Profile of Hannibal

Although I do not disagree you numbers might be a bit high given the smaller target size even if one add collision hits.

Mediums get hit usually by half to two thirds of the scatter shots frontally.
If we assume the T70 gets only hit by a third of all scatter shots, this gives us a hit chance of ~81% at max range and ~85% at range 50, being higher at every point closer to that. The one third scatter hits is obviously an assumption, but I think the 85% hit chance is overall fairly realistic.

If only there was an ability that would make LVs almost immobile. Or some type of buildable to kill them... Should really be a thing in CoH3.

at maps such as Baku pack howie can actually deal solid damage from a very safe distance. But in damage from the same range 120mm is decently better (checked it with Scatter this!).
Howie is also easier to decrew because it needs 1 guy less to kill (4 guys vs 5 guys) and the squad seem to be more clumped on pack howie. I kind of agree with Gachi that it is way easy to get away with stupid stuff with 120mm vs pack howie. But if you do decrew and capture it, it makes it easier to steal as well (which is very rare, because it is that hard to be decrewed)

Yeah, I had MMX's calculations in mind (the same thread that Vipper posted) but forgot that this data is outdated, at least for the Howie (and 120mm?).
I also agree that the 120mm is more survivable by a fair bit. And although autofire is still important, balance team put more value on its barrage, on which it has 20 more range.

Performance is not the point, its merely a reference point. We might aswell bring all mortars and look at them in this context but its rather pointless because closest units to 120mm are Paks\IGs.

Point is being that 120mm mortar surviability is blantly unjutified by anything aside from it being a commander unit, sure its more expensive then regural mortars by so are the closest units, sure it take more pop-cap but so do closest units awell. Sure 120mm might be marginally more expensive and take few additional pop-cap or be marginally weaker in certain situations, but its blantly a mile away when it comes to staying power and being countered.

Even if we forget about other units completly, even in a vacuum, I still cant find a single reason why 120mm actually needs its surviability or what its compensated for, thats the point.

I partially agree.
However, I would not call 1-2 pop more "marginally", at least not when you're below 10 population. The difference between 9 POP (120mm) and 8 POP (Howie) is a 12.5% increase. For every more typical resource, this is quite a lot and we have seen lots of changes on smaller scales. It won't break your strategy, just like a cost change of 20-30 MP would not break the strategy. Yet, paying 360 MP (=320*1,125) would be considered overpriced for the unit.
As I said above, I fully agree that the 120mm is very sturdy. Too sturdy? That's what I would doubt. The 120mm is in usually at least 2 very popular commanders. One of them is Guard Motor, which has been the Soviet favourite for years now. I have only irregularly seen the 120mm being spammed though. This likely also has to do with MP constraints due to Shocks and Guards or other causes of not fitting timings, but it might also hint that the 120mm is not as a strong choice as people are making it out to be.

This is mostly self-bias. P4 and PaK40 have the same accuracy and scatter values than their Allied counter parts. Elefant has the same issues as every casemate: The first shots miss more often in general, but nothing special to the Elefant itself.

I like how vipper actually believes that DPS is a viable thing to talk about when discussing indirect fire.

Indirect weapons are not measured by DPS, because they do NOT provide reliable damage.

You either get hit or not, rarely can your squad stay in combat once its being hit by any indirect, which makes scatter most important stat and RoF second one.

There is no such thing as "DPS" on indirect weapon, unless you're firing at british emplacement or OKW truck.

The DPS in MMX's analysis serves as a proxy for expected damage per shot and therefore to some degree reliability, although it does not show the variance of the shots.

It's the best "stat" we have for discussing mortar damage, at least way better than AoE values where every argument will be made with anecdotal evidence.