The Times staff has noted that several players in GC have complained that there has been no coverage of the tournament. We want to let you know that it was our intention to cover the metagaming aspects of the tournament from the outset, and called on players and alliances to work with us to file meaningful reports that would complement the rankings and standings featured on the official tournament website. As of this moment, not one player or alliance has contributed anything to the tournament reportage.
On May 18, the Times encouraged those involved in the tournament to help us provide insights into the strategy and politics taking place alongside the battles and struggles for tournament squares. Our post in the forums read:
The Times is Looking For Tournament Stories
The Times editors are looking for stories and reports that would interest the the metagaming community. Most of our readers are interested most in the metagame and Illyriad politics as it relates to war, trade, and other gaming topics, so please provide story ideas and reports that are unique, intriguing, and poignant. Thank you!
However, it was only until the end of last week that one contacted us via the forums, suggesting a piece should be written about how most of the tournament strategy is not about actual battles on the tournament squares, but rather backroom deals to secure squares uncontested. When pressed to provide further details, this tipster declined to go on the record about the politics surrounding the current tournament — even anonymously.
The success of Times reporting has always relied on the participation of the players and alliances involved to provide insights and details into the gaming action. This is no different from real-world press, where PR agents often keep reporters in the know about latest news and developments. The fewer the reports we receive, the less complete and insightful the reporting. This is why alliances sometimes complain of biased and lop-sided reporting — without exception, these are the same alliances who offer little to no insights into their side of wars and conflicts.
Until or unless participants in the tournament are willing to work with the Times, there’s little else we can offer aside from screen shots of the current standings:
The Illyriad Times 
One tidbit that I have heard is of a trade between numbers one and two in the global rankings where control of a square in the Broken Lands was ceded in return for control of a square in Elgea.
The other aspect, is that of alliance[s] exodusing cities to sit right next to the tournament square. So far I am only aware of this being done by vcrow. Whether this is good strategy, to dominate the squares, or bad sportmanship, is open to debate.
If vcrow were to view attempts to raze such cities as being part of the tournament, and therefore not triggering a wider war, then I would view such actions more favourably.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Unlike with all the wartime propaganda I wouldn’t be surprised if the The Times only receive info on the tournament after the event. I doubt any alliances are willing to give away even a hint of their tournament strategies. Especially not their trading-around-squares strategies.
I’m currently more interested in the performance of the smaller alliances in this tourney, those Order of the Orcmenguys have certainly been very impressive thus far! Curious to see how they’ll fare in the rest of the tourney!
LikeLike