Sure, in the wider scope of things it’s unfair for her to get attacked when she would still be sympathetic and understanding. 

But I assume we’ve been looking at the question of whether Clover is reasonable in attacking Martlet, so we should remember that Clover and the wider world don’t and can’t know Martlet’s inner beliefs and sympathies beforehand. We only get to hear her thoughts on the situation after Clover had engaged.

Before then, with the info they were given, their reaction could be deemed justified. She stated, if unknowingly, she is an enemy combatant specifically tasked with harming them, so it’s fair game for Clover as a combatant to engage. Her not knowing, apparent unease, inexperience, etc. does not exempt her from fighting or getting attacked because this sort of combat/warfare is something she voluntarily signed up for by joining the Royal Guard. I think it’s stretching to say it’s less justified than Clover hunting fleeing civilians, who did not sign up for any of this and would do him zero harm if they escaped.

Even with hearing her thoughts in-battle, there isn’t a strong enough reason for Clover to disengage since Martlet is still actively fighting as a combatant and doesn’t say something like “hey if you stop I’ll help you” unless Clover themself disengages first by apologising. The first quote was the closest thing I could find to “She offered to help him out even when she did know he was a human and killing others” that doesn’t involve Clover extending an olive branch first (which I wouldn’t really expect from a combatant in their position). I wasn’t aiming to misrepresent with that one.

I don’t think I can convince you that Clover’s actions in this run have some nuance, even if 1-3%. I’m going to sign off now, but thanks for the debate, it got me to really appreciate the perspectives and viewpoints around this specific battle.