Mortars vs. Infantry Guns

[SSFSX17]

Is it just me, or are mortars much more efficient for both cost and weight than infantry guns? Furthermore, mortars are also very useful on the offensive, unlike infantry guns.

[IRONCROM]

I haven't figured this one out yet. I use both myself, more mortars than IG's.
 According to the stats I've looked at though the IG IS an offensive weapon.
Where things get hazy to me though is on the number of attacks... Mortar has 5 and IG has 2...Ok mortar sounds better, but IG has 5 on fav. attacks and mortar has 2.
 The way the manual reads it sounds like against infantry, which I would assume is the favorite target for each of them, that they would get the same number of attacks[7].
-Except IG has a higher attack value against inf. which perhaps makes up for the increased cost.
-IG has double the max attacked value which sounds like a good thing on defense and higher defense value against armor.
when you factor in the difference in PP cost it sounds pretty even.
-Only thing I'm unsure of is the [init att. value and init def. value]...I'm not sure what effect these values have on combat.The IG has much higher values in these areas.
 Playstyle has to factor into this a little bit I'm sure.
-Morter is more suseptable to death by arty and IG by air attack.
-IG gets bonuses for attacking fortifications and urban areas...not sure what bonuses morter gets?

[IRONCROM]

 OK
-IG gets a positive modifier of 50% against urban, fortification, and fortress.
-Mortar has no positive modifiers but has less of a negative modifier when attacking accross a river.

[jakobrogert]

As I understood the "Max Attacked" value, that is the number of times enemies can attack the Unit in question before getting a penalty for crowding around a single Unit.

[IRONCROM]

Most of these stats are pretty hazy to me. It would be pretty cool if someone posted a very specific breakdown of exactly what every stat did...
 You may be right Jako...but as I read the manual it says that after the maximum number of attacks has been reached that the attacker receives a penalty...lower sounds better here...then it also says after the maximum number of attacks is reached the the defender will no longer counter attack.
In that case higher sounds better. A penalized attack is better than no attack at all.
I'm not sure a high number here is better for the attacker here or the defender. It just sounds like it would be better for the defender since it means you would get more counter attacks than if the number was low.

[IRONCROM]

 I ran a little test this morning setting up some simulated battles just to so which performed better. I activated the combat sim, but it didn't seem to work. I think maybe it has to be used it on the first turn...
 So I did my test the hard way one at a time.
I ran 4 test. In each one I ran the sim at least 10 times some as many as 25.
All test on clear Terran with all defenders at 95 entrenchment and both attacker and defender with 40 exp.[exception was the urban combat test.]
-1st was 40 rifle and 2 IG's attacking 40 rifle, and an identical test of 40 rifle and 4 mortars attacking 40 rifle...I ran this test the most..maybe 25 times it was really hard to tell which performed better. At first I thought maybe Mortar but in the end it was inconclusive.
-2nd was just the opposite, with the 40 infantry on the offence and the units with IG's and mortars on defence...This test I ran only about 10 times as the unit with IG's was clearly doing better. fairly close but better.
-3rd test was an attack on urban with same set up as 1st test except on urban instead of clear...After how close the 1st test was I fully expected IG's to do better here. As expected they did.
-4th test was same as first on clear terrain except I added 1 light tank to the 40 defending infantry... This one was giving me strange results. Out of ten test for each in 4 of the test the IG either destroyed the tank or caused it to retreat. The mortars on the other hand never damaged the tank but seem to be killing more infantry the the IG.
The results of this test make me wonder if my initial impression of the 1st test were correct about mortars being slightly better attacking infantry...Or maybe the the reason is because the IG was targeting the tank with more of its shots than the mortar and fewer infantry.
 Conclusion: The 2 are slightly different from one another.
While my test seem to suggest the IG is the better of the two, there is the weight factor that evens that out since there is an increased transport cost if you want the unit to be motorized.
 In the end there does not seem to be any wrong choice here, rather its a choice of play style...IMHO[:)]