OP: yes that is best solution given the circumstances, with out redoing a lot of work for negligible improvements.
The best option is to have one router in the middle of the house doing all the wifi.
Adding more networks with different SSID's wont help unless you have practically zero reception. By adding more networks - even if on different channels - they will start to interfere with each other reducing all of there capacity. This is why people in apartments often get terrible wifi coverage even when beside the router.
if you want your device to be able to switch between AP's seamlessly you need to have AP's with Zero-Hand off, which basically means the AP will decide if they will broadcast/receive to/from you or not. Apposed to the device deciding which AP to connect to.
The best option is to have one router in the middle of the house doing all the wifi.
Adding more networks with different SSID's wont help unless you have practically zero reception. By adding more networks - even if on different channels - they will start to interfere with each other reducing all of there capacity. This is why people in apartments often get terrible wifi coverage even when beside the router.
if you want your device to be able to switch between AP's seamlessly you need to have AP's with Zero-Hand off, which basically means the AP will decide if they will broadcast/receive to/from you or not. Apposed to the device deciding which AP to connect to.