WC 2020 aftermath indirect fire support weapons

In the recent tournament mortar type units so very little action. What it the reason that these units so little action. Do they need changes? or other unit need changes so that they can be used more? Do they need a price reduction?

Please god no!!! If anything, just delete all mortar units from the game. More RNG than throwing wet shit into a fan. Kills the game.

My guess is that it was the commander picks that made them miss out the tourney.

Elpern / Angry Dutchman use them in their streams which are fairly high lvl players imo

The more mobile the players are the less effective mortars become. Top level players move around so much that by the time a mortar has aimed and fired the squad it was targetting has already moved somewhere else.

My guess is that it was the commander picks that made them miss out the tourney.

Elpern / Angry Dutchman use them in their streams which are fairly high lvl players imo

I can see that for ostruppen (although one can easily back tech) but USF have T0 mortar and the commander comes with MHT.

The more mobile the players are the less effective mortars become. Top level players move around so much that by the time a mortar has aimed and fired the squad it was targetting has already moved somewhere else.

They seem to just forget about them. Whenever they are built (by certain players who do use them more often) in the mid to late game to counter HMGs or other defences they seem to work well. Luvnest had a vet 5 ISG in that game on Crossroads. Also in this case nobody built T1 as Ostheer because of Osttruppen, so no one on the Axis side had direct access anyway. Getting T1 for just one mortar isn't cost effective at any stage of the game. And the USF T0 mortar isn't very good beyond the early game. Pak Howitzers weren't built because the primary choice (to counter Osttruppen) was Lieutenant and every bit of spare manpower mid to late was needed for Captain backtech + ATGs and armor. I'm sure a Pack Howie would've done wonders against Osttruppen and HMGs but no one could really afford to get them.

Personally I don't like using mortars not because they don't do well, but because they're pretty RNG dependant. Sometimes they hit a lot and then you'll win a lot of engagement because of that, sometimes they won't hit anything and you're constantly down one squad. I usually prefer the safety/control of an extra squad or HMG instead.

I can't remember that mortars besides the PaK Howie were regularly used in any recent 1v1 tournament. Some units here and there yes, but my subjective impression was that players in general do not see them as a unit that would add enough.

I assume it is the game mode though. 1v1 has low unit density and more mobile warfare. Mortars are just not that effective here. In team games they are fine, I don't think they need major changes outside of maybe a few tweaks that are unit specific.

I can't remember that mortars besides the PaK Howie were regularly used in any recent 1v1 tournament. Some units here and there yes, but my subjective impression was that players in general do not see them as a unit that would add enough.

I assume it is the game mode though. 1v1 has low unit density and more mobile warfare. Mortars are just not that effective here. In team games they are fine, I don't think they need major changes outside of maybe a few tweaks that are unit specific.

Didn't you hear? A couple of whereaboos stated that the pak howi is OP and as such should not be used by USF players. USF players complied.

Pak howi is not used because it's quite expensive to build and maintain. It requires a lot of input in 1v1s because it can be decrewed easily due to 2 man decrew + super low agility. Combine that with the fact that 1v1s are all about constant shifting, pak howi is not really needed. In 1v1s pak howi is usually bought alongside paras in Recon doctrine (pak howi + paras drop). Pak how is really good vs ostruppen which are cover bound to be effective but alas, it's expensive and potential big bleed.
In teamgames, which are more static all around, pak howi is used much more effectively and hence the constant crying from typical axisboos (everyone knows who they are)

Considering the mortar. A T1 mortar is not really effective in the long run and USF t0 mortar is not needed early on since going for more rifles gives you more map control and flanking is not difficult on 1v1.

This tournament was dull and boring. Same commanders, same builds. I understand it's for the money and going the most effective commander for 1v1s is preferable but man was it dull. But that's 1v1 for you. You need a commander that can react.

All in all. Yes. 1v1 is much too mobile to use indirect fire. Only indirect that can work in 1v1s are the stock mobile indirects. Stuka, werfer, katyusha. I'm 90% sure that the USF halftrack mortar could do wonders in 1v1 but we shall never know.

Didn't you hear? A couple of whereaboos...

Pls try to cut down on characterizations of that sort in this thread. They are not constructive.

Thanks in advance.

Besides my comment about the mobilty of top level players, another aspect that explains the lack of indirect fire are thr build orders that players go for. You need your 4 infantry squads to fight the enemy 4 squads or you will get out-gunned and out-capped, and after that you need to spend mp on light vehicles and AT. With everyone going for these builds, there isn't really any MP left over to invest in indirect.

In my own comparatively lower level games, not everyone goes for light vehicle rushes, and sometimes people go heavier on the infantry and support weapons. Indirects usually work out fine in these types of games.

Stat from WC 2019:

Ostheer built out of 40:
8 mortar in 8 games
2 MHT in 2 games

Soviet built out of 48:
6 PM-41 in 6 games
1 PM-38

OKW built of 61 games:
7 leig in 6 games

USF built out of 44 games:
10 mortars in 10 games
6 howitzer in 5 games
4 airdropped howitzer in 4 games
7 MHT in 5 games

UKF built out 8 games:
1 pit

Pls try to cut down on characterizations of that sort in this thread. They are not constructive.

Thanks in advance.

But did I lie?

Still, the indirect weapons are fine. Providing stats from the last years WC is beneficial in the regard that one can see the evolution of game balance. 8 mortars in 40 games is a very low number for OST since their mortar is the best by a normal margin.
Only USF could be said that they "actively" used indirect. 10/44 is a low number, probably in games that required fast smoke or one player that likes using it. All in all, a low number of indirect usage was back in 2019, even lower now. Nothing unexpected.

I guess mortars are not dependable enough when money is on the line.

I'd like to see smoke barrage buffed somehow, so it lands slightly quicker. It's the most useful thing a mortar has in high level play. Maybe Mortars should have like x2 rotation speed when using smoke barrage.

But did I lie?
...

It is your opinion so there little reason to talk about lies.

If in your opinion Pak howitzer is too expensive I suggest you start a thread about it. I would rather avoid toxic comment in this thread.

I guess mortars are not dependable enough when money is on the line.

Previous WC says another story thou with USF using a type of mortar in 54% of the games

I'd like to see smoke barrage buffed somehow, so it lands slightly quicker. It's the most useful thing a mortar has in high level play. Maybe Mortars should have like x2 rotation speed when using smoke barrage.

I agree the time to deliver smoke using a mortar is way to low compared to most alternatives.