"LMGs limited to medic and SMGs to engineers are dumb as you can only be so effective in certain situations"
That's the point of locked weapons. So that no 1 player can be effective in all situations. That forces teamwork if you want to win.
Fair, and I get it to a point. My counter argument to that; what is the main mechanic in battlefield? Shooting. You're limiting a users effective engagement on the primary mechanic. What's the big difference between AR, SMG, and LMGs that's so devastating to cause peoples negativity? Damage wise, it's a minor difference between weapons. Range and Accuracy are the big ones. Gadgets and perks make up most of the class not the weapons. Past battlefields classes had shotguns, carbines, dmrs. So how does this hurt battlefield?
You can't reasonably say because "past battlefields did it" or arbitrarily say it promotes teamwork.
If I'm stuck with an SMG as an engineer and have to do long fights, you'd lose in most situations you're up against ARs or LMGs. Say my team was holding a spot at a distance, what value are you providing?
If you're a Support and locked to the LMG, your team pushes up onto a point swarming with enemies. Are you effectively helping your team with a low mobility medium/long range weapon in close quarters? You can't easily post up to take effect of a mounted LMG. The game is too fast right now anyways for that anywhere :D. Of course there's a chance you can win in every situation.
With Open weapons you can still fight the way you like, but you can't do everything. You can't fight a tank as a Support and you can't heal teammates as an Engineer. Thus teamwork still exists, it's just infantry to infantry combat.
I will concede some points. Like I mentioned above, Snipers should be for the recon class. Maybe institute a more restricting mechanic when not using the 'primary' weapon class.
