Hey, Nate. I did a little research on those Cliftons. If you sprained your MCL just running and did not suffer an abnormal event, you might want to consider a shoe with better lateral stability. These are rated nice and comfy but the softer the mid-sole material the less the ability to hold your foot steady in the foot bed. You are more likely to pronate (or supponate if you are that type) on landing which can torque up your calves, knee, and lower back. Hoko shows them as "neutral" stability letting the foot "adapt to its natural placement," which to me sounds like it shifts around like a wet carp.
From what I can tell, those use the same white EVA from heel to toe, and that material breaks down rather quickly -- your 200 to 250 miles seems about right to swap out, though one fella says he got over 500, of which I am marginally skeptical and think there might be other factors involved (for instance, Hoka says the 4s should last 450 miles, more if you treadmill.)
Weight will definitely have an impact on longevity. At six-foot-flat I am 225 pounds, which puts me at roughly 40 pounds "over-weight" so I tend to wear out shoes a little more quickly than someone else of my stature. (Thankfully about two-thirds of that overage is muscle weight, so no pot belly here like some of my compatriots with similar dimensions.) Rotating between two pairs of shoes for day-to-day and a cross-trainer for work-out and neighborhood walks helps keep them youthful, supple, and sexy. Honestly, from what I have been reading about these Cliftons, if I had held them in my hands and was able to compress the mid-sole with my thumb, as one reviewer was elated to find, I would have passed right on by. I suspect that arch probably twists right in twain, as well. Might work well for some runners but not this guy (pointing thumbs at self.)
I read a couple of places where users mentioned the 4 is built and feels different than the 2 and 3, so there could be a clue there as you mentioned coming up through the models. If you cannot or do not want to fall back to the 2 or 3, you might be able to find another runner made with differing materials, softer in the heel to give you a softer strike but more rigid down the arch to hold your foot steady and give the upper a good platform to strap your foot. I also would not discount the Brooks as an option -- even though we had it in a general retail environment, Brooks is known to be a damn good brand for running.
Getting older sucks. Not long ago I had to transition away from Asics because my arch starting hurting severely during and after longer walks, like between the stadium and parking, using the same model I had been wearing for years. The shoes had not changed, my body had. I switched to Saucony Grids and have not looked back. For serious work I like wearing cross trainers but New Balance discontinued the only XT I really liked so I am on the hunt, currently using a Nike for work-outs. I also buy multiple pairs (BOGO, baby!) when I find a model I like so I can be assured I will have a fresh pair when I need them and not have to worry about suddenly finding them discontinued as brands are often wont to do.
Certain I do not have to tell you, you will probably have to try few to get just the right balance of cushion to avoid shin-splints and impact/compression pain and support to avoid torquing joints. Good luck, buddy!