30 replies to this topic

[Tyzh]

I've not done very much of TT.  But, uh, I like the Firefly mech.  I like it's name.  I like it's look.  It's got that je ne sais quoi that some other mechs seem to be lacking.

But, looking over it's load out I can't help but wonder if it's really worth much of anything.  It seems too slow.  The Dragon weighs twice as much and goes just as fast, and it doesn't seem like most medium mechs would have a hard time running a Firefly down and blowing it apart...
So, what I am really doing here is asking some of the TT gods to enlighten me with their massive knowledge powers, and, hopefully, tell me what makes the Firefly effective.  'Cuz I want to like it.  Please help me like it.

[Arctic Fox]

Well, I haven't used it, but it seems pretty good to me. It's not incredibly fast, but it's far from UrbanMech slow and the inclusion of four jump jets gives it nice mobility in difficult terrain. It has the maximum amount of armour for a 30-ton 'Mech. The armament is decent enough, it's not too dependent on ammo and it outguns 'Mechs like the Valkyrie (And variants have even more lasers). More importantly, being a 30-ton 'Mech with little in the way of advanced technology (at least the earlier Wolf's Dragoons' variants), it's dirt cheap. What more do you need?

[Jack Gammel]

It's not my favorite light mech, but it could have its uses. Its got pretty good armor and weapons (though you shouldn't expect that LRM5 to do much for you) for a light mech, and it has good mobility too. I don't personally use one, I think there are better options, but it's not a terrible little mech.

You are right that the Firefly would not last long against most medium mechs, but comparing it to the Dragon also is not quite fair. The Dragon is unusually fast for a heavy. I suppose that if I were to use one I might try to integrate it into a light-medium scout lance with the Firefly acting as a bit of relatively cheap muscle (3 medium lasers can ruin another light mech's day), but I already said that I think that there are better options.

This:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Night_Hawk

Or this:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Spector

Or this:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Wolfhound

The three listed mechs are all available in 3049, and all of them would offer more for your c-bills.

[Arctic Fox]

All of those except the Wolfhound incorporate significant amounts of lost and advanced technology and as a result cost 2-3 times more than the stock Firefly. The Wolfhound is moderately more expensive and is moderately faster and more powerful, with a better weapon loadout (That LRM-5 doesn't make a whole load of sense), but it is also 5 tons heavier, has no jump jets and significantly more heat generation for mostly the same sinking capacity, so it's not like it really outclasses the Firefly either.

[Jack Gammel]

Arctic Fox, on 26 March 2012 - 04:40 PM, said:

All of those except the Wolfhound incorporate significant amounts of lost and advanced technology and as a result cost 2-3 times more than the stock Firefly. The Wolfhound is moderately more expensive and is moderately faster and more powerful, with a better weapon loadout (That LRM-5 doesn't make a whole load of sense), but it is also 5 tons heavier, has no jump jets and significantly more heat generation for mostly the same sinking capacity, so it's not like it really outclasses the Firefly either.

Firefly BV: 870

Night Hawk BV: 997

Spector BV: 1,183

Wolfhound BV: 1,061

So yes, all three mechs are more, but the Night Hawk is only ~130 pts more, and the Wolfhound ~200. The Wolfhound does not have jump jets, which is a big advantage for the Firefly, but it does have a significantly better weapons loadout and better armor. It's just my personal experience with Battletech, but armor has always paid back its weight in gold for me (possibly because I have terrible dice rolls and need all the help I can get to keep my mechs moving on the battlefield).

I should have seen that the Night Hawk listed on Sarna is actually the model reintroduced in the IS in 3055. Mea culpa. Still, its only ~130 pts more than the Firefly, but is significantly better in most quantifiable ways.

Not saying that the Firefly is bad, it's just not my personal favorite.

Edited by Jack Gammel, 26 March 2012 - 05:03 PM.

[Monky]

I think the firefly is meant to be an ambush mech.

Slow speed means you can neither run from or chase down enemies, you have to lie in wait.

Good armor means you are meant to be able to take a bit of damage before being KO'd or forced to retreat (even if you're a light, it can make you survivable).

Good weapons means you are an asset in a firefight.

Put all those together, you have to get into a position where your team is capable of providing fire support, jump out from behind the enemy as they roll in and let loose. Don't expect to get out alive if you positioned poorly, get spotted, or didn't have fire support.

Edited by monky, 26 March 2012 - 05:12 PM.

[Arctic Fox]

Jack Gammel, on 26 March 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:

Firefly BV: 870

Night Hawk BV: 997

Spector BV: 1,183

Wolfhound BV: 1,061

So yes, all three mechs are more, but the Night Hawk is only ~130 pts more, and the Wolfhound ~200. The Wolfhound does not have jump jets, which is a big advantage for the Firefly, but it does have a significantly better weapons loadout and better armor. It's just my personal experience with Battletech, but armor has always paid back its weight in gold for me (possibly because I have terrible dice rolls and need all the help I can get to keep my mechs moving on the battlefield).

I should have seen that the Night Hawk listed on Sarna is actually the model reintroduced in the IS in 3055. Mea culpa. Still, its only ~130 pts more than the Firefly, but is significantly better in most quantifiable ways.

Not saying that the Firefly is bad, it's just not my personal favorite.

Ah, I was referring to the cost in C-Bills, which is significantly greater for both the Night Hawk and Spector. If units are balanced by BV then I'll conceed you'll usually be better off with them. I haven't checked, but I wonder how the Star League-era or later upgraded versions of the Firefly compare to them in cost and abilities.

Oh, and the Night Hawk is put back into production in 3055, the Spector is in 3053. Both much later than the Firefly and Wolfhound.

[Jack Gammel]

monky, on 26 March 2012 - 05:12 PM, said:

I think the firefly is meant to be an ambush mech.

That's probably a good point. Like I said before, I don't own a Firefly and have never used one or faced one on the battlefield. They might make a nice cheap little defensive mech to hold an objective or something like that.

Edited by Jack Gammel, 26 March 2012 - 05:25 PM.

[Jack Gammel]

Arctic Fox, on 26 March 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

Ah, I was referring to the cost in C-Bills, which is significantly greater for both the Night Hawk and Spector. If units are balanced by BV then I'll conceed you'll usually be better off with them. I haven't checked, but I wonder how the Star League-era or later upgraded versions of the Firefly compare to them in cost and abilities.

I always go by BV since that's how my friend (the one guy in the area besides me who still plays) and I play.

The Firefly-C is the upgraded version utilizing Clan tech. Not sure when it was introduced (though likely ~3055). It uses Endo-Steel and has 4 ER small lasers, 3 medium pulse lasers, and an SRM2. It is 1,290BV.

Edited by Jack Gammel, 26 March 2012 - 05:25 PM.

[karish]

I would love to see a locust in the game take off the MG and ammo and load up the C3 computer and maybe another ML it would have great speed no jump jets and a itty bitty target profile

[Tyzh]

Ambushing hadn't really occurred to me. I played it in MegaMek against some other lights and it did way better than I was expecting. I guess I really underestimated the nice bit of armor it's got. Cheap muscle isn't really a bad thing to be, so thanks guys. That helped a lot.

[CycKath]

quite like the Firefy, can definitely do much worse. Curious if it will make the jump from TT to game though, in the time period only the Dragoons and Com Guards use it and not much unique about it unless "every 'Mech will appear" thinking takes hold.

[EXSODER]

Old thread, but I really wanted to add to this and I don't want to start a new one.
I've warmed up to the Jenner lately, but I think the Firefly would be the one Light that I use. I'm on and off about the Cicada, but it's a Medium and doesn't do nearly the same thing.
I'm aiming to have at least one Mech of every class - I'm certainly up on my stock of Heavies.
I've read about the Firefly and its variants, but have yet to use it in the TT or A Time of War (definitely plan on it). It's unique enough to be set apart from the Jenner and Raven, but the Spider might give it some competition.

[wanderer]

The Firefly has virtues and reasoning that do go beyond the basics, like many designs in Battletech.

Don't think of the LRM rack as a weapon designed to kill 'Mechs. It's meant for taking out softer targets at safe ranges. Don't want to close on that infantry group? Missile it. Vehicle? LRMs and you'll eventually end up stripping it's motive systems and crippling it. It's also handy for other harassment loadouts- smoke or later-tech Thunder minefield munitions instead of standard ammo.

What it isn't is fast, though it won't lose speed in rougher terrain thanks to the jump jets. This leaves it vulnerable to accurate heavy weapon fire, since 30 ton 'Mechs aren't grand for armor protection- another place where the LRMs can be handy to give you some harassament fire without geting too close...

[Lt Limpy]

The Firefly-class is a series of Multipurpose, Mid-Bulk Transport boats designed by Allied Spacecraft Corporation. The hulls and engines are constructed at ASC's shipyard at New Burbank, Osiris, with final outfitting being outsourced to a dozen smaller companies, including the newly formed Firefly Ship Works on Hera.
All Fireflys feature a large rear engine module, wing-mounted engines capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL), a centralized cargo section, and raised forward section holding the crew quarters and bridge.


I'll be in my bunk.

Edited by Lt Limpy, 03 December 2012 - 08:19 AM.

[Kobold]

Lt Limpy, on 03 December 2012 - 08:18 AM, said:

X

I think you're lost.

[Lt Limpy]

Shiny.

[EXSODER]

Wait, before you go to your bunk -
...I-I'm confused...um...
...the Firefly is like if you took my '97 Pontiac and put jumpjets, missile racks, energy turrets and armor on it, and then gave it legs...so...raised forward section holding the crew quarters and bridge?
I don't...I don't think it's that big.
...it's a Light with LRMs, though...pretty please, PGI?

[Fatebringer]

I'm only now getting into checking out the potential Mech releases and noted that the Firefly and Specter were contenders once upon a time. While people had issues with the speed I notice a lot of people that purposefully slow down their Cicada's so they can mount an AC 20 The best feature about the Firefly that I know, AKA Classic Battletech variant is the numerous weapons. I would sacrifice the speed if it meant keeping the ability to use a large number of small and medium lasers My first encounter with this mech, I had no idea what it was but I was given two of them in a lance and used it to great affect and is one of the reasons I love to pilot light mechs. I would love to get one in this game as well.

[dal10]

I would use it.