The medium (80 mm calibre) mortar was the first step in the long chain of fire support available to the infantry, which culminated in the massive artillery pieces held under Corps and Army Group control. It was also one of the most effective. Firstly, it was integral to the Infantry Battalion, and was not subject to providing other support missions. Secondly, the steep angle of fire meant a steep angle of descent. Simply put, the bomb falls very close to the vertical. This has a profound effect on the blast radius of the bomb on detonation. Shells fired from artillery pieces had a tendency to 'dig in' on landing, directing a good portion of their explosion into solid ground. Mortar bombs fell almost on their nose, meaning the bulk of their destructive power was radiated outwards. Thirdly, the rate of fire they could achieve was astonishing. An average crew could put a dozen bombs in the air inside of a minute. Multiply that by six crews in a typical Battalion, and you have over seventy rounds of ammunition impacting on the same target area in sixty seconds. The effect is too awful to contemplate on men caught in open ground. Against a machine gun just lying flat provided some defence, but against mortar bombs the only chance was to dig in, deep. Even then, that high angle could deliver a round right into a dugout. A well drilled crew could fire around 30 bombs in a minute, though due to the barrel overheating this rate of fire could not be sustained for long.

Here again the mortar had an advantage. It could be broken down into its three parts and spirited away by Jeep, cart, horse or man in seconds. Depending on the range, as the first bomb in a series landed, the last one may just have been fired. That meant the crew could have disassembled their weapon shortly after the last round hit and be gone. Not a feat that could be achieved with traditional towed artillery.

 marv335 wrote:

 McGibs wrote:
Giving mortars AT rounds seem pretty out-there. Hitting something as small as a tank is next to impossible with a high trajectory round like a mortar, especially with a non-explosive round.
I really like the idea of alternate rounds though, making them more of a support weapon that compliments other units.

For AT purposes, maybe something like an incendiary round (s4, ap5, ignores cover) that glances vehicles or inflicts crew shaken on 4+?.

Smoke giving the unit hit a 4+ cover save, but also subjecting it to night-fighting would make it a good duel purpose round (give cover to yourself as you move up, or blind your enemy when they need to shoot)

Anti-tank mortar rounds already exist.
So not all that out there...

EmilCrane wrote:Anti tank mortar rounds do exist, but I've never heard of HESH mortar rounds (which is what augur rounds are)

Upping their strength might be the way to go, I like the idea of having mortars but can't realistically find a place for them in my lists

Rumbleguts wrote:Trying to take real world examples and apply them to the rules of 40k are generally a bad idea.

Xyrael wrote:

 edbradders wrote:
In real life mortars are one of the most un-maneuverable weapons going. They have to be dug-in to be fired accurately which can take a long time. They do have a higher rate of fire than artillery though (up to 20 rounds a minute for short periods of time). Therefore I don't think they should be assault weapons. I do think they should be more powerful though. Maybe S5 or S6 and able to fire at heavy 2 every 2 turns and heavy 1 all other turns and make them AP4. I think that would make them more true to life, for an appropriate points rise of course.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_89_grenade_discharger

Japanese innovation is often forgotten. It's more similar to a modern grenade launcher, though.

TheLionOfTheForest wrote:I thought the topic here was about the 40k mortar profile.