JAPAN: Heavy Airborne or Mortars?

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:56 pm

Continued Discussion regarding our Story:
Japanese Mortars or Heavy Airborne?
http://www.axis-and-allies.com/article-52--0-0.html

Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 10:10 am

first of all, as the article says, this is a question mainly for Japan. other countries will be better off with different units, well Germany, especially with Kesselring can also put both mortars and heavy airbornes to pretty good use.

Imho the question boils down to the following: are you facing enemy infantry(SAS, Snipers, Commandos, etc) or early mechs. if facing infantry than the additional mortar troop per regiment is more valuable than the overall increased strength per soldier of the heavy airbornes. however when facing mechs the heavy airbornes shine, being the strongest infantry/airborne regiment available, and that the mortar itself doesn't do that much damage against mechs, as opposed to other infantries.

another thing to note is that mortars are a lot easier to spam, being produced from a 5 unit tent(infantry) as opposed to a 3 unit tent(airborne), so in any type of fast build mortars are superior.

Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 10:38 am

well said once again, I appended the story with your comments Smile

Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 1:31 pm

If there ever was a map where this was most relevant, it would be the Manchuria Custom Mission made by Timegate. The Russian enemy can go inf, mech or both + the wide map factors in the airdrop ability as well. My personal approach was airborne, but I'm curious to hear how others tackled this mission.

Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:20 pm

Both Mortars and Heavy airborne effective if you have enough money you could get both. My best would be heavy airborne even tho i use mortars sometimes because heavy airborne has a faster healer rate than mortars.