Would some also consider a reduction in accuracy ala MRMs as opposed to the negative to damage?
This would represent the single-fire capability of the weapon versus the multi-round capacity that the autocannons represent.
a reduction in accuracy would be more Fasa-Fiziks and draw more derision. See, the problem is, the reducing range of BT Autocannons (2s shoot further than 5, 5 shoots further than 10, 10 further than 20) has already been explained by the "Automatic" side of the ledger (having to group multiple shots to inflict damage, requiring faster firing rates, which tends to spread groupings OUT, via vibration and such)
which actually does fit with wht can be seen in practice. Ceterus paribus, your grouping spreads out with multiple shots on a single pull of the trigger-this is a mechanical effect (You can thank friction and vibration for it.)
The most ACCURATE long range fire comes from single shot weapons (all other factors being equal).
most full-auto fire does not group tightly, this is actually how suppressing fire and beaten zones are even possible with tripod mounted machine guns.
MRMs are inaccurate, because they lack this thing called a 'guidance system' (same problem Rockets have in the setting.)
why? because rocket-propelled weapons have a tendency to wander without active guidance, and do so
randomly.
to a pretty extreme degree. (See the actual-factual Gyrojets actually produced in actual reality, or look at the range profile of a LAW, or RPG round)
in the case of Rifles, you're more likely to see an accuracy
bonus, because once you've got target lock, you're only sending one package down range and unless your engineering staff were dropping acid and smoking pot the day they designed your targeting system, it's going to correct for motion, angle, and parallax much the way the system on the Abams does.
meaning, proportionally, very precise shots as soon as the reticle turns green.
'very precise' is very relative on that scale, be mindful, an infantry rifle has a bore/length ratio of several hundred diameters of the bullet, while most tank cannons (aka 'rifles' on a vehicle) are more proportional to what you'd find in a service pistol (at best a few tens to just under a hundred.)
this has an impact on precision range. as does the proportional thickness of barrel walls (and thus, the pressure a barrel can contain using a given alloy with a given propellant.)
aka the 120 smoothbore on your Abrams actually has a pretty slow muzzle velocity, but then, a barrel scaled to the same proprtions as your Springfield is going to be virtually too heavy to mount on anything but a coastal or naval mount.
barrel thickness,incidentally, tends to damp vibration as well as acting as a heat sink, so the need for advanced materials is probably a good starting point if you have a shop working on an improved Rifled cannon.
which unlike some here, I can see as being something not only acceptable in-setting, but inevitable. Just as long as it's not the damned Clans who are doing it, because frankly, the whole "Inner sphere is defined as slower, heavier imitation of the Clans who do everything, including things they don't want to do, better than the inner sphere who DO want to do those things" to be..well, pathetic and unnecessary.
There OUGHT to be, at least by 3100, some things the IS does outright
better, or only the inner sphere does, and this is one where it's possible even a minor periphery power could pull off a tech-coup. Maybe by taking HVAC ammo, coupling it to a chassis that will NOT explode from the vibrations because it only fires single shots and dissipates its heat efficiently by NOT piling huge numbers of shots through the same barrel as fast as the action can cycle using propellant gas and/or recoil.
IOW, a Heavy rifle, does 8 or 9 damage to BAR 10, with AC/5 ranges, and
doesn't self explode randomly.
but you take a hit to ammunition capacity, and maybe it sucks ass against flying objects and can't be mounted on a 'mech because it needs a loader technician to keep it fed...but it has its own 'specialty' rounds that are generally more useful against vehicles and infantry while being LESS useful against 'mechs and Battlesuits.
a weapon that ends up requiring its own tactical menu to use, oen that isn't as widely applicable to EVERY force in EVERY situation. (aka not mounted on asf, not mounted on 'mechs, or rarely mounted on mechs because the damn thing SUCKS compared to 'mech weapons on 'mechs.)
My suggested direction of development?
Endo-Steel barrel and breech, possibly with a layer of armor composite wrapping the breech block, a 2 pip penalty against flying targets due to the nature of the weapon (making it difficult to use even against a Yellowjacket), but a bonus against ground-bound targets, It can fire indirect but the damage is LOW and only impacts a single hex using a specific ammunition type that costs mass and space to carry.
for example:
AOE rounds (Thermite plasma and/or some inferno equivalent) will most certainly cook anything with exposed skin, including mechanized infantry that aren't environmentally sealed, but has little to no impact on even cheap PAL suits.
Firecracker/Cannister: shreds infantry (1, 2, or 3 D6 out to range vs. unarmored infantry), leaves a 1D6 point minefield that only affects infantry in that hex or crossing that hex. (toe poppers).
HE: a 1 (light), 2 (medium) or 3 (Heavy) point pain maker in a targeted hex when fired indirectly (at plus four, minus one for each spotter, maximum of 3 spotters). Certainly enough to fry a foot or motorized platoon,b ut the fragments will be shrugged off by Mechanized or Battlesuited infantry without issue. (Since, after all, they're protected from shock and splinters to a certain extent.) HOwever, it does a GREAT job of clearing woods or reducing /creating rubbled terrain.
HVAP: does full rifle damage vs. 'mechs and BA out to range when fired directly. However, you have fewer shots, thus fewer chances to DO that damage, and various NEW armors reduce it. (hardened, Ferro-Lamellor, and so on.)
likely creators:
Taurian Concordat
Magistracy of Canopus
Cappellan Confederation.
C-bill cost: same as an AC/5.
capabilities: may fire indirect out to effective range with the aid of a spotter, may be linked to a targeting computer, ammo reduction is due to bulk-the ammo itself is BULKY, if permitted on 'mechs and ASF's, one ton takes up 2, 3, or 4 critical spaces. (Light, Medium, or Heavy), and CASE for it weighs twice as much to cover the needed additional volume on a 'mech or ASF. (thus continuing the trend of "you can do it, but it's not a good idea" technologies applied to 'mechs and ASF.)
Crit spaces: Light occupies the same crit spaces as an Ultra 2, Medium the same as an Ultra 5, Heavy the same as an Ultra 20. (thus, making it REALLY not a good idea to mount on a 'mech!!) On vehicles, only counts as a single item.
