Every harassment weapon has a counter, usually in the form of another harassment weapon. They have a time and place, that place is not shear destructive force. Harassment weapons (machine gun, minigun, incendiary mortar, sniper, AP sniper) are used to suppress your opponent and remove undefended utilities/weapons. They are a harassment weapon designed to pick off exposed utilities/weapons, not heavy weapons that destroy opponent's cores. This is entirely the point of incendiary mortars. It's nice to see some discussion opportunity here, though I must disagree with the notion of increasing mortar damage. (not the biggest cost).Īnd big mortar would destroy in a bit smaller radius than its large blast radius now, but again at least be able to destroy the steel beam it hits. Standard mortars should be upgraded in damage, the splash radius is fine as it cant damage too much, steel bars should of corse not be much more effected than before, but regular walls ect should be destroyed. Then theres the problem of most maps dont allow good use of mortars to where your left with strange angeled shots at best.
Iv watched alot of replays of skilled people useing them effectively, but they all upgrade the mortars before they use them, and by the time they use them they have had time with their snipers to take down the enemy machinegunners. and again low loading times and shots that can be shot down (countered) cheep by haveing cheep machinegunners doesnt seem worthwhile investment to me. Upgraded morars does more splash damage, but unless they can hit near the core, the damage isnt enough. Yet if you have 3 missiles siloes you get tons of missiles per shot that does plenty of damage, and is more garanteed to hit, even if 1 missile feels like a mortar hit. I mean, hitting all 3 shots with your 3 mortars (unupgraded) does very little damage, if any at all. I feel that mortars could use some damage increase, seeing that they got a counter by getting shot down.