General Winter - sounds like a faction.
Meanwhile in
Advance Wars...
Campfires are destructible, so creating one then creates a target for your opponent. Building them is a tactical/strategic decision. So is deciding when it's worth risking a squad potentially freezing to accomplish an objective.
To carry your argument to its logical conclusion, we should get rid of the resource sectors because we want the challenge to be our opponents, not a random circle on the ground somewhere.
Except that a feature like territory sectors allows for more decision making, which adds depth. Cold Tech also does that. If you don't like how it adds depth, that's fine, but there's no need to make generalizations about people and their preferences, especially when its rude and inaccurate.
I still can't see how his argument can be extended in this way. Your troops won't die from not having captured a point (not directly at least), but they will most certainly die in a blizzard if there's no source of heat nearby.
The other issue is the fact that the blizzards most often favor the player who currently controls more sectors. