Mortar/howitzer/artillery tanks Rotation.

[Verin]

Why not have it the same as a standard turret? It takes a good 3 seconds to fire at an enemy that is 15 degree in the other direction. It is very annoying.

[Jorzi]

I think it's intended, they are artillery weapons, after all, sacrificing mobility for firepower...

[Kacen]

You know this brings a thought to my head perhaps giving the light mortar/pepperpot/incendiary mortar the ability to rotate their turrets and fire on the move.

Or maybe make that be a later upgrade? Could give them some staying power in late game.

[Zarel]

I've heard a lot of balance suggestions regarding making mortars more useful in the later-game, but I've never understood why...

Scourge outclasses Lancer/TK. Gauss Cannon outclasses HC. Is there any reason why howitzers shouldn't outclass mortars?

[dak180]

I've heard a lot of balance suggestions regarding making mortars more useful in the later-game, but I've never understood why...

Scourge outclasses Lancer/TK. Gauss Cannon outclasses HC. Is there any reason why howitzers shouldn't outclass mortars?

In real life given a howitzer and a mortar of equal bore size the howitzer will have the advantage (in most cases) in flight time (over the same range) and in range; the mortar will out class the howitzer in destructive power and may do better in sprint reload times.

[Corporal Punishment]

It boils down to what role you wish to fill. Howitzers are expensive and thus few in numbers, usually organized at brigade-level, meaning they come as one complete battalion per brigade. Field commanders have to request howitzer strikes from brigade command. Howitzers make up for this with high range and ammunition effective against even the most die-hard targets.
Mortars are cheap and countless, every infantry battalion has it's own mortar company. But the mortar has limited range and is effective against soft targets only. This does not really matter since infantry meets the same limitations. But both are highly mobile and stealthy, compared to tanks and howitzers. This means infantry and it's mortar support can operate in terrain too rough for mechanized forces.
In strategy gaming, however, these characteristics can never be fully reproduced. There is no realistic command hierarchy to begin with. Resource management is simplified as much as possible, supply chains don't even exist. The division between soft and hard targets is blurred at best, stealth is out of question. Mobility, in terms of capability to operate on extremely difficult terrain, is also no part of the equation.
Keeping the above in mind, in a real battle scenario mortars and howitzers coexist, filling different roles. In the simplified environment of a game, the howitzer will necessarily outclass the mortar. There is not only no need to change that, but changing it is not even possible without adding a great deal of complexity in terms of terrain features to the game.

[NoQ]

every infantry battalion has it's own mortar company

Hey. What about mortar supercyborgs?