I usually play the game in Single Player, I just don't like the ranked games, (reasons: small maps)

I think I played all the scenarios available in the game, but they are ok... Stardock need to do something better with scenarios. (More interesting story per scenario) What about a Multi-map scenario? will that be possible?

I am also Waiting for an automatic matchmaking for medium, large, and epic maps.

A Vulkan version won't affect player counts.

Lowering the hardware requirements and increasing skirmish replayability is the key.

Remember Homeworld: DOK? It's at lower numbers and that has the Homeworld license.

Giving away DLC would be a fast way to end development on Ashes and move to a different project.  It's DLC that funds development and it sells well.

I think you will be waiting a long time, you would need many many times the current MP community to support that.

Not directly relevant but it is a shame more of the top ranked players don't to custom games, but for a few exceptions they mostly just do 1v1.

If a Vulkan port was made, then you open the door to Linux, Apple, and other platforms, which would bring in more people.

Using Vulkan also does make the game more playable on older hardware, since it is faster, then it can work with lower spec machines.

A random skirmish generator would be pretty cool!

Well guys dont know about others, but i have given up on AoTS because:

1) Balance issues (i hadnt been here for 2 months now, but i dont think it got better). 2 races is not enough cause always there will be a dominance by one of them over the other;

2) Repeatative gameplay (every game ive played was like "well been through that scenario, seen that");

3) Lack of content (single player is getting boring after a while, and i dont actually care for mp). You can say to me "hey, what content do you want from a RTS game?" Ill just point in a direction of sc2, where blizzard managed to do wonders with RTS genre via atracting casual players and actually making it fun to play. Although i didnt liked sc2 gameplay, but the content via allied commanders mode/campaign/maps/mods is a lot better for a casual player as myself (i cant really remember last time i played sp or mp map in sc2, but i do frequently play allied commanders mode cause its fun);

4) Large amount of useless (in my view) DLCs. I did not enjoyed a single scenario mission that came with core game, so im not interested in buying some more. The map selling is something you shouldnt make money with in a RTS game IMO;

5) Devs are actually breaking promises. AoTS was advertised as massive strategical RTS game. Where does the "massive" part come along? Almost all of the sp/mp games are limited in time due to early agression being the best tactical solution there is. And cmon, 1/2 bombers/aircrafts wining a game in a "massive RTS"? Even the larger maps do not give you any sense of massiveness. I do remember these positionings of AoTS - "command thousands of units, ten thousands of units". Didnt seen it in game even once, and believe me i tried. 

About that "strategical" part. Micro everywhere. Mismanaged your units in the beginning by 1 sec, lost a production node, and instead of starting with 2 of them, you start with one and pretty much lost half of the game. Same goes for "early agression gank type attacks" by aircraft. 

Ive been following AoTS developments since last december when i bought the game, and i did had some high hopes for it, but sadly all that AoTS got to provide is a nice technical solution to a next gen gaming. Thats all. I know there was a debate on wheather the game is considered "finished" or not. I do think it is finished, but it is just not fun imo. 

Sadly that a lot of my friends have given up on AoTS too for similar reasons. And i dont actually think a "sale" of some sort will help.