Ready slots are also for ammo, bombs and medikits. While late in the game, its more for 3 weapons, its not easy to get to proficient in all 3 or to develop them for a class / its likely because of multiclassing. I find it very useful, and would not change it.
Devs’ task is not to interfere with the “Light and Heavy” players, but to make the game comfortable/ Interesting for everyone. There are many tools for this:
Customized difficulty levels
Second wave options
Game starting options
Good Mods (= Moding Tools)
freedom & tactics
Removing freedom (with realistic logic) = setting the rules of the game.
Tactics = correct sequence of actions in limited conditions (in strict rules).
Excessive freedom gives rise to Anarchy. (which breaks previously created rules).
Take a look at this, also in the main post there are Big Examples.
On the other side, this looks unnecessary complex to me sorry…
I agree, that, there is sense behind, but it is still computer game,
I would like to make the player strategic decisions, not to deal with micromanagement
I haven´t looked at differences in the proposed options, but I do agree with OP that from a “tactical/real-life simulation” perspective, it does not make any sense to be able to have at Heavy-cannon, another Heavy-cannon and then a Sniper-rifle “ready” at the same time without it at least costing some of your time/action-points to switch between it all. (Perk “Ready for Action” is special and perhaps broken for same reasons - maybe it should allow to use Medikits, Grenades, reload and some-such without extra cost, but not to switch big/main-weapon).
If you go into battle, you would most likely carry a somewhat bigger weapon that takes both of your hands and then you would carry a sidearm in your belt for easy/fast use if your main weapon fails, your limbs gets disabled (especially in this game) or the situation calls for short distance or holding/carrying something with your free hand, only in special cases would you take time to switch with the gear you carry on your back.
So I do agree with OP that it makes it more stratigic/tactical to have to choose which main and secondary weapon you carry and to have to spend Action Points to switch to another big weapon.
But this would also require that the devs have taken this into account to balance the game-mechanic …
There’s another aspect to this, which you mentioned but maybe didn’t realize all of its importance: gameplay balance. Simply put, enemies almost never have to change weapons and deal with readiness or not, specially pandorans, which are the main enemies.
So, for the gameplay to not feel unfair, this “realism” would’ve to apply to all sides. In the game’s current form and enemies, I see the option of “less realism” more beneficial to the gameplay and wouldn’t change it much.
An interresting game-mechanic could be if you don´t use all of your Action Points in a turn, by the “shot sniper-rifle 3 points draw pistol and shot once for one point” that the last point if you do not use it, you could carry it on to the next round. Maybe capped at just one point … ?
It goes “behind the point”
There is Inventory limitation by weight, which is determines directly by Strength,
this works good, there are no issues with it, and is no reason to set rules like -only 2 large objects/boxes in the backpack-, it would not improve the gameplay
Here is the issue, that soldier can have ready 2 heavy cannons and Sniper rifle at the same time.
Please do not take it like “My idea vs Your Idea”,
this was not really “my idea” from my head, I just saw it in some tactical squad games (jagged alliance 2)
The problem is that you deny (you call - do not do microman-t) my option, without explaining your option in detail. I am Good, all are Bad.
Present your version in the form of a plan like mine, so that everyone is clear and understandable.