Bureau of Verified Records · Charter
About Pax Autocratica Archive
An independent reference site about the game Pax Autocratica, built on one rule: if a claim cannot be traced to a source you can open yourself, it does not go on the site.
Why this exists
When a game launches, a lot of pages appear within days that answer common questions confidently and without sources. Some of those answers are right. Some are invented, and the invented ones look exactly like the correct ones. There is no way for a reader to tell them apart, which is the actual problem.
This site is an attempt at the opposite. Figures carry a stamp linking to where they came from, quotations are reproduced word for word, and gaps in what we know are written down as gaps instead of being smoothed over.
How claims are verified
- Sources are fetched as raw HTML or raw JSON and read directly. Summarised versions of a page are not used, because summarisers reliably drop qualifiers and occasionally add fields that were never there.
- Anything inside quotation marks is checked against the original text character by character before it is published, and anything we have reformatted is labelled as reformatted instead of being presented as a quotation.
- Where the source is an image, such as the developer's roadmap graphic, the page says so and transcribes it. Nothing is paraphrased into a quotation.
- Figures that change, such as review counts, carry the date they were read. A number without a date is an assertion; a number with a date is an observation.
- Where sources disagree, the source closer to the developer wins and the disagreement gets printed, not resolved silently.
The full list of sources, with the tier and read date of each, is on thesource register. Last full verification pass: 2026-08-11.
What the method missed the first time
Before this site was published, an independent reviewer re-checked every claim on it against the original sources, with instructions to assume the site was wrong until proven otherwise. That pass found six factual errors. All six are fixed, and they are worth describing, because a page claiming to be careful should show what its carefulness failed to catch.
- An archive URL that silently redirected. A request for the August 2019 capture of the Steam page was forwarded by the archive to a June 2020 capture without any error. Two rows of the release-history table were therefore the same document, and the earliest advertised release date on the site was wrong: the 2019 page said 25 November 2019, not August 2020.
- A count typed instead of calculated. The number of missed release dates was written into six separate files as a word. When the table was corrected, the prose beside it did not follow. It is now derived from the data.
- A caveat that was itself false. This site said the archive held nothing between two dates because the captures were error pages. They were not: the request had been made without compression, so a complete page arrived as unreadable bytes. The rename can be dated more precisely than we first claimed.
- An invented detail. A sentence said the 2019 page already described an Early Access plan. It did not; it described an alpha test and was filed under a different genre.
- A recommendation to something that no longer exists. The free Prologue is no longer on the Steam store, and several pages were still pointing readers at it.
- A typo we quietly corrected. One roadmap item is misspelled in the developer's own graphic. We had fixed it while marking the transcription word for word, which is exactly the thing this site says elsewhere it will not do. It is now reproduced as published.
The common thread is that none of these looked wrong. Each was a plausible sentence with a real source attached to it, which is the failure this site exists to guard against and is evidently not immune to. If you find the seventh, thecontact page tells you what to include.
What this site deliberately does not publish
- Walkthroughs and build guides. We have not finished the game. Writing strategy content without having played would mean rewriting someone else's work and presenting it as verified.
- A review or a score. Same reason. We report what Steam users have collectively said, with the date, and we note that Steam carries no Metacritic figure for this app.
- Invented author personas. There is no fabricated byline, no invented credentials, and no claim of hands-on time that did not happen.
- Unattributed numbers. Specific figures about this game circulate that we could not trace to any source, most notably a co-op player count. We say so on the relevant page instead of repeating them.
Who writes it
This site is written and maintained by one independent person, not a studio or a media company. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by Multiverse or Valve. It has no relationship with the developer, no early access to information, and no review copy. Anything it knows, it knows from published sources that you can open yourself.
That is a limitation, and it shapes what the site is good for. It is a reliable place to check what has actually been stated about this game. It is not a place to find out how the third boss works.
How it is funded
This site currently carries no advertising. We intend to display advertising through Google AdSense, and this page will be updated when that happens.Advertisers have no involvement in what the site says. Nobody has paid for coverage, placement or a favourable characterisation, and no link on this site is an affiliate link.
Links to Steam, the Epic Games Store and the Internet Archive are there so you can check the source. They earn nothing.
What data gets collected, including by advertising, is set out on theprivacy page.
Corrections
If something here is wrong, we want to fix it, and a specific pointer helps most: the page, the claim, and where the correct information is published. Write tocontact@pax-autocratica.online, or use thecontact page.
Corrections to factual claims are made promptly. Where a correction changes something substantive, the page will say what changed.