ORIGINAL: azraelck
So we have either reduce the ammo loads for the Mortars to a more historic level, and increase the speed, or leave them with a full day's supply of ammo, and keep the speed. That is what I see here. Generally, I don't see a reason to be moving more than one hex at a time, in a situation where my troops are exposed to enemy fire. I don't like casualties, and charging forward at a full run is a surefire way of getting my men killed or wounded.
Personally, while I fully believe a troop of 5 could carry a 81mm mortar and some ammo 200m in a couple minuits, I cannot believe that they could carry that ammo loads given in game like that. If you want to go historical, give them the ammo loads that they would have, and let them advance with the infantry. As they are suppossed to be used for close support, setting up in sheltered areas just behind the front to provide indirect fire support, that would be more realistic it seems to me. 10-12 rounds, and use small ammo crates and jeeps to provide resupply if they run out. Since I have no intention of leaving my troops in one spot during an assault, and in practice I rarely even give my mortars enough time to set up, much less fire, before advancing again except when heavily engaged and unable to move forward without unneccessary casualties. It's in those situations that the mortars come into play for me, and even though they very rarely fire more than a half dozen rounds a battle with me, I would not do without them. I could probably beef up my infantry a bit, but then they'd get stopepd just as easily, and not give the same kind of fire support like the mortars do. Then the whole platoon or company would get pinned down with enemy artillery fire, and they'd suffer even greater casualties and suppression than if I had had the mortars to break up the enemy lines.
No aspect alone can win a battle. The best infantry cannot win against fortified positions, tanks, and heavy artillery, Artillery is useless without men to advance and secure those areas ahead, tanks are vulnerable to infantry and ATG fire, and aircraft cannot control the ground, or even identify units beneath them, as evidenced by mis-bombings and strafing upon friendlies. Thus, My tanks do not advance behind my infantry, but besides them, to handle enemy AFVs and fortifications, and to break up enemy infantry formations, the MGs are just behind, to get into a position to bring cover fire if needed; while the mortars and HQ lie 50-100m back, to provide rallying effort and close indirect fire support as needed. Calvary, if I use it, generally acts as a fast flanking force, and to plug gaps in my own lines if needed.
Correct-a mundo, sir!!!!
My neck hair was up from a prior entrant who said the movement of the piece was "silly" and that the notion of moving HMG's with the infantry was something "he had a problem with", (right after I offered testimony it had been done by my unit, my army..)
He then made the statement I was suggesting it was the same as "charging the enemy" with said piece.
Not at all.My original comments on the matter were that those units should be able to move 4 hexes, not "1"..
A reduced ammo load, yes, if only moving the piece with those 5 men, but if moving as part of a larger group,(platoon or larger), the ammo would be spread out amongst them as well, but the mortars and HMG's went WITH the infantry...
Yeah, I am a history nut, but I helped make that history, and (like anybody in a veterans hall), don't appreciate revisionists who proffer their shovelfull based on "feeling" or their concept of "silly"..
Wikipedia
mortar (weapon)
A mortar is a smoothbore, muzzle-loading artillery piece that fires indirect shells (bombs in the UK) at low velocities, short ranges, and high-arcing ballistic trajectories. These attributes contrast with the mortar's larger siblings, rifled howitzers and field guns, which fire at higher velocities, longer ranges, and flatter arcs. Typically a modern mortar consists of a tube into which is dropped a mortar shell (bomb) onto a firing pin resulting in the detonation of the propellant and the firing of the shell.
A mortar can also be a launcher for fireworks, a hand-held or vehicle-mounted projector for smoke shells or flares, or a large grenade launcher.
Mortars are relatively simple and easy to operate artillery pieces. Light and medium mortars are man-portable, and are usually used by infantry organizations. The chief advantage a mortar section has over an artillery battery is its small size and its mobility. It is able to fire from the protection of a trench or defilade. In these aspects the mortar is an excellent infantry support weapon, as it can travel over any terrain and is not burdened by the logistical support needed for artillery.
There are also heavy mortars of 120 mm to 240 mm calibre. These are usually towed or vehicle-mounted weapons, sometimes breech-loaded, and normally employed by artillery units attached to battalion through division level. Even at this large size, mortars are simpler and less expensive than comparable howitzers or field guns.
