Deployment versus support

[Rhagrok]

Being able to move troops to a city versus just supporting the city would allow for much better support. City deployed to would of course have to be able to feed the troops.

[MidevilMonk]

There are 2 problems that I see with this and the reasons I do not like this idea:

1. You no longer need to plan out your future attacks because you can simply shuffle your scholars and offensive troops around on a whim.
2. It would create an unbalance in terms of allowing you to capture a city 20 hours away and immediately send scholars and troops there to continue attacking from that city instead of forcing you to build an army and scholars at the new city.

[Rhagrok]

Possibly but that would also mean your city that's now 20 hours away no longer has any troops in it so it'd be screwed if attacks were launched against it cause all those troops you just sent are now 40 hours away from getting back to help. The 15 minute cancel isn't gonna help you much there.

[Bolba]

I actually like this idea. I think it's pretty stupid that you can't shuffle troops around to other cities. In a real empire you can deploy troops. You wouldn't send your troops to attack and march straight back. They would conquer and keep going.

[Imya]

I too like this idea, but only like it because of the power it would lend. I agree it's more realistic but also consider it very dangerous. Perhaps it could be added as a world option and only enabled for specific new worlds.