Signature Weapon Bonuses Should Increase Spendable Attachment Points

The class balance (pick rate) was pretty good during the open beta of BF6. I think the synergy bonus is incentive enough. It should just be something small, not something that gives a clear advantage.

Even 10 extra attachment points would convince me to change to a different class just to make my preferred weapon stronger.. making the class system more redundant. As a player i don't really want that. I want a meaningful class system that let me choose class based on the needs of my squad, without forcing me to pick a specific weapon. 

Your approach could appeal to that result as signature weapons need better balancing. Playing with the cost of accessories could also help with this.

Personally I would like to change the buff. Assault can equip 2 types of ammo, engineers explosives will reduce movement speed, support will suppress (old version) and recon can swap between regular scope and thermal (same scope)

However you slice it i agree that accessories could appeal players to use signature weapons. 

I think if you value 10 attachment points over the entire gadget kit of a class, the problem is more in the effectiveness of class gadgets than 10 attachment points being OP.

Either way, one of the benefits of adopting this proposition is that it is very easy to balance. If an additional 20 (or even 10) attachment points is, as you've stated, enough to attract players away from an entire class's kit of a gadgets, then the number of additional attachment points provided by the signature weapon bonus can easily be adjusted. In your case, maybe 5 additional attachment points wouldn't be enough to yank you away from an entire class's kit, though I would wager most people would say even 20 attachment points (about the average price of an extra attachment) wouldn't be too overpowered.

By the time you have spent 100 attachment points on customizing a weapon, all of the high priority weapon attachments should have already been selected and applied to your weapon. Realistically, the extra value you would receive from the additional 20 attachment points would be limited to one of the very last attachments you would select for your weapon, like a match trigger or laser sight. The largest benefit it would offer a player is a little bit more flexibility.

Out of curiosity, what would you individually spend the extra 20 attachment points on that would convince you to switch classes? I implore you to then compare the weapon bonuses this increment of attachment points would offer you to the current signature weapon bonus it would be replacing. I find it shocking that 20 additional attachment points would pull you away from a class, but the current signature weapon bonuses do not.

I'm personally not a fan of giving each class a specific and niche bonus, as I believe this results in a convoluted system (similar to the current one that is implemented). Additionally, the bonuses you described are available to all weapon types, which would not incentivize players to choose the weapon type that is signature to their class. I firmly believe that there should be incentivization to get players to play the signature weapon type of their class, though that may be because I would prefer a closed weapon system in general.

Let's examine the problem. Just for reference:

Assault -> Assault Rifle - Faster draw and switch times, plus better sprint recovery.
Engineer -> Submachine Gun - Improved hip-fire control.
Support -> Machine Gun - No sprint speed penalty.
Sniper -> Sniper Rifle - Stabilize aim by holding breath and rechamber quicker between shots.

So the first reason you mention is this:

There are certain playstyles within the class that are largely unaffected or impacted by the signature weapon bonus that is given to them. 

I'm not sure why you're saying this. If you had given examples, it would have been easier to understand. My first impression of these  bonuses is that they are pretty generic bonuses that would pretty much benefit any playstyle.

The current system is also convoluted, as the bonuses given to each signature weapon type vary from class to class and lack consistency. It is not an intuitive system to navigate.

What it comes down to, is that each weapon has a penalty and using the proper class negates that penalty. I don't think it's inconsistent or convoluted, but I'll agree with you that it's not all that intuitive what kind of advantage or disadvantage you're given when selecting your class and weapon.

Replacing it for +20 attachment points is certainly more intuitive at first glance, yet you do already mention that you need one loadout when your class matches the signature weapon and one loadout for the other classes. The fact that a loadout may change based on the class you select isn't by itself all that intuitive either.

An additional issue is that it's indirectly a nerf to all non-signature weapon categories. The reverse approach you mentioned fixes this to some degree by ensuring that all non-signature weapons receive the same amount of attachment points as using a signature weapon with the correct class. However, this could increase the usage of non-signature weapons, as a carbine with 100 attachment points, may outperform an assault rifle that would only have 80 attachment points.

What this means is that it's likely going to be more difficult for the developers to balance the game. Changing a few bonuses would be far easier than having to adjust the balance for multiple weapon classes. Don't get me wrong though, I do think it's an interesting idea, even if I'm not completely sold on it yet.