Move city changes

[Sylarius]

If it were up to me personally, I'd say to implement Darkon's first suggestion in this thread. The second one I'm a bit iffy about.

Added poll.

I agree with you Sylarius, and I voted like that

I think overall we are on the same page. My suggestion is simply one way to solve the situation and I think it would be easier for the developers to implement. My 2nd suggestion was just an afterthought and is probably overboard. If the moved city is not permitted to attack other players or occupied oasis / forts for a period of time, that would be sufficient. I retract my suggestion about the community letter to notify. Thinking about it more, that would cripple a lot of strategy behind moving a city. People still need to be responsible for looking around the map to see what is going on around them. If they are too ignorant, busy or self sure to check it out then they should get what is coming.

Its a good idea but you would have to play around with it a bit. I also keep all of my troops hunting at all times and any extra resources selling in max in market so it doesnt really matter much to me anyways, nobody would get anything, however i do see your point and i think its a great idea. Moving your city should take the same amount of time as if you sent you troops hunting or tried to capture an oasis.

I generally agree with both ideas. Not having the second option would make the first almost pointless. Sure it would take longer for the attacker to get there. but the defender wouldn't see a difference. A city would suddenly show up, attack and then leave, with out them having a chance to retaliate.

I think something like a refuse war after the city is moved may be a good idea.