You can't change companion weapons or armour

I never denied armor could help, or that in some condition it is mandatory. I'm not going to use Pee Bee around toxic material and I hope there is an explaination on why she can have her belly exposed in a icestorm. Once again technology can easily explain that, but if it is not mentionned then yes it would be stupid and illogical. But if i thought about it, i think than somewhere a guy in bioware already thought that.

I'm saying that pointing specificaly Pee Bee (while there are a ton of character like her in my quote that did not recieved such complain)to be a illogical design character for not wearing an armor is not a valid argument.

Pee Bee is no soldier, she is a scientist, a crazy annoying one, but a scientist.
She does not wander with only cloth as people like to pretend. She has a shield, tech ability, powerful biotic ability and a gun to defend herself which is more than the common soldier have. Even her cloth as some small protection suited for movement (elbow, shoulder, knees) not much but the basic minimum for exploration we don't usually see with character like Miranda and Thane.

Once again I did not say that biotic user can't wear armor. I never said that and often insisted on that particular matter. However I did say that exhaustion is the limit to biotic ability and an armor can cause exhaustion and by extension limit the biotic abilities. That is why hybrid class use armor, because their combat style works that way. They don't need to be the best at biotic abilities but they need polyvalence.
Adept class however does not wear armor (the only exception is Liara alternate mass effect 3 armor)because they need their biotic ability at their full potential.

Of course Pee Bee could use an armor, but she had a gun, a shield, biotic and tech abilities to defend herself. Moreover the few extract we had so far showed her as being very quick. An armor would upgrade her defense but limit her movement and biotic abilities. One could think that she does not seem to be an extreme potent biotic user and could use an armor and I would agree with that. But thinking it is the only logical solution is wrong.

Pee Bee is clearly no soldier, she is hardly a scientist. She is a daredevil and she is how to phrase it...independant...(a euphemism that means annoying). From a soldier perspective or a pragmatic one, yes she could really need an armor, but PeeBee clearly put a lot intention in her appearence. It is not the rule of cool, it is a character that wants to look cool, and that is why a lot of person don't like her. For me it is clear she follow her own looks, she wants to help the pathfinder but she does not want to be commit to a cause. I don't see her wanting to wear an armor or even seeing how she could benefit from it.
You see the benefit and so do I, but from PeeBee the "rogue scholar" it is a logical design choice not have her wear an armor.
We may not like the character, I surely do, but that does not mean I disaprove the design choice. I think her quick playstyle and her appearence fits how the character would fight and dress.

Once again it is not about micromanaging our companion but them taking their own decision, no matter if we agree with that decision.
From what it seems, I am not Pee Bee superior, so I cannot give her orders. But if I thinks she is not suited for a mission because of the environment or her behavior I will not take her with me simply as that. On other occasion, like when my goal is to find a remnant vault I probably take her with me. If I want to attack an heavily guarded pirate camp, I will take professional soldiers. If I want to deal with Angaran, Jaal may be my man.
And I think that is a better RPG thing than just mind-controling NPC to dress according to our desire, even if we think it is the most logic thing to do.

And no I don't think I troll or i am being irrational here.

If that's the case, I know that I shall not enter the forum (or the internet) at least for 10 year.

And Red is always right 

Jesus.

First, we can't issue power commands to our teammates, effectively removing out ability to prime/detonate the combo that I THE PLAYER choose.

Now we can't choose their gun. What. The. Fuck?

...

No thanks.

I wouldn't try to explain / look for some logical explanation for lack of protective gear in hazardous environments. Bioware / other game devs have already demonstrated logic / practicability isn't vital. They're not foolish, they just want it that way. The only thing players can do is voice objections / criticisms and just march on. Whether it is heard.. *shrug* it depends on how deaf / stubborn they want to be.

I do agree with you second point.
I don't think PeeBee would be irrational about wearing a protective armor in a toxic environment, and it seems disappoiting to not take them on those places because there is only one skin of armor because a lack of ressource. When I took Liara on Palaven's moon or similar planet I would have her wear the armor skin because in that condition it made sense.
But knowing that there is only one armor available I do not regret PeeBee wearing a jacket, because it reflects her style way more than a functional armor, when it would be the opposite with Cora and Drack. So Pee Bee not having another suit for mission requiring one is a shame, but I do agree with PeeBee current design because her choice of cloth fits her free and casual personna.
It would have been way weirder to see her in complete armor all the time.

The worst thing is I do not like her now because she is "too much". But the swift daredevil and casual scientist wearing a jacket does not put me off, that is basically Indiana Jones. I do think her suit fits her fighting style. If I want a soldier type fighting style,  i will take a soldier.
Her exposing the tummy is purely intentional. On the field it is not practical, but there is still logic behind it.

Considering all the new amazing things they managed to get into the game, not being able to choose or change out gear for squaddies is a minor disappointment.

Well, this is pretty pathetic. They have already taken a similar approach with DA2 and seen how people are hostile towards having such an important RPG element taken away.
Armor might not be a big deal. As usual they will release some Alternate Appearance Pack just to grab a few extra dollars - that should cover the not changing Armor issue. Now weapons, not being able to change them is really pathetic.
Gladly I care more about the Multiplayer than the Singleplayer.

I get the people that are upset about not being able to customize squadmate's weapons and armor, but I don't get the people who say "why have so much customization for Ryder then?" . Ryder is the character we'll actually be playing as, the one who we'll be making decisions through, and interacting with other characters through. I think it would be pretty obvious why Ryder would have the most customization options even if the squadmates had weapon and armor customization options too. Plus different people will like different weapons, abilities, etc. Especially if they are making a character that's supposed to portray themselves in the game to some extent.

I was talking about the type of RPGs BW is/was proficient with in the past, though: Party based, tactical RPGs... that includes everything, from directing your party in battle to picking their gear for the occasion. The tactical aspect was pretty much taken out in earlier installments of ME, bit by bit, and now the party management goes too... what remains is a isngle protagonist RPG, like - say - the Witcher. Outside of non-combat interactions, party members are just another gun to point at the enemy.

Mass effect was not a very good team based rpg neither a tactical one.
The most intersting part was not having bot running at the enemy while you do all the kills, it was character development. The best moment in game was not killing bandit in space generic warehouse, it was going in the presidium with garrus.
Companion mostly just did auto-attack, nothing fantastic about it.

Focusing the gameplay around the character was a wise choice. They did not change the original gameplay because it was too good. a game focused on shooting thing did the right thing using the shooter mechanic, these games are popular because they have good gameplay.

I don't understand "it's either A OR B" approach like this. Like, why can't we demand more robust customization options for both Ryder AND the party? Especially since Bioware's last RPGs allowed you to do just that (DA:I and ME3), and it's fun to set up your party to your own liking, whether it's how they look, how they behave on battle, etc etc. I mean, why? Why would anyone be more accepting to Bioware stripping more choices instead of expanding or adding them? Especially with such a lengthy development time and it was something that they have done with their last games.

I don't understand.

"Stripping more choices instead of expanding or adding them" isn't the best conceptual frame for this sort of design decision. In the end it's a question of how many resources they want to throw in this direction, versus throwing them in another direction; it's not like they had a working NPC gear system lying around and decided to cut it, after all, since the trilogy was on a different engine.