Its is like: lets make a contest and make the rules so one unit must win, because the rules are made for them.
test the same units without cover and come back.
test the same units at some other ranges and come back.
Using Cover is the most realistic scenario, being a core component of the entire combat system and all. Using no cover isn't. Because cover is a core component of the entire combat system. The fact that JLI, 1cp 280mp infantry can beat even Obers, who are the latest arriving and some of the most expensive in the entire game is an absolute testiment to their power, that's before even considering they get a 50%accuracy bonus out of camo and camo allows them to select which engagements they want to fight.
This test is SPECIFICALLY testing the best long range squad, using ONLY long range squads, why would they test at any range but each squads optimal range? It's best case scenario for all those units and most likley the targets they will be facing (because trying to close against a long range squad is a guaranteed lost match up, as they can deal damage to you while receiving next to none) or is there something about this match up that you feel is skewed towards a particular long range specialist that makes it far and above other long range specialists?
But for the sake of fairness I too recommend we try the tests at 0 range on neg cover as it is the only way to possibly replicate the real game scenario of how one would use a long range squad.
And after that, I would like to match up shocks, Thompson rangers and commandos at 40 range so we can determine who (if any) is the king of CQB!