I will bite and respond to your post in a constructive and meaningful manner other than downvoting you.
Firstly, in your introduction, you mention that you lost more in Arrgh then what you gained in loot. If this is the truth, you did not raid correctly. As a former member of Arrgh myself, I can say that raiding is a very profitable practice if done correctly, which it seems that you did not do. Now moving on to your points:
1. Role-play may be the objective of some, however many find enrichment from the war system. There are many other games and forums which allow you better opportunities to RP as a proper nation (NationStates comes to mind). If you find that this game does not suit your purposes, why not try one of the others? You say that most of the game agrees, however if they did, the war mechanic would have been removed in the beta phase of this game. Furthermore, these downvotes that you keep complaining about is further proof that the game does not agree with you.
2. There is no defined "win-condition" of this game. While someone like you can say that your "win-condition" is to build as much score as possible, this may not be true for others. Others for example, may find that they define "win" as having military superiority over other groups (as politics seem to work in this game).
3. Mass accumulation of resources increases inflation of the number these resources, causing your "valuable" resources to become worthless. A true winning war may cost resources sure, however you will gain a resource advantage over your opponents by dealing more damage to them then they deal to you. If winning to you means to become the richest, having this advantage over the enemy will help with that objective.
I believe that you should take the time to listen to "most of the game" and realize that your ideas are not agreed upon by most of the game.
Thank you for your time,
The Honourable Last Hope Lunaris
