Gonna be honest dude. I think most people like to war with a little stock because it's a bit more of a skills challenge regarding country building and stocks. Wars that start OOP and go all set with much collateral damage are generally thought as not much fun. Historically, if you want people to be friendly, even with war clans, you try to set the war up to be a little fun, and generally don't war in the most boring way possible. The war end of it is going to be very boring and tedious for Darkness with very obvious outcomes that dont involve a lot of strategy in building. That's why, imo, you've seen SF offer a 1v3 and Symbolic say "why don't we get started later next set."

The only wars out of protection I've ever fought in were over pretty heavy grudges. Generally OOP is reserved to make war an awful time and a grind so people quit. It's reserved for the least friendly situations because of how bad the grind is. Even great rivalries tend to build up a little because it's just more fun. I say this all to say, if you want a pat on the back from anyone in this community, you ought to try to listen to some of the theory behind traditions here.

If you look at Darkness and say let's build for 2 weeks next set, I'm certain they'd be more than happy to give you an even sides war and that every achievement you made, they'd give you props for. OOP wars generally being thought of as toxic to the point that it makes people quit the game on both sides out of boredom is a very tough sell. Toxic behavior can result in achievement, but it's going to be thought the same way until you adjust your strategy to allow your counterparts to enjoy it. Like boxing, the best wars in this game are a dance. Leaders can hate each other, but the best wars have great dance partners.