WDYWTNTF said:
I think you forgot to mention how problematic it is for the rest of us playing the normal game,who cant,or wont go to Jontunheim.
There must be a logical explanation that the kingdoms have a limited number of towns,and this would suggest that the sheer numbers of players going to one kingdom, all with the same objectives ,is going to overload the system and cause problems.
I wouldn't say that number of towns is main reason for more than one kingdom.
Other MMO games also have the same concept, and reason for this concept is both that it would not be trivial to scale the game if more than million users is in one kingdom, meaning that theoretically data on more than million users is in one database, and they are all connecting to one group of servers.
Although it is possible to handle high loads with groups of servers, fact is that technical requirements and cost needed to handle large groups of users is smaller if groups are limited to few tens of thousands, which today could be handled inexpensively by small set of servers, e.g. 2 or 4, depending on configuration and size.
But there are also other reason for concept of "kingdoms": kingdoms can both be limited to start time of kingdom, and to area (country or continent) where users are from.
Second is today less important, but it was more important a decade ago, when you both collocated servers on continent where users are from, so network latency would be smaller, and you could even offer only one language for UI for users of some server.
First is more important, kingdom starting time. As time goes by, number of users which stopped playing rise. For game publisher it is not smart decision to delete inactive accounts after a while. Why?
Simple - if player comes back, he wants to find its account how he left it. He does not want to need to go through pains of user registration once again. Also, any stuff he earned, or paid for, which is still there, protected by something like vault or granary or permanent storage facility, that needs to be there. After 8 hours, day, week or year. Otherwise, game publisher could lose possible income from users who paused gaming a week or month or 6 months, but will come back eventually.
So, game publishers needed to find way, to find solution to have all inactive accounts around for at least 1 or 2 years, and at the same time, to give new and active players enough active players around them to make game interesting. Some inactive players are OK, they are food for players with small armies, but active players need other active players around them.
Clans or guilds or alliances need active players.
Kingdoms limited to start time of playing is solution for both problems, problem of large mass of players accessing one set of servers, in this way you limit number of users using one set of servers.
Remember, in Vikings: War of Clans new players have possibility to jump to old kingdom in first 14 days for free. Even later, they could jump once in a month. Teoretically, all new users could go to one of old servers. 
I'm playing this shortly, but it seems to me that kingdoms in Vikings are recycled only when there is no active players there. Some MMO games had seasonal servers, which lasted for predefined number of months, e.g. 6, 9 or 12 months. Your main account wouldn't be deleted, but you could choose which server or kingdom you want to play at. Without Drakkars. 
Regarding Jotunheim, I partly agree with Yellow. There are parts of game that introduce you slowly to the game, and after a while you know everything by heart, although you did not read any manual.
But in any game there are parts which are intended for skilled players, which either know how to read manuals, and where to find them, or that are around so long, that they learned everything, either by experience, or from other players, or from manuals.
Jotunheim is that. You need to have 500.000 energy on your hero before you start attacking the monster. You need to know coordinates. You need to be there in time to be in first or second row, not in third row from monster or further away. You need to be advanced, so your every attack makes some real damage. You need to be advanced, so your heros do not walk, they need to run! 
Yes, for attacking trolls in Jotunheim it does not make sense to have one hero.
Finally, besides having 500.000 energy on your hero, you need to have at least 500.000 energy more in stack. One million is better. Two or more millions, you have enough for 2 or more trolls, and you have chance to be in first 10 attackers on list. If you make more than 50 attacks (my current max is 31) on one troll, you are superhuman. Or you are playing this in room where servers are. 
Jotunheim in short:
Jotunheim is part of game intended for advanced players (palace 32-35 with great armies) showdown, trolls and ghosts and there to show less advanced players what this game looks like when you grow up. :)
Now, what I agree with Yellow:
Jotunheim by design is expected to be hard on servers.
If you conceived it, you need to try to make it as perfect as it can be.
To me, it seems that they (Plarium) used common set of servers for Jotunheim, like servers for any other kingdom. I know I guess in the dark, as I'm not Plarium employee, and I never had time or wish to do network traces or any kind of debugging of game to try to find out in more details how all of this is built.
I'm simply talking from experience of playing more than three MMO's, and having some expertise on web apps, as I'm working in the same field. No, I'm not working for competitor. I'm too positive to be working for competitior, and I'm too negative to work for Plarium. :)
I would suggest that Plarium would need to make Jotunheim technical resources better, if possible. Technically, always is possible. Financially, it is, or it is not feasible.
