a. your stun lasts exactly the amount of time before you recast it, and b. the second rdm is casting at exactly the same time as you, it means there is more chance that someone will stun at exactly the point at which the previous stun wears off.

For example, if it is 4 seconds between rdm/drk cs stuns as someone above mentioned, and 2 rdms are going at once, at WORST an equal number of stuns will land to what would have landed with one rdm (if both rdms are stunning at the same identical time). Going on 4 seconds, say stun wears off after 5 seconds, and your rdms are stunning at 2 second intervals, the second RDM will stun after 1 second of Dlord not being stunned, whereas with 1 rdm there would be a full 3 second interval. Ofcourse it is never this simple in terms of math as people will be slightly slow or quick on stun, etc, but overall, you can see why more is better.

At best, it will be atleast twice as good, as 2 rdms can cover twice the amount of time in which stun wears off before it is re-applied. Ofcourse, luck will play the defining roll overall in whether you get screwed or not, but if you are into increasing your chances, there is no argument whatsoever to be had for multiple stunners being anything but equally (at worst) or more (at best) efficient than a single one.

read my post with the tiamat example