From my long superannuated point of view, the accuracy which today's gunners have achieved is a positive step. Sure, we can still concentrate as many batteries as are available on targets and that is a good thing. Understand that in the bad old days of the Second War, Korea and the Cold War, both the accuracy of the gunnery system and the means available for locating the target were not much changed from the First World War. Thus, because we could not hit the targets which we had too often guesstimated the locations of in the first place, fire plans compensated by using lots of guns firing lots of ammunition to blanket an area.
As a side note, it was a Canadian gunner, Brigadier Ziegler, in Italy who fired the first Whisky Target - in today talk Fire Mission Army - and the standard barrage was so popular because it was "easy" to arrange and covered the target area. It also meant most of the rounds fired fell well away from the enemy positions, but that was accepted.
We have moved on quite a bit, thanks to the computer, laser and the GPS along with some other fancy bits and pieces. The gunner community is nearing the point where it can land rounds on a eight or ten figure grid reference most of the time. Earlier I was reviewing the factors affecting the accuracy of indirect fire in my brain, and realized most of them are addressed by the technology of today, be it GPS, digital laying systems, electronic measurement of muzzle velocities with on weapon systems, laser range finders, etc, etc, etc.
I have pounded on a bit too long, but that is the privilege of age. The RCA of today can hit a point target and cover an area with fire. We should make sure that is understood by senior commanders and the supported arms.