Full article at:

https://lastwarguilds.com/week-31-season-2-underway


Our current R4/R5 roster with elections:

Tony 2026-02-11 Unchallenged
B0oby 2026-03-03 Unopposed
Bones2: 2026-03-17 Elected
Dys 2026-03-30 Unopposed
Lilo 2026-04-07 
Hutch 2026-04-14 
MastaBayta 2026-04-21 
Goose 2026-04-28 
Tony 2026-05-05 
IAMFALLEN 2026-05-12
Bones 2026-04-19
Fyre 2026-05-26


Desert Storm Week: Lost A 80% participation (20/20) - we had a late start on 100% participation. However, we were definitely outmatched so I don't think it would have mattered


I am still off track. Here goes my best...

Goose has been leading the charge with Bayta on handling business. Much like the S1 mechanics, we hold cities and strongholds. The limits and our holdings are:

🧠 4/4 Strongholds - lvl1 x 3, lvl2 x 1
🧠 3/6 Cities - lvl1 x 2, lvl3 x 1

For comparison, TBs holds:

🧠 4/4 Strongholds - lvl2 x 2, lvl3 x 2
🧠 4/6 Cities - lvl2 x 2, lvl1 x 2

NoMy:

🧠 4/4 Strongholds - lvl3 x 3, lvl4 x 1
🧠 6/6 Cities - lvl2 x 5, lvl1 x 1

WRZS:

🧠 4/4 Strongholds - lvl2 x 2, lvl3 x 2
🧠 4/6 Cities - lvl1 x 2, lvl2 x 2

SofB:

🧠 4/4 Strongholds - lvl1 x 2, lvl2 x 2
🧠 4/6 Cities - lvl1 x 2, lvl2 x 2

Frankly, we are on course with the smaller alliances. We should be ready to progress early this week on lvl 3 strongholds.

We have another civil war brewing. Some SCAMmers don't like war. A majority do. A vote was passed by a wide margin to support TBs' move. My thoughts...

I would support SofB if attcked. That's not my call and that is not the opinion of the alliance. I facilitate what we want. 

If you look at the map. NoMy has occupied 8 of the 13 squares across the north, split into two strongly connected components. That area is occupied by 4 top 7 alliances and 5 alliances all day. Their ratio, evenly divided is 30.8%. There current influence and holdings (again, we are viewing a digraph of two strongly connected components) is 61.5%. That is a ~100% overage. 

Either their neighboring nodes have rolled over or they have called them out. SofB happened to call them out. This is a game of "I can, therefore I will". They have lived up to their alliance longform name of "No Mercy".

In regards to supporting TBs, I'll draw from past experience. The Army, we learned that a good commander is one who makes decisions. When wrong, we still supported them. We may voice our opinion. This trait is called "loyalty". 

We should support the victor. In this case, it has been and will be TBs. They also have the strongest support. SofB is ranked 6th. WRZS will throw in with TBs on this. I conjecture that Cong will not support NoMY. That leaves them as the lone gunmen.

We have involved ourselves with TBs in the past. To not support them in the future will put our alliance at risk. To think we won't be drawn in is naive.

Finally, the name is "Last War". War. If it comes, we are wise to be proactive in choosing sides. Solidarity is a deterrent as well. 

There is suspicion that TBs was at fault. MUSO had mentioned they would allow land takeover if alliances hadn't mobilized. That is true. It's my opinion that this was a "fk you if you don't do as I say right now" stance. Not a great motivator. That's also not a trait of a leader having a handle on politics and strategy. You deal with humans, not robots or "subjects".

But my hatred goes back to week 3. They took the stance, "I can, therefore I will". I had ordered the attack on a lvl 3 city. MUSO owned 4 lvl3 cities and 2 lvl 4 cities. Being a #7ish alliance at the time, we weren't going to win outright. The play was to feign an attack and secure quickly. They hunted and burned all our bases. I communicated they were in violation of NAP. To wit, they used the "warnings" clause, issued their fake "warnings", and proceeded for the next 30 minutes or so. 

They are fkheads. This I know from experience. Looking at the northern map. Yep. Looking at their way of navigating politics in S1. Yep. We are wise to throw support early and proactively to TBs. Good call alliance!