One thing about the New Foliage confuses me a little bit. Until now the game consistently had Taiga Tags for all Coniferous Trees, whether Temperate or Boreal. Same tagging was consistent with Animals too. The Globe also used the same logic. However with the addition of the California Redwood I think we received our 1st Coniferous Tree with Temperate Tagging? Is this intentional or a mistake like the Bristle Cone Pine?
Just checked it in the Game and that one is only Taiga. I also skimmed through all Trees with the Temperate Tag just to make sure. I only found the following:
1) Aleppo Pine
2) Cyprus Tree
3) Korean Pine
The first two are Mediterranean so that really doesn't count. They are handled differently in the Game. Mediterranean Trees in the game have Grassland and Temperate as far as I know. Deciduous-Coniferous distinction is not made about these. Such distinction isn't made about Tropical Evergreen Trees either. Those all have Tropical tagging.
The last one is a Special Case. Korean Pine frequently grows in Temperate Deciduous Forests. So it makes sense for those to have Temperate. But they still need Taiga in addition. This confirms that California Redwood is really the first of its kind, unless I'm missing something or this wasn't an Intentional Decision by Frontier.
All this I agree with. It also caught me by surprise. It definitely is a first in the game and the best option appears to be swapping 'Temperate' for 'Taiga' to alleviate consistency concerns. The current tag suddenly transforms a west coast tree into an east coast staple.
Similarly the Carpathian Mountains Skirt which is also Taiga on the Globe is in the Temperate Category. This is again very confusing. It would raise Consistency Concerns if this becomes a Trend with new Packs.
Temperate Carpathian Mountains Map in the same Update kind of signals it was intentional though. Which is worrying.
However, I don't think the second issue you mentioned is that big a deal. You can always assume the area you are building in is in a transition zone. In this case, you can assume the mountainous 'Temperate' skirt is in the
montane zone (judging by the mixed deciduous and coniferous trees) somewhere in the foothills of the Carpathian Mountains or at the edge of the Po Valley in Italy, with the Carpathian Mountains/Italian Alps in the distance (the actual subalpine zone that is fully coniferous - or 'Taiga' as defined by the game). Realistically mixed forests are often categorized under temperate broadleaf, so there isn't anything scientifically wrong there either. Place your pin at the edge of a mountain range on the globe and you are golden.
That being said, these transitional skirt options still shouldn't outnumber the regular ones that define a biome level. 'Temperate' isn't one of these though, as regular lowland broadleaf forests make up the majority of 'Temperate' skirts. The same can be said about 'Tropical'. Only the SA version (and its reskin) represents a transition zone. However, the same thing cannot be said about 'Tundra'. This biome definitely suffers from the issue of skirts with marginal representation outnumbering skirts with average conditions.
This is because most 'Tundra' skirts in the game now feature forests or trees. By definition tundra means above the tree line, or at least the forest line. Tundra transition can have some trees (which are still above the forest line, but not the tree line), so not every single 'Tundra' biome skirt in the game should be completely barren like the Antarctic version, but they shouldn't have actual forests either.
This means the generic or vanilla 'Tundra' skirt we always had could pass for the tundra transition, particularly because the trees in that skirt are sparsely placed Dahurian larch trees;* while "Tundra Europe" and "Goodwin Arctic Research Park" would not, since they have forests. Now we have 1 proper 'Tundra' skirt with no trees, 1 tundra transition with some trees and 2 with forests, resulting in the majority of 'Tundra' skirts in the game having forests or trees, when the majority should be barren/with low lying shrubs, and none should have forests.
One could argue that the internet is full of images and panorama of the western Norwegian coastline/fjords with forests, which could have been the inspiration behind the design, but then again, the places pictured are actually part of the
temperate conifer forests biome, which only degrades into alpine tundra with elevation.
Since we can't roll back this decision, the best alternative would be adding two or more barren versions for NA and Eurasia - one of these featuring low lying shrubs and bushes, the other just grass. This would tilt the balance in favor of skirts with more average conditions that define the biome. As for the Antarctica skirt, there should be
no grass (tall or short), as less than 2% of the continent can support plant life. Currently that skirt is better representative of the High Arctic tundra than Antarctica, but sadly we can't pick that one when building in the Northern Hemisphere.
*Dahurian larch is unique in that it is the northernmost tree in the world and can form sub-tundra forests, as well as have creeping forms and singular vertical trees growing above the normal/conventional tree line to an extent.