They are not necessarily contradictory. Some features that create more caution do so in both long and short range (think of for instance lower reinf and longer spawns). But a lot of features actually only matter a lot for one and not the other, as the critical timing in long range is different.
I see your overall point about a difference, but I still think many of these individual points are moot.
Some examples:
Effects that make people more cautious in close combat. Increasing the time to go into iron sights especially after running. Currently you can litterarily sprint into a building and within a split second pop off accurate shots from iron sights. If it takes longer to go into iron sight then you should go into iron sight before entering a building if you're willing to get a sighted shot off.
This is fair enough, but the smgs are pretty effective without need for iron sights in close quarters, in real life and in the game. And the rifles need to be pretty cautious already, unless going for the bayonet option.
Movement speed, the further someone is away relatively the slower it seems he's moving. While in short range a player moves a much greater distance on the screen, making it viable for a player to try and strafe etc to evade shots. Changing movement speed will mostly affect close range combat.
While it is true that someone in the distance
looks slower, they are still actually going the same speed, and any change to actual speed has an impact on how to aim at them. Make everyone slower, and everyone is easier to hit, even at range,
which encourage staying back and taking pot shots.
In long range people take pot shots purely because its so effective to do so. People can easily hit people with pin point accuracy without breaking a sweat. If there was a slight "breathing" sway with weaponry, then at long range it would require a player to focus more to pull off good shots. This means that a player would obtain better effectivity at a shorter distance to their enemies, this will cause people to get somewhat closer.
Sorry to contradict you so boldly on this one, but there already
is a slight breathing sway with weaponry. I'm not sure why you haven't noticed it, but I have and it affects my ability to hit targets at range.
Similarly zoom, zoom makes it much easier to see people and take pot shots. While in close combat its not really helpful. If the zoom gets slightly reduced then people will try to get a bit closer to the battle, making the effective distances people play at smaller and the possible locations where threats are go down with the distance squared.
This might be a fair point, but I think it also must be considered that the zoom is meant as a compromise with gaming fov in order to simulate more accurately the effective range of the real life weapons. Which to me, I prefer.
Another thing for zoom could be making zoom always available, your vision is able to see things at a realistic size at all times even when sprinting. If the headbob were slightly reduced and the zoom would become available at all times, then people could better scan their environments at long range going from objective to objective. This could make people more prone to play progressively.
I don't know about this one. Scanning the environment with tunnel vision does not seem like a big help when you're on the move.
The key always is not artificially trying to make people more or less cautious. But simply making it such that playing in a certain way becomes more effective. If people are more effective at a range of 150 meter over 300 meter then people will try to get to a range of 150 meter and will advance. If people can get more kills by simply cutting the corner before entering a building then people will cut the corner.
But that's the thing...many of the changes you are proposing are "artificially trying to make people more cautious". Besides, playing more tactically already is more effective. And shooting at a range of 150 rather than 300 meters already is more effective.
