Debatable about whether or not 0.5 seconds would be overly awkward, but I certainly don't think it's fine where it is at the moment. I tend to forget it's there most of the time, frankly. Perhaps around 0.3 seconds (like the Magsec) would work better. I at least actually feel the charge-up time on that gun, like it's actually a meaningful part of the weapon.

I agree. I'd also like to see the ARR and ACR have more dispersion at range.

Assault variants should have some characteristics of the Assault Rifles which they imitate, namely less utility at range. The ARR is understandable to a degree, but the ACR in particular is far too effective outside its optimal for its damage and ROF.

So....first the AR has the advantage when hitting shields, and then the RR has the advantage when hitting armor? I....don't understand your point. Also, you're assuming both weapons are fired in each other's optimal, which of course is often not the case as the RR massively out-ranges the AR.

But it's not supposed to be even remotely comparable to the AR/PR/whatever in CQC. It has double the range!

I just don't get how CCP or some players can't see how range and DPS should be inversely proportional - in the absence of some other major drawback, like overheating for Amarrian weapons, for example.

The spool up time is supposed to be that drawback, but hilariously was much shorter in the original design, and it is still too short and can be easily compensated for by pre-firing. As a result, while the AR should win the vast majority of engagements in CQC, it doesn't, especially with the still present shield/armor imbalance.

I'd also like to propose for the 328th time that the damn thing get bullet trails. I'm sick of getting ninja'd by a hail of invisible silent bullets while my LR sends out a giant sizzling trail of "KIll me, I"m over here" that can be seen from orbit.

This is fully dependent on the fit. Also, saying it is so doesn't prove to me that it is so. Please provide the numbers and I'll be happy to accept your argument as accurate. (I'm too lazy to do maths right now)

Only 4 things matter in this game; where every utility weapon registers damage through hitscan:
Accuracy, Range, DPS, and HP.

How easily can you acquire a target?
From how far away can you kill them?
How quickly can you kill them?
Can you tank some shots should they get any off?

The Rail Rifle has a scope, the Auto AR does not. RR wins accuracy.
The Rail Rifle has significantly better range.
The Rail Rifle has comparable DPS to the AR.
And, in the hands of any fairly decent player with 450 or more HP, and possessing ANY kind of damage mitigation, the RR is a tough act for the AR to follow in every capacity.

Numbers vs. practice.
You can't mention numbers without defining circumstances. That's like saying the SR-71 Blackbird can hit Mach 3, but ignoring the fact that it must be in optimal conditions to safely achieve that result.

The RR is a good weapon, but it needs to back off from CQC, and the OPs proposals would help that.
Increase the firing delay, raise the hip fire spread, and back the fk off. It already has a ton of range, why the hell would it be made to be good at CQC as well?

OR simply use the Assault variant for close range. With no sight, it is on an even footing with the AR in terms of accuracy, it has increased RoF to slightly reduce the DPS gap, and I would reduce the fire delay, and hurt long range accuracy for the assault variant to keep it inline with it's purpose.