After recent discussion with a few other players on how to improve some of the game play. The idea of a city re alignment has come up. Basically, the removal of Los Angeles and Las Vegas. Instead, a new central city and east coast city would replace them. The first city being St. Louis reopening it's doors as a central city. Then a new city. Miami for the "east" coast. 

Las Vegas has always been a traditional organized crime city. Though it's long out of the way. Los Angeles takes that one step further. Drug prices in either city are often complete shit due to the lack of travel. Growing families there is difficult due to this as well. 

The change of re-aligning two cities (and moving the leaders there free of charge with no damage to their forts) would allow for shorter flight times, more drug price change and more profits balancing out all the cities. 

Otherwise I think flight times should be revisited. Yes I know no one could fly in 2 hours from NY to LA. However, 12 hour flights make it really unlikely for people from NY to fly to LA. Whereas you could simply realign all the cities, longest flight time being 6 or 8 hours. Money would go up. 

the reason the west coast cities were brought back in was because players complained that cities became too big and they didn't want to have a single city with 5 districts (New York under Toy Armadillo) + (Chicago under Cpt-Harris) were both 5 district, power house cities.

I do agree drug prices are a bit on the low side in LA/LV, but its similar in PH/NY imo. Although, i'd say ny>ph in drug prices.

anyways, rambling.

I don't think the game should remove the two cities, but rather revamp them to be more uh ..competitive(?) with its central and eastern counterparts.

That's the idea behind.... moving the cities to be St. Louis and Miami. Personally. I'm a fan of keeping Las Vegas. Los Angeles though I don't care about. Easily could replace that with St. Louis. Either way, the cities need a more balanced approach to making money. 

If the cities exist then they need to be viable to produce money and actually build in. The way it sits now, LA and LV don't make near the cash other cities do. 

I mean, given that logic, we could remove PH and NY in favor of New Orleans and Denver and make it west/central.

I get your point, it'd be personal preference, but I think everything is fine as is, there would be no need for a major change. The only change that I'd personally want is the revamping of drugs in the west since it's weak.

I agree Mint. That's the goal of the post. At least get LV and LA to be profitable. The city names aren't too huge or their location.

Personally I think if we could see LA and LV more profitable that we'd see more leadership willing/wanting to move there. Right now there's just not much benefit besides eventually achieving Godfather. Which is HUGE. However, being broke just isn't fun.

squishy

Reaching Godfather isn't that big a deal anymore. You get it once, then it's like, "Eh okay, done that now". 

Nothing to do with the topic, but I agree Anna.

Godfather is a worthless rank that anyone can get.

It's only useful for the gun boost, plain and simple.

Anyways ot: Yeah, I'd much rather see the prices revamped in the west to compensate for no one wanting to move over. It would make the two cities much more appealing.

I've been Godfather twice. So I understand the sentiment. Though it's part of the game.

I do agree though. It'd be nice to see LV and LA financially prosper and draw more users to those cities so the district idea can grow more.

I'd like to see the cities individualised more rather than renamed/replaced.

What do you mean Bigwood-Longdong?