Destruction Rules Need Revision!
Here's the dilemma: there are three players each with a city and a knight. One of the players builds another city. The Barbarians attack. Each person loses a city. That shouldn't be. Each player has a knight to protect its city except for the new city. That new city should be the one to be destroyed. The way it plays now, the system penalizes everyone but the leader and in some cases, it is something that can't be won back easily. Another example is when one player has reached two metropolis's but no active knights and another player has three cities and four knights. Now, when the barbarians attack, because of the metropolis rule, the player with the knights, loses a city. My new rule would work for this as well, the knights protect the built cities.
You describe your houserule and not the rule, how it works in Catan and the author want it to be.
Read the rules and understand, that there is no „own protection of my own cities“. This is not the way it works.
All knights defend all cities. If there are more cities and metropoles than knights, the players who has at least one city and distributes the fewest amount of knights, will loose a city.
It is this simple and a good source of strategies to win Catan.
You can play different at home with your Homerules ...but sorry, than you play a different game - and not Catan ...
@V-Man That loss of cities happens according to the rules. Most players frown upon this strategy, and I personally dislike it, but it really is legit. Just find players who do not use this strategy, put them in your friend list, and you´ll be ok.