Quote Originally Posted by Iscah View Post
That is literally a fancy way of saying "you did better than I expected".

That could mean anything from "I didn't think you could win" to "I thought you'd take a bit longer to beat me".

It can be "you're even stronger than I hoped you would be".
The wording of "surpassed my expectations. Surpassed me." strongly implies that her expectation was that you would not surpass her.

Quote Originally Posted by EaraGrace View Post
Not to mention the constant statements by Venat about her faith in mankind’s potential.
In the same way Emet-Selch hoped that WoL would surpass and defeat him, but didn't actually believe it was possible, Venat thought the same. Hence why she developed the entire evacuation plan to begin with, because she thought it could come to that.

I fully admit to believing Venat in the right and the Ascians in the complete wrong, but I was deeply alone for having black and white thinking on the issue less than a year ago. I simply do not understand why that desire to explore moral complexity is completely and utterly abandoned when it comes to Venat.
You don't understand value judgements? If someone values loyalty and honestly, or the quality of a life more than just the existence of a life, they probably won't sympathize with Venat. You can believe in moral complexity and still believe that Venat was very wrong, if you consider her actions to be antithetical to your own moral framework.

But as you say, less than a year ago you didn't consider moral complexity valid and viewed the conflict in black and white terms. So when the situation gets turned around, and your position loses it's moral simplicity, and you find yourself arguing "well actually this genocide was justified because it reached an end I agree with", I don't think accusations of double standards are very appropriate.