What may not be obvious, is that I am aiming for a clear matrix of "best" in class per role per faction of stats.

That means cleaning up the many discrepancies we have, simple logical systems of calculations and then iterations according to a bigger plan.

Imagine a table with factions and roles on the left, and all the stats on the right as columns. Then a color oaf varying greens and reds to indicate best and worst. That's the master plan. Then we can all argue over why something is better than the other thing and how it should be changed.

does this also include theory crafting like suit builds? because slot layout negate suit stats.

a cal assault is better with an AR then a gal assault because he's faster and able to get into range better.

a gal assault is better with ARR because he cant tank damage at range better than cals can because of how armor reps work, as well as deal more damage at range.

this was intended design? or oversight?

are you going to add the necessary suit bonuses to ensure slot use doesn't override suit stats and design? id like to see them before the Playstation 5 comes out lol

A Cal assault isnt faster, so i have no idea what you are on about and almost any other weapon is better on a gal suit than an AR.
I can make a Gal fit that reps at around 16 hp/s has near 560 armour and run at 8 m/s, if i tried to do the same with a cal assault i'd have trouble fitting a duvolle.

What may not be obvious, is that I am aiming for a clear matrix of "best" in class per role per faction of stats.

That means cleaning up the many discrepancies we have, simple logical systems of calculations and then iterations according to a bigger plan.

Imagine a table with factions and roles on the left, and all the stats on the right as columns. Then a color oaf varying greens and reds to indicate best and worst. That's the master plan. Then we can all argue over why something is better than the other thing and how it should be changed.

and cal assault can fit 613 shields, 52 hp/s, and sprint at ~8m/s

while fitting a proto AR with a basic nanohive. plus zero movement penalties.

so like i said. AR better on a cal assault.

you clearly dont run cal assault... or your fitting skills are trash.

---

and the reason ARs suck on gals is because gals are too slow to use them. its much better to use a longer ranged weapon and abuse armor reps at range than it is for a cal assault to fight at range with a long range weapon.

and cal assault can fit 613 shields, 52 hp/s, and sprint at ~8m/s

while fitting a proto AR with a basic nanohive. plus zero movement penalties.

so like i said. AR better on a cal assault.

you clearly dont run cal assault... or your fitting skills are trash.

---

and the reason ARs suck on gals is because gals are too slow to use them. its much better to use a longer ranged weapon and abuse armor reps at range than it is for a cal assault to fight at range with a long range weapon.

The flaw in this logic is that there are players who run Gallente Assaults with ferroscale plates. They aren't "too slow to use them", it's just that there is no benefit -to- using them. AR gets a whole 8% more DPS than an ARR but at the expense of 43% of the range. That isn't a good trade-off. Speed has nothing to do with it, it is the trade-off of range over DPS. I could be running around at MinScout speeds but it isn't going to help me kill the guy any faster once I am within range of my weapon.

When I run Cal Assault? I use an ARR because of that advantage. The shield/speed is an afterthought. I don't hesitate to engage someone in CQC -as- a Cal Assault because I know that the amount of DPS gains from other rifles is miniscule at best. 30 DPS can be, and is, negated by mobility, proper use of cover, and fitting. 30m of range is a completely different story.

And please, spare yourself the consequence of looking foolish when saying "You clearly don't run 'x, y, and z'" because it just makes the rest of us more likely to dismiss your arguments.