A mortar can be carried by one or more people (larger mortars can be broken down into components), or transported in a vehicle. An infantry mortar can usually also be mounted and fired from a mortar-carrier; a purpose-built armoured vehicle with a large roof hatch. A heavy mortar can be mounted on a towed carriage, or permanently vehicle-mounted as a self-propelled mortar.
An unusual support weapon is the Soviet/Russian 2B9 Vasilek 82 mm automatic mortar, also manufactured by the People's Republic of China's Norinco as the Type W99 mortar. This is a fully-automatic weapon, capable of a high rate of fire. It can also be used in a direct fire mode, and can fire a HEAT round for use against light armoured vehicles. Another interesting recent development is the emergence of the Lacroix Defense's Samourai Urban Warfare Weapon, described as a man-portable, shoulder-fired mortar.
Design
Most modern mortar systems consist of three main components: a tube or barrel, a base plate, and a bipod.
Modern mortars normally range in caliber from 60 millimeters (2.36 inches) to 120 millimeters (4.72 inches) however, aberrations both larger and smaller than these specifications have been produced. An example of the smaller scale is the British 51 mm light mortar which is carried by an individual and consists of only a tube and a base plate. Conversely, a large abnormality is the Soviet 2S4 M1975 "Tyulpan" (tulip tree) 240-mm self-propelled mortar.
Smaller mortars (up to 81 mm) are commonly used and transported by infantry based mortar sections as a substitute for, or in addition to, artillery.
Ammunition for mortar systems generally come in two main varieties: fin-stabilized and spin-stabilized. The former have short fins on their posterior portion that control their path in flight. The latter use spin (similar to a thrown American Football) to balance and control the mortar shell. These rounds can either be illumination, smoke, or high explosive.
Spin-stabilised rounds require a rifled barrel. Since mortars on the whole are top-loaded, the mortar bomb has a pre-engraved band that engages with the rifling of the barrel. The increase in accuracy is at a cost in loading time.
Mortars came in a variety of calibres. The French 81 mm mortar became standard for many countries. The Soviets developed an ingenious tactical advantage based upon this fact. They standardized an 82 mm mortar for their armies. Hence, they could use the ammunition of other countries which they found on the battlefield in their mortars, albeit with less accuracy, while their own would be too large for their opponents. This was made use of during the Vietnam War and at other times.
Other Advantages
An additional advantage of the mortar is its ability to place munitions in close proximity to the weapon placement due to the "lobbing" nature of the ballistics. This can also be an advantage if the attacking point of the mortar is at a lower elevation than the target. Imagine attacking a city centre with heavy resistance at 1 km with an elevation disadvantage of 30 meters (100 feet). Regular long-range artillery would not work. The lobbing effect of the mortar is the perfect solution to enemy neutralisation in this scenario.
History
Mallet's Mortar with 36 inch shells which would have contained 480 lb (217 kg) of gunpowder..
Enlarge
Mallet's Mortar with 36 inch shells which would have contained 480 lb (217 kg) of gunpowder..
An 1832 "Monster Mortar" invented by Henri-Joseph Paixhans.
Enlarge
An 1832 "Monster Mortar" invented by Henri-Joseph Paixhans.
Mortars have existed for hundreds of years, first finding usage in siege warfare. However, these weapons were huge, heavy, iron monstrosities that could not be easily transported. Simply made, these weapons were no more than an iron bowl truly reminiscent of the mortar wherefrom they drew their name. An early portable mortar was invented by Baron Menno van Coehoorn (siege of Grave, 1674). Coehorn mortars were used by both sides during the American Civil War culminating with 13 inch railroad mortars. During the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905, Leonid Gobyato for the first time applied deflection from closed firing positions in the field and designed together with General Roman Kondratenko the first mortar that fired navy shells. However, it was not until World War I and the Stokes trench mortar devised by Sir Wilfred Stokes in 1915, that the modern, man-portable mortar was born.
Extremely useful in the muddy trenches of Europe, mortars were praised because of their high angle of flight. A mortar round could be aimed to fall directly into trenches where artillery shells, due to their low angle of flight, could not possibly go. Modern mortars have improved upon these designs even more, offering a weapon that is light, adaptable, easy to operate, and yet possesses enough accuracy and firepower to provide the infantry with quality close support.
