We encouraged the Stellar Ascendency to model itself after the federation, a collection of states. "Uplift different people" was already the plan, and I've never skimped on planning specifics of how different polities could stand on their own side by side with Denva. We argued for days over how best to do that with Caldereth, remember?
Collective defense is a necessity in 40k, and Denva merely happens to be best equipped to bootstrap it and get those agreements and uplift moving. We spent a boon on making sure they'd do so ethically,
and we're not far off from the warp comms to keep an eye on it even then, so I don't see the problem.
Nor do I see anyone arguing
for imperialism. This is SV, decrying it is preaching to the choir.
Denva is our closest partner. We don't have to be them to see their success as beneficial, nor does their success come at the expense of other people we want to help. And without them, doing EMT for the whole subsector becomes way, way harder.
If an imperial faction rolled over Denva, that might be it, yeah.
If she
did intervene, I bet that means she grabbed the 85. Classic W, most fitting name.
It came with me
going to the map page to count the number of systems in between us and different factions and comparing it to navigator travel times. When I said "argued" with past tense in the quoted post, that should have been your cue to find the post I was referring to. If you did remember that earlier post or reread it, then I have no idea how you could think I didn't back my claims up.
And even then, my claim was that it was something that
could happen, not that it
did. It. Was. A. Hypothetical. Just like Bongo choosing to drive those ships into the planet was a hypothetical.
"It could plausibly have happened" - and you've made no argument why the citations I had don't say that's true. I did literary analysis, dice analysis, and analysis of the mechanics of travel time and you discarded all of it while forgetting what that analysis was even for despite me saying what it was for at length.
For you to come away from that and say I presented "
no citations, no reasoning behind it, no concepts" was unnecessary, insulting, and objectively wrong.
Please ask me questions about my position rather than confidently saying it's wrong if you're not sure you understand or didn't have time to review the whole discussion.
