That's just going to lead to everyone taking multiroles with one air special and one ground special so it'd end up playing nearly identically to the current system though. Instead of using standards for air and XAGM/LAGM/SFFS for ground I'll just take use QAAMs for air and XAGM/LAGM/SFFS for ground.
I guess it does mean fighters/attackers will be kinda shit since they'll be pretty useless on maps which have a mix of air and ground targets though. Did you want that to happen? Because that doesn't sound good.
Well my idea would require the following:
1) Doing away with special weapons, with exception to the 1-2 unique experimental sci-fi planes. Instead there would just be weapons, as I outlined above.
2) Weapons would be based around a purpose, so no more generic missiles or "XAGM" and the like. Of course, with a loadout system, you can always just select 2 weapons if you don't want to cycle through a bunch.
3) Missions/maps would have to take any gameplay changes into account, which is what this thread is about. Multi-role missions would have to have enough targets for air to air and air to ground aircraft to be passable. You don't have to kill every single thing on the map, but instead plan what you want to hit. Give us a bit of a challenge.
I'd take some changes like this otherwise the game will feel too stale, IMO. Currently some not so fun missions or gimmicks are thrown in to change the pace up. In AC4 we had to be below an altitude of 5000 to avoid the super weapon, in AC5 they simply reversed it to being above 5000. What is next, between 2500 and 7500? Point being, it gets old and isn't as fun as it was the first time. The tunnel missions are probably the most boring because they're linear. And they rely more on quick reflexes than thinking. Of all the missions I replay, those few are the ones I skip over. Then you have some of those really odd ones, like the one in which you put out gas in AC5. It just doesn't fit in the game very well, isn't that interesting and feels unnecessarily cheesy. Although 5 had the worst mission design of the PS2 games, but that is another topic.
I'd rather engage my brain a little bit and spend 20 seconds thinking about how I want to tackle a mission and selecting the right tools for the job. What I don't want to see is lots of unlocks (traditional earning cash by completing a mission to buy planes is okay), invisible upgrades that magically make your plane 3% faster and the like. As mentioned, if they make changes, makes them based around the subject matter. Don't copy MMOs, Borderlands and the like. Or we'll get Assault Horizon 2.0. And I'd rather have a re-hashed AC4 than that.