That’s a choice. All hardware is scalable and all software can be written to manage loads. It’s not like AGS is in the woods working independent of civilization. For all their separation of departments AGS has access to AWS. If management in AGS wants to invest in more/better infrastructure, they have the means and opportunity to get it done.
You are 100% correct there. But with all the changes to the game in recent weeks, that won’t matter. In fact switching to a channel system would solve that problem on smaller servers where one faction dominates and takes all the territories with no chance of defeating them. Travel and storage costs (after the PTR patch) are basically irrelevant now, so the only drawback to one faction owning all territories is the lack of viable war opportunities for other factions/smaller companies. With channels, they can gain influence and declare for war in ANY channel, so instead of 11 possible territory options, they would have hundreds to pick from.
I agree, but the way the game is set up now, territory ownership is meaningless. Wars are a lot of work to set up and run, so much so most companies don’t bother. Unless AGS is makes major changes to how territories work (and that’s harder than implementing server channels) the maps are going to get pretty static/boring with most players just doing just OPR and PvE, like they already are now.
The one benefit to territory ownership is gold income, and there are already hundreds of posts here and on Reddit complaining about how unfair and broken it is, how companies exploit the gold, control trading posts, and ruin servers’ economies. That needs to be fixed regardless of server channels, but if the devs are going to distribute the wealth like what was described earlier, then that just fits in better with the channel system. Split up all the income and be done with it. Then there’s no extra benefit to certain territories or what channel they’re in. Channel relevance becomes something the community creates, like hardcore PvPers fighting over channel 1 or Spanish-speaking companies gathering on channel 5 so they fight for control of that channel specifically, etc.
I agree dealing with 200+ channel maps is probably too much, but it could just as easily be 20 maps, with channels 1-10 all sharing the same territory owners, 21-30 the same, etc. With war mechanics being so bad right now, there currently aren’t a lot of companies wanting to war, but even 20 maps means 220 territories to pick from, and it would be very easy to browse through 20 maps to see what’s available.