Intercepting invaders

This might be hard to do.
When someone is attacking you, you are give an option to intercept the army sent with in a certain amount of time. If you don't take that option in the time window then your city is attacked.
When the army is intercepted the battle would take place in a field or oasis. Depending on which one it is, the attacker or defender would receive a bonus of defense or attack power( or something like that).
This would allow a more strategic way to battle opponents and add another element to the game. Battles would continue in the same way when going up against a city. The only advantage of intercepting an invading army is you could get a bonus, which means that if you had a less powerful army it is possible for you to be the victor.
... Just a thought I had well raiding someones city.

I don't think you need a boost. Cause cammanding is the way you win fights. Today I attacked someone and they pulled their army in and it was twice mine but I wiped it without losing one guy(other than to traps) and it was all cause I commanded better. So if you know what your doing it's not har to win just my take on it

True, a better commander almost always wins but being able to battle in a field you would add a strategic skill, which is limited in the game. There is more tactical skill then strategic.
Now we don't need bonuses but think about it. Logically Cats world have more range in a open field then in a city, well Cavs would have speed reduction in a wood or stone oasis. This would also make unit types more important then other on the field of battle.
So now no one would want to attack with straight Cats because they could be disadvantage on the field. Just as an example.

i could see this being abused... id send one cav to intercept then it would stop the other persons attack if i didnt think i could beat them. this would be too easy a way to stop people trying to take over a sub/oasis/fort so wouldnt fit in with the current system. especially taking a sub where you can only attack someone 5 times in 24 hours.

this would be my main concern is there anyway you can see to combat this abuse as i cant think of one

Simple, the attack on a city is not holted until the enemy army is either dead or is pulled back. Sending 1 Cav to intercept would have no effect of stoping the enemy army, it would simple die and the army would move on. The only advantage that would have is delay it the 30 seconds it take to do the battle and maybe, let say, 10 after for the enemy to decied to turn back. So forty seconds. there can also be a limit on how many times a army can be intercepted. After 2 times the army cannot be intercepted. I say 2 time because if an ally is close enough they could try to. That last part about the ally helping does not have be. It was just a after thought.

THe defender would have no reason to intercept tho, at his/her city they would have traps/turrets, and that kind of thing overcomplicates it way too much

Hmmm... You should be online for all the travel

There are reasons to intercept. First there are the bonuses that would be received, which I believe is as good as having traps and towers. Lets say the whole field is 20 feet long and your Cats have a range of 13 feet. Fighting on a field would give you a +3 range; or Your Cavs Have a 7 speed out of 20 and they would get a +3 speed boost. Little things like this could change that outcome of the battle.
Second, If a defender wins in a field battle then they could get more Prestige and/or be able to loot 2000 gold from the attacker, or something like that.

Thirdly, If someone has all footmen and are attacked with Cavs, in all probability they would loose because Cavs are more powerful then Both types of footmen. Now I know its is a bad idea to have all footmen and not any Cavs and Cats, but since footmen are cheaper and could be built in more of a balk people will build them, and for the fact that they make great meat shields.
Now if you have a lot of footmen and are being attacked with A lot of Cavs and you fight in a Stone Oasis the footmen would naturally have defense bonuses, they would be harder to kill, because Cavs would not really work well in a quarry.

You are trying too overcomplicate the game way too much. I think it would work if this wasn't a game for anyone, because anyone can play this game and understands the basics, but if you add your idea, it makes it harder to understand how to battle, so I'm against it for this game, maybe with a different game it would work, just not here

I am making it sound complicate but once all is said in done it really isn't, because everything is automatic. When you intercept an army on a wood oasis, in fairness i think were a interception takes place is random to help prevent abuse, any bonuses are applied right away. Example:
You have 300 Footmen going against 300 footmen. When you arrive at the oasis the footmen get a 5% attack boost. (Now this boost could go for each individual troop or as a collective that would have to be decided by others.) So upon arriveing you could get a message saying what bonuses you get and then battle continues normally. That's it.
When I gave the example of the footmen in a stone oasis I has give more logical detailed look on how bonuses are given, because logically Cavs would be at a disadvantage in a quarry well footmen would be able to maneuver better thus them having a defensive bonus. But the Players would never have to dill with this aspect because it is all in the code. Battle is still simple.