Battlefield 6’s Open Weapon Classes: Freedom or the Death of Class Identity?

I’ve been testing the Open weapon class system in Battlefield 6, and on the surface it’s promising. It already applies penalties when you equip a weapon outside of its “natural” class role — for example, an Assault with a sniper rifle doesn’t get Recon’s breath-holding bonus or stability. That’s a solid foundation.

But here’s the problem: right now this is mostly explained as “signature weapons.” And honestly, that wording feels too minimal. Players need to know exactly what that means. For example:

Recon’s signature weapon is the sniper rifle → only Recon gets hold-breath and reduced sway.
Assault’s signature weapon is the assault rifle → only Assault gets faster ADS and recoil control.
Engineer’s signature weapons are SMGs and LMGs → only Engineers get better hipfire and gadget swap speed.
Support’s signature weapons are LMGs and shotguns → only Support gets larger ammo pools and faster reloads.

If this isn’t communicated clearly, players will assume every class handles weapons the same. And when that happens, class identity — one of Battlefield’s strongest elements — falls apart.

💡 My own idea: rocket launchers and stingers should be even more tied to Engineers. If another class equips them, their effectiveness should be heavily reduced — cut the range by 50%, slower lock-on, much worse stability. That way Engineers remain the backbone of anti-vehicle gameplay, while freedom still exists for anyone who wants to experiment.

⚠️ Why this matters:
The Open system can work, but only if penalties and bonuses are clearly explained, visible in the UI, and meaningful in gameplay. Otherwise, “signature weapon” just becomes a vague term and most players won’t even realize they’re at a disadvantage.

👉 To make this point clearer, I’ve attached an example image of how a warning could look in the UI — showing players directly what they lose when picking a sniper rifle with Assault. This kind of feedback is what makes the system transparent and trustworthy.

My view:
Open weapons could be the best of both worlds — freedom of choice for individuals, and preserved class identity for teamplay — but only if the system is transparent and penalties are significant.

What do you all think?