Suggestion: I think that when buildings are destroyed they should deal damage to any units (enemy or allies or structures) 1 tile next to it. The damage dealt to the unit (maybe 25?) should be reduced if they have normal armor.
Why do this?
It will make the game more realistic and add more STRATEGY!!!
It has been known that infantry deals massive damage to buildings and easily destroy a castle!
(http://www.ageofstrategy.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2380)TheBluePhoenix wrote:Me - i generally use man at arms and surround the castle with 4 of them to fall the castle within 2 turns
This quote shows how strong infantry (some) are against buildings. To prevent players spamming man at arms at a castle to destroy them castles will now deal damage to the attackers. Because of this players will now:
a) weaken the castle with infantry. Then move them back and finish it off with siege weapons.
b) Just stick to siege weapons and use man at arms for fighting other units
c) Continue the old ways and just spam man at arms at it and suffer fairly big loss
Also the attackers (ones destroying the building like a castle) could now wait until many enemies gather around the building and destroy it to kill the defenders. The defenders will also have to back away from the buildings when they are about to fall.
Players will also not spam (or at least reduce the amount of) fortresses near each other to create a nearly "unkillable" defense because if a trebuchet destroys a fortress it will damage fortresses next to it. If the other fortress are also low on health they will also break causing a domino effect damaging most of the defense. This will also make players fix their fortress/buildings more often to prevent their defense from being completely destroyed.