Board Thread:Suggestions forum/@comment-25981649-20170228084714/@comment-26553378-20170301224147

Dr Frankus wrote: Legoarmy505 wrote: No, this is extremely unfair, in all instances of warfare, flamethrowers are extremely dangerous for the user and his allies. Buffing firethrowers to be able to survive flames is very unreasonable.

The opposite should occur, giving fire pots a chance for explode prematurely, which would actually debuff something already quite op.

Seriously, imagine playing on a server (good for this example), then boom, a Easterling player pops up with a squad of fire throwers, who would set you ablaze and running while they keep firing at you, until you burn yourself to death or the enemy player catches up and 1 hits you.

Then you don't understand Fire-throwers.

Fire-throwers throw 1 fire pot, and then immediately charge in towards their enemies. Unless their target moves far enough, the Fire-thrower will continue to attack with a dagger.

All these claims of fire-throwers being OP are rubbish. They are never in contact with fire in the first place, and thus would mostly be useful for when other fire-throwers come in as reinforcements.

They don't ever keep firing at you, they would all charge towards you after you start to burn. If you have any units whatsoever, you should be able to stand a chance, but no matter if their fire-throwers or not, a single player against a group of units never wins.

"It should be worth to note that any flame throwers irl were very rare, only appearing in the right conditions and if ordered. Should also be worth that Greek fire was really mainly used for defensive purposes. As behind a wall, your more likely to hit an enemy than in a melee where your comrades are spread with the enemy."

They were rare, and well-equipped as well. I think they would have taken precautions to make sure they wouldnt't end up killing themselves if they were to send out fire-throwers. Actually they throw fire pots until all enemies in range are ablaze, not just one