3. I am against a simple equation between crouch and better accuracy. Currently, our maps really lack a lot of good cover -- objects that provide defensive firing positions. This reduces the element of cover in the cover and concealment game mechanics. But I hope in the future with more cover in maps, that stance will have more to do with the demands of a particular defensive position than just accuracy. The decision to crouch or stand could have implications on whether the player is more or less exposed and, as a trade-off, is more or less capable of returning fire. In my ideal future UFO:AI, this is a more important calculation than weapon accuracy.
Maybe we could split the "crouch" in two antagonist modes:
- "Take cover" mode: which work as in 2.4 (TU, move and defence) but give variable penalties to accuracy (and maybe add a TU penalty to firing, also),
- "Take firing position" mode: which take a variable amount of TU (almost zero for close, small for assault, very high for sniper (25?)), prevent moving but give bonuses to accuracy (great bonus for snipe, medium for assault and near zero for close) (maybe the accurate shots would be only available in this mode?)
This should answer the snap shot/accurate shot problem of the snipe rifle, pros/cons of the theses modes should be clearer for players and make more difference between close/assault/sniper weapons.
Also, it would be a greater advantage to get around an enemy in firing position to take him back as he couldn't open fire directly without leaving this mode (and lose TU and the mode's advantages).
(I hope my poor English will be understandable, please feel free to ask otherwise.)