Personally, as an experienced player on solo worlds, playing with damage doesn't work. In BD, there are typically stronger players then you, who all would like to steal your crystals. A strong player could wipe you off the board in one round, preventing damage troops from ever hitting your opponent. It takes 4 rounds for damage to dish more damage than range. On average by my calculations, the average is approximately 2. Which means that range will deal more damage in most battles. In solo worlds, you NEVER go for an even battle. That destroys both players. I am a cautious player, and I will never attack players that will break down my army. So damage is pointless in an era about survivabilty.
I am in M1, where ryan (ie: Shocker) was wiped despite it being his last era. I am rank 5 right now. I can say definitively that if I find out a player with crystals uses damage: I nuke, plant agents etc. I then wipe his ENTIRE ARMY with no losses; resulting in experience, crystals, and an BR to show my friends. xD

Although I think having one main chassis is more important than range or damage. I can break down any multi-chassis army.

all this talk about solo worlds.... yes, on avg, you will not be going into long rounds... most of the talk prior to this was for worlds with very large alliance armies. There is no avoiding long battles with many rounds.

Also, huo, damage has been boosted since OC.
Range - 12 dmg per round
Damage - 21 dmg per round

Round 1
Range does 12, dmg does 0

Round 2
Range does 24, dmg does 21

Round 3
Range does 36, dmg does 42

The example you used is of a very very poor build. The example below is NOT meant to be about a dmg build, but to show that BIG battles will last much longer. This is an old BR i have and by no means am I saying that it had a good build on it! Simply meant to show that rounds can go very long...

I didn't know about the damage boost, that is quite significant. Thanks