The only answer to "CP" haters

It wouldn't change that some pokemon are better than others, but would increase diversity. Pokemon with very good typing, defensive stats and defensive moves are currently excluded of the game just because of their low CP (coming back to cheating: shavers, etc). It's not only CP's fault. It's CP placement together with lack of anti-cheating measures.

To be fair, I don't think Niantic will ever get rid of CP (it's one of their signatures). And in the same way they won't ever be able to stop people from using multiple accounts. Therefore, there is the need for a way of gym sorting other than CP.

I'm looking forward to the "gym rework" to find out whether they are still able to surprise us

Golduck has confusion/Ice beam though. Now your water gun/hydro pump vaporeon doesn't look so sweet on defense does it?

'Taking away CP' at least gives mons with better moves to compensate somewhat.

"Really the only way to realistically realign "CP" is to put a modifier on the Formula based on a Pokemon's Moves."

Um... or weigh Stamina and Defense more (or Attack less) into the equation. Even a slight readjustment would introduce more mons as gym viable, and take some currently higher CP guys who are awful "defenders" down a peg.

If cp is going to stay the way that gyms are sorted than cp needs to be based more on the defensive stats ie STA and DEF I feel I should not have been one of the first to say this that I know of because obviously cp is for gyms so why does cp favor the attack stat.

I don't have a problem with the cp formula, I have a problem with it being used for gym placement. Besides the simple reality that some pokemon with lower cps are better defenders, I believe someone should be able to place whichever pokemon they want without fear of it being at the bottom and shaved off. There is no reason that grass pokemon should not be included in the gym meta. There is no reason that fairy pokemon are not in the gym meta. There is no reason pokemon like the Nidos, Slowbro, Tentacruel, Steelix, LAPRAS, and many others are not part of the gym meta. For the most part, the gym meta is made up of pokemon with high cps and double weaknesses.

I think the current formula has more logic than people give credit. Damage taken is a function of stamina * defense. Damage dealt is a function of attack. It makes some sense then that you would treat attack and (defense * stamina) the same.

I'd like to see at least these two very simple changes.
1) trainers limited to no more than 12-15 gyms.
2) same species of mon limit in a single gym.

1 is the most important in order to limit gps spoofers who have a crazy number of gyms each.

2 stops gyms from having 10 Blisseys.

any other change is just gravy to me.

I like the cap on how many gyms you may hold, I would be a hardliner here and say 10. There are no real reason for having a huge backup, why should spoofers and others who abuse the system be granted a daily 5000 stardust + coins?

Maybe also introduce something to cut down on those remote stagnant lvl 10 gyms. Like a "battle tireness", the mons in the gyms get an temporary reduction in their base stats with maybe 10% per day, and after 10 days they fall out of the gym. That would certainly shake up a lot.

The problem is CP is a composite of a Pokemon's base stats.

This is not doubted by anyone seriously.

You could change the weighting between Attack/Defense/HP,

Indeed, you could, and it would make sense.

but it doesn't change the basic fact that some pokemon simply have better stats than other pokemon.

Correct.

Vapereon > Goldduck simply because it has
Vapereon 205 Attack > Goldducks ATK 191
Vapereon 177 Defense > Goldducks DEF 163
Vapereon 260 Defense > Goldducks STA 160

Nonsense example. Noone doubts that vaporeon is bettter than golduck. Try to compare alakazam and steelix to get a feel what this discussion is about.

Getting rid of CP, or Getting rid of CP for Gym Placement isn't going to change those basic facts.

CP should be calcualted fair, not gotten rid off.

CP for Gym placement is the only thing where CP matters, if it would not be taken into account, discussions would be a lot calmer.

Really the only way to realistically realign "CP" is to put a modifier on the Formula based on a Pokemon's Moves.

Of course not. Before telling, how you calculate it, you should tell, what you want to calculate. This modifier could be a second step, the first step is to evaluate stats in CP correctly.

Something like Damage/Energy Use* (Cooldown-Flash Window/Cooldown) *500 *1.25 if stab

You are looking for cycle damage. There is no need to define it new, playing with numbers without doing the math is leading to nowhere, math has been done already correctly, cycle damage is used in many sheets.

For Quick Moves you'd add something similiar but I'm low on time to come up with a formula.

You do not need to evaluate a quick move and a charged move independend, because you want to calculate whole CP for a complete moveset. Cycle damage is the way to go.
Those numbers exist, for each moveset on each pokemon, they are listed in public google-sheets.

You can also add say a -250 Modifier to any double weakness a pokemon has.

This would be a further correction. Why not? Your approach is not very systematic thought. You could give +50 for each resistance and -50 for each weekness. Double resistances would simply count double.