I can raise the speed penalty to compensate but this will make ranged rookie recon battles harder, they are already close combat dominated as rookies can hardly hit a moving recon as of now.
This is true. I can remember my rookie squad being so poor at hitting enemy Titans with their ranged weapons that I had to exclusively use close-combat weapons instead.
Does it make any sense for giving some range bonus if shooting with lasers/cannons while being linked to a squad buddy closer to the target based on indirect fire skill?
No, it makes no sense what-so-ever because the Titan firing the lasers/cannons has an unobstructed line-of-sight to the target, so the Titan would not gain any benefit by having a spotter (or radar vehicle, or infantry painting the target with a laser beam) who was closer to the target because lasers/cannons are not guided weapons. The only factors that would affect whether a laser/cannon hits the target would be:
1. the range of the target from the attacker
2. the quality of the fire control system of the attacking vehicle (i.e. the targeting system)
3. the velocity of the target
4. the velocity of the attacker
5. wind velocity
6. the muzzle speed of the cannon shell/slug
7. the condition of the attacking weapon (i.e. whether it is in perfect working order or the extent of damage that the weapon has sustained)
8. the skill of the attacking vehicle's crew at targeting and firing weapons
I'm thinking about giving indirect fire skill some impact for non missile ballistic weapons. Currently I'm thinking about limiting the move speed and dodge penalty, being modified by indirect fire skill of the shooter. Not a bad idea but I'm not very pleased with this as it will render recons more useless (their only advantage is their speed while being shot at). Any ideas? I'm open to suggestions. Cannons/lasers should not be allowed to shoot enemies only visible indirect (x) as missiles do, of course.
I disagree. If you are going to allow unguided missiles to fire indirectly at enemy targets (either visible indirectly (X) or linked (L), as is currently the case) then, not only should cannons also be able to fire indirectly at enemy targets, but cannons should also have a much better chance of hitting targets indirectly than unguided missiles do, because cannons have a much higher muzzle speed and a much more accurate ballistic trajectory than unguided missiles because unguided missiles:
1. launch much slower
2. spin much slower
3. have a much lower mass to surface area ratio
4. leave the barrel (or launch rail) at a much less accurate initial trajectory
5. are more affected by air resistance and the wind.
I don't know what you have against cannons being able to fire indirectly at targets. In reality, artillery rarely fires directly at targets because the artillery crew is incredibly vulnerable to enemy weapons fire! Artillery can fire reasonably accurately at any coordinates that they are given by infantry due to the accurate ballistic trajectories of cannon shells and the fact that range tables are calculated for artillery beforehand.