The way you describe it with the quick math and all the strategy involved, why do people dislike it?
Well, in the beginning, it was all kinds of fucked, and that's unfortunately the version everyone had to judge. And like the number of people who still think the game has a block button and fatalities, that prejudice is just not going to go away until they see the game on a stream.
Since the revamp, its just typical fgc xenophobia. We fear change, by nature. And there's a lot of sky is falling types who think any concept that tries to be more inventive than ST is inherently broken. Dinosaurs try to shield themselves from change, but its rarely (and I mean rarely) some goofy new system that actually breaks a game.
Anyway, Clash will probably be used a lot but I don't think it's going to be every match, it's a ridiculous amount of risk for minimal gain. There will be times where it's very advantageous but I don't think it'll present itself as often as people will believe. Early on there probably will be a ton of Clashes as people don't know the game and get acclimated with the mechanics but eventually it's going to be used sparingly IMO.
That all depends on the math involved. On meter gain rates, on health / damage returns in clash, on a lot of things. The way I see it (and I could be wrong) unless the defensive penalty (meaning you clash and lose) is huge, we are going to see a lot of clashes. If you're losing, and you have meter, and your next touch is not guaranteed, why save the meter for a combo that might not happen? What about a zoner who has no interest in lengthy combos? Why wouldn't he use a hunk of meter for Clash? And get the added bonus of thumping his opponent all the way back across the screen? As I mentioned, the combo is broken whether you wager or not. The question then comes to the aggressor, can he make it worth his while by burning meter;
IE: His BnB already uses two bars to reach 60% damage, if the enemy clashes it might be worth it for him to wager two bars if the defender has less meter, because he would have spent it anyway, and now he's robbed the defender of his combo breaker and his health recovery, just because he thought he could get away with it.
Or should he skip his wager, and hoard the meter, waiting for the next touch. If you go that route, you lose nothing, but you basically give the opponent back life for meter (almost always a worthwhile trade). I am of the opininon that dying with meter, with xfactor, with whatever, is the worst thing you can do. That's why they call them come back mechanics. XFC is obvious example, because a lv3 xfactor character can kill an entire team in seconds, and most characters can kill with a single meterless combo in xfc, level three. But even in SF4, a bar of meter is one more FADC to make that reversal uppercut safe, or turn that hit confirm into an ultra combo. In Injustice, scoring a "free" clash from a stingy opponent could be that extra slice of chip that saves you down the line, or it could be nothing. The numbers could be totally fucked.
I just find it strategically fascinating because meter is SO MUCH in this game. Now its a potential healing mechanism too. That has huge psychological implications.
There's no advantage to losing with X-factor but people wait and wait for an optimal time to use it and they just die sometimes. Things happen and if there's no true benefit to a clash then why not just die with it?
I agree, and believe me. People WILL die with their Clash waiting, but I think its only going to take a tourney or two for people to decide they don't want to.
