Isn't that a bit of an overstatement?))

Not at all. All people are selfish to some extent, and personal victory will be the top priority for the vast majority, unlike the opponent's time.

Explain to me the real meaning of spending your own and others' time in battles with neutrals when the losses in auto-battle will amount to a couple of units. Are you playing online for the sake of battles with neutrals, or for the sake of fighting another player?

On this issue, Devolik has already "explained everything to you in detail," and I completely agree with him.

I don't see any objective reason other than having too much free time.

In the first battle, we lost a couple of units, in the second, too, and in the third, instead of "insignificant," they write "low." And if there are inconvenient neutrals, then we should think again: lose a couple more units in auto-battle and save time for an opponent whom we "don't know" and "haven't seen," or fight manually, ignoring the guy, again, whom we "don't know" and "haven't seen." I can tell you for sure that most, and the overwhelming majority, will choose their own units, not the guy we "don't know" and "haven't seen."
And in general, my friend, this is just elementary arithmetic, or rather, an arithmetic progression, the result of which is this: either we are left without an army and terribly slow down in development, or we run into an opponent who was not lazy, fought manually, and did not lose troops, where they write "high" and we are in mourning.

And also, haven't you heard such sayings as "a penny saved is a penny earned," "little strokes fell great oaks," etc.?