I want to expand on this topic because it is one of my more sour gripes about the game. Firstly, I am definitely influenced by my Mediterranean-pilled climate preferences. I am not a personal big fan of winter's snow lasting 5-7 months (depending on elevation & latitude), as I personally experience winters from December to February. That isn't to say that I believe temperate climates should have snow longevity conform to a Mediterranean climate and weather cycle.
All of that lengthy introduction is just to say, I want to settle down in a location that is slightly warmer than the temperate/default world setting. No problem, most would think to themselves, "Just change your starting climate to 'Warm'". This is where the second disappointment kicks in. At least in my experience playing in the multiple "Warm" worlds I have started, the starting climate is warmer than my preference. Most "warm" worlds are too hot for snow to form during the winter, ergo In both world types, I have to travel 5-10k south or north (temperate and "warm" respectively) in order to reach my desired climate pattern.
Personally, I don't agree/disagree with the sentiment that any "x" starting climate setting is too hot/cold. Temperate winters lasting 5-7 months may be accurate to the real experiences of temperate regions. Many "warm" regions on Earth never experience any snow year-round. However, I wish there was greater control or at least expanded options as to where I can start my world in the realistic climate distribution model. Currently, you are shoe-horned into long winter starting climate vs no winter starting climate, when players should be able to pick a climate with a "moderate winter". (It is not lost on me that many VS players may already consider temperate winters to be "moderate", but I can assure that not all feel this way)
Why is this so important? Couldn't you just spend a few in-game days traveling to a location with your desired climate?
I'm sure many have already identified why this may be frustrating to players or have personally experienced this problem in your games. When you generate the world, all of the story content for chapters 1 & 2 will have generated based on the world spawn. This means, that depending on where those structures spawn, you would be forced to travel a far greater distance than if you were to just stay at spawn. You could remedy this by reducing the distance that these story locations spawn, but you then risk the chance of simply running into them during your 5-10k trek either North/South. Most importantly, the only thing that all of this additional traveling in order to reach your desired climate is doing is bloating your world size & somewhat wasting your time. I say somewhat, because you can technically find/forage for materials during your travel, but if you don't find anything then you don't find anything. Plus, many people wouldn't WANT to spend the first few days of a world walking in one direction straight. Let me tell you, as someone who has done this in several worlds so far, it is not nearly as fun as it sounds. That is also several in-game days where my inventory is severely limited, ergo limited on how many materials I can collect, can't start clayforming b/c it takes up too much space in the inventory, etc. etc.
These are all minor gripes, but it is something that I hope gets addressed soon. Not that I don't find temperate or hot starting climates fun, I've played in both and can say they both have their ups and downs, but I wish it was easier to get to that perfect sweet spot in the middle.
