Agreed, laser rangefinders are a tool that makes things very easy, all too easy in some cases, there should almost always be a risk vs reward.

i am not for the risk vs reward but am more for realism. I do not care about balancing the game. I don't want everything to be fair but instead realistic so if this is all realistic (which it is more or less) then I agree :)

Again as we can see reality provides a perfect balance from a gameplay perspective

With realistic laser range finder you would risk detection but at the same time with single pings instead of a constant scanning it will be your call to make when to risk said detection

It will only make things a lot more tense and prevent LRF from being an uncontrolled cheat it is now.

Also no need to use L. LMB will be more than enough for pings.

This is not about balance, war isn't balanced. It's about adding another small detail, because attention to details is what makes great games.

The L key was proposed with vehicles in mind, because LMB is a trigger already and having laser rangefinder/designator as a separate "weapon", like it was in Arma 2, isn't the most optimal solution.

Since posting of the original ticket, I've realized that L is used for lights already, so maybe another key would be better, but the idea is to have a single control to work the laser regardless of platform (man, vehicle, aircraft).

Details and authentic functionality are a balance in and of itself.

Actually you could argue the range finder would be such low intensity as to render the above moot and most unlikely to be seen unlike its designator brethren which is designed to be seen when designating and is much higher power and takes a battery.

It’s also possible to determine distance from focus with high quality magnifying optics which don’t have “infinity” focal lengths, e.g. I have an old dumpy-level that I use for setting out building foundations and basic surveying, if a survey staff moves 1m back or forwards its imposable to read-off (blurred) without refocusing to the new position, its focal lengths are 0.3m to 2km (able to read 1cm marks on a survey staff at 2km !allegedly! though I have easily been able to read 1mm marks off a 5m retractable pocket tape measure at 150m), which given the rate that CCD are progressing (22 years from now vs. >15 years since my dumpy level was made) could easily change from manual focusing to auto focusing which just gets mounted discreetly within the range finder and is totally passive (i.e. outputs nothing) and could provide course 1m increments of range based on the precise distance apart the lenses or any prisms are as the CCD would be presented with a blurred image at anything other than the correct focal length which would be a crisp sharp image, if stereoscopic methods are used this increases accuracy, as you also have “images” a known distance apart laterally in essence forming another triangle to triangulate from.

See:
Coincidence (parallax) rangefinding or stadiametric (stadia) rangefinding principles.