Armor works by reducing damage by a percentage and this leads to the counterinuitive case where smaller caliber arms such as SMGs (not pistols because they have low armor shred) and ARs are actually better vs heavily armored enemies than sniper rifles. Let's say the damage works like
2 AP shot of AR for 200 damage, reduced by 50% armor to 100
3 AP shot of SR for 300 damage, reduced by 50% armor to 150
There are several factors here that make the AR better than the SR at dealing with higher armored + high HP foes such as mechs:
- full auto allows you to shred multiple enemy armor in one action
- the total amount of your damage mitigated by armor is lower so you "waste" less damage
- you can shoot at lower AP cost so you have more chances to shred since you can only shred 1 armor per attack
- AR armor shred % is higher than SR (e.g. level 5 rare AR dragonroar has 30% burst / 25% full auto shred vs 20% for level 5 legendary SR outlaw longshot vs 25% for level 5 rare SMG Heavy AutoMag)
For me, armor should intuitively work better vs smaller arms than high caliber rifles. This doesn't mean a percentage armor system is fundamentally flawed, just that with the current damage distribution for the different weapon types, it is counter intuitive for me which weapons do well vs armor