[Guns] What does accuracy represent?

[MrFix]

Originally Posted by solidsingularity

I will look into that.

The M2 is an inherently more accurate system than the FN Minimi, as it fires from a close bolt rather than an open bolt. The M2 Is also a heavy machine gun fired from a fixed tripod rather than a light machine gun fired from a Deployable bipod. M249 is a 12 MoA gun, I could not find any direct numbers for the M2, the M82A1 Which as you have said it was inspired by the M2 is a 3 MoA gun bumped up to 1 MoA with match grade ammunition.
So I find it hard to believe that the FN Minimi Has the same base accuracy as the Remington 700.

"12 MOA" M249 is definitely not a factory new Minimi, think about what that entails for a moment. It means that the impact area is 1 foot cone at 100 meters. It means it's 4 feet cone at 400 meters. 6 feet cone at 600 meters. It means that you cannot target a man-sized target intentionally at common infantry ranges, and it means that it is almost impossible to score a hit upon a target 600 meters away (on the nearby mountain like in Afghanistan for example) without a lucky accident. There's no reason to adopt, let alone design, such a system because you can as easily design a system capable of rifle accuracy, which would be infinitely more useful for suppression, because nobody is more suppressed when they're dead, and nobody is more scared of your volume of fire than when they witness their comrades drop on the ground injured or dead, and if dispersion is needed, it can be provided by MG's operator, not the system.

I searched around for M249 accuracy and got results ranging from 6 MOA down to 1.5 MOA, depending on the condition of the weapon and the barrel (Most M249s in US service for example are extremely beaten up). HT actually models such issues on HT85 - sustained fire with MG drops it's acc and malf by 2 (acc 5 minimi becomes 3).

So, in that sense, FN Minimi is comparable to Remington 700 if it was treated and maintained well from MOA standpoint. Is this a realism issue? Not really, a sniper can use whatever he wants and there are millions of weapon designs with millions of pros and cons. If a sniper chooses Rem 700 over FN Minimi, it means Rem 700 is better for his work, not that it is better overall. If a sniper chooses MINIMI, it also means it's better for his work, but that doesn't mean it's better overall. I won't go into details why it is this and that because it'll be a long post.

Is it a balance issue? Not really. Rem 700 costs MUCH less (meaning it can be fine accurate for cheaper), is MUCH lighter, comes in MANY calibers, has LESS ST requirements and LESS BULK. It also has more damage when we compare Minimi's 7.62x51 version with Rem 700 in 7.62x51.

In the end, if your players snipe with LMGs, it is not an issue at all from any perspective except personal taste, and GURPS mechanics already provide reasonable drawbacks to doing so without making things unreasonable.