And how did the obers do in light cover? And in no cover? Pretty confident they spank guards in both of those situations, the guards would need their prone position every time
Not to mention, obers literally have a doctrinal upgrade that let's them ignore cover bonuses
Exactly, if Guards ain't winning neither are the other LR squads as they all have very worst RA except for commandos. And even that is about the same, Guards have a Target size of .66 while having 6men while Commandos are 5 man with .65 target size. The point I am making is that Guards will perform the best regardless of no cover/light cover/heavy cover. Why is the generalist better at the LR job instead of the dedicated specialist.
And since you mentioned IR STG, they at least have to move in for maximum damage vs any of these squads, at max range they will lose despite the cover bonus.
But lets take that example and look at it from a different perspective. Lets compare IR STG vs any of the allied Elite short range squads. Out of Paras/Airborne/Shocks/Rangers/Commandos/AssGuards they will most likely lose to Shocks/Rangers due to durability and Paras if Tactical Assault is used. The others are gonna lose due to camo detection and AssG being a bit weaker overall. I would assume most would consider this fair trade off as they hit the field earlier and are cheaper overall. Yet since they are all short range they all have the great equalizer in the lucky nade.
To sum up what I am saying is Guards long range Performance is BS as they have utility, EHP, DPS, along with the potential to merge with conscripts. Guards should be toned down.
The performance between the other LR squads should be looked at as they aren't quite as balanced as the short range squads.
Guards win 50%, Airborne 0%, Commandos with camo 25%, Paras 25%