[quote=@catchamber]
[@Willy Vereb] Assuming a rocket with Lunar gravity acceleration, you can reach 200 km/s in 1 day and 10 hours over ~41 light seconds. Assuming Earth gravity acceleration, you can reach that in 5 hours and 40 minutes over ~7 light seconds. Given the inner system is ~46 light minutes across, repositioning units at these velocities isn't much of a tactical issue.

Combine this with modern railguns firing ~11 kg rounds at ~2 km/s for a mere 32 megajoules, packing dozens of tungsten rods in dispersal units, radiator vulnerability to lasers, rotating spacecraft minimizing direct laser strikes, having inactive stealthed missiles available to strike incoming targets, turning missiles into portable laser platforms, limiting military channels to quantum entanglement transceivers, and using enveloped fragments of comets as hulls and heat sinks, I'd say space warfare falls somewhere between a clusterfuck and a game of "who can make the most officers betray their superiors?".
[/quote]I feel you haven't directly responded to my post here.
Yes, you don't need to accelerate for the whole trip to reach 200km/s. The problem is rather that no matter what you'd have limited fuel and propellant to use. That and even if the ship has enough fuel for multiple times of this delta-v it wouldn't use that for more speed in caution for maneuvers and eventually to decelerate when reaching its destination.

As for you citing railguns, unfortunately the formula for velocity within such system is roughly v^2 = 2*a*s which means if you raise the acceleration or armature length the velocity won't raise in proportion but rather by its square root. So when I raise the length of the acceleration from 10m (navy railgun) to 1000m (spinal gun) its velocity would only raise by 10 times. So to around 20-35km/s. Granted, the navy railgun is far from the fastest you can achieve. Taking other experiments as an example solid projectiles can withstand maybe even hundred times of this. Albeit realistically it's questionable you can put any complexity into such systems. But again, fiction. We can afford to err to the side of fun. Also the projectiles won't be absolutely cold, either. Railgun rounds are heated to 1000+ Kelvins during launch. Even if we assume less waste heat due to efficiency the weapon has much more power here to begin with. So the projectile would be almost glowing hot. Still, that's just a twinkle in the dark compared to the blaze that is a space rocket on active burn. The projectile will cool and would only provide heat signatures when performing maneuvers. So yes, it'd be relatively stealthy. But not quite that much. Also yes, space battles would be long and complex. Albeit I am sure we'll find a way to roleplay them in a more accessible manner.

As for quantum entanglement comms, they'd still need radio/laser comms to even work. You see the reason why quantum entanglement doesn't allow superluminal communication is because you can't transmit information with them. Or more like you only can if you know the measurements both sides made. Which means in order to confirm the information you need that data be sent via conventional measures. Same for quantum comms if they'd ever work. Chances are high that we'd only use such system at specific times while radio or laser communication would dominate. Especially when you consider the devices needed for quantum comms would be sensitive so you wouldn't fire them out as part of a projectile.