How about increasing the wall’s health?
As you know, the latest patch has increased the wall construction time and it seems that the siege weapon is still quite strong, so why should we waste time building the wall when it will be easily destroyed Later?
If so, why not increase the health of the walls? Siege weapons will take longer to destroy these strong walls. Only then will it be worth the time spent building them.
I share your opinion. Stone walls are too weak. 2 or 3 bombard shots are enough to kill the stone walls 
This is bad for defensively playing players. My brother, who mostly plays the Mongols, only laughs at my english walls. He says they’re almost useless because his siege shoots them away like nothing.
With how long it takes my Delhiboys to put up walls since the last patch, I wouldn’t mind the walls being stronger, but the major strength of Stone walls is supposed to be exploited in the Feudal Age to stave off a knight rush or something else in order to by you time to go Castle and defend/attack from there. After early Castle Age, Walls have to drop off in viability just a little to keep the game moving, and then in Imp they have to receive a counter like Bombards or else games could go on for hours with proper walling techniques.
I would be in favor of stronger stone walls, or stone walls that scale with each age. There’s not much stone wall play in most games I’ve played against other players (except Delhi).
At higher levels, feudal stone walls (and stone towers at all ages) are supposedly too strong, as they were banned in the n4c. However, I don’t see them as being too strong at lower Elo.
Around my ELO (1200 - 1300), I see at least two players using stonewalls with great efficiency in every game, but generally, walls are used as a means to buy time rather than attack/defense like at the top level.
I believe that, if they buff the walls, whether a flat buff to hp, or one that increases with the age, the walls must have a flat hp while under construction. I believe that that should have been the fix for the last patch to stop Delhi wall abuse rather than increasing the wall’s build time (which didn’t change much) and making the gate take forever to build.
yeah especially with the increased build time ( a good change by the way) i think giving stone walls a bit of a health buff is a good idea, do they already get more health with every age like in aoe2?
We , the closed beta testers have been saying this since the beggining in the closed forums. Walls are useless having this OP siege .
And now walls take more time to build , change that i support btw . But now they need to have more health , the walls nerf was an indirect buff to siege , and siege shouldnt be buffed . On the contrary , they should be nerfed as fast as posible
Walls are very atrong age2 and age3 but they are weak in age 4. I think that in imperial age the main function of a wall is to avoud raids and people just walking into their opponents base. What i suggest though is to have a tech on age4 that increases stone wall health. That tech could be in the university for example like aoe2 fortified wall tech.
The primary reason they feel so weak in Age IV is surely how strong bombards are. It’s not just that they’re much stronger than trebuchets, it’s also that they are so much more versatile – having five trebuchets is using a ton of population on a unit that has only one real use and that is hard to defend. Having five bombards gives you five of the strongest units in the game all around.
Trebuchets could use a slight buff. I think adding a tech that increases wall health on age4 seems like a good option. I dont like the idea of nerfing bombards even more. They are meant to be strong and have high damage and now they are much slower and die quickly to cav.