Is there a certain point where the push to field the "perfect" extended range cannon actually becomes a reduction in capabilities? When you look at the weight, transportability, cost (system and ammo), reduced onboard ammo load and (pure conjecture here) a more advanced gun barrel which may have a reduced effective life over other systems which don't use such high pressure...could you get the same (or better) overall effects with a combination of lesser systems?
For the cost of a 6 gun battery of ERCA could you have instead a 6 gun battery of A7's, a HIMARS to strike those targets outside the A7's range and a C-RAM system to make up for the increased vulnerability from the A7's lesser engagement range?
I don't know where you draw the line as to where the advantages of a smaller number of "exquisite" systems vs a larger number of "good enough" systems, but we're seeing these questions asked in lots of areas where new technologies are being fielded (F-35s, CSCs, etc.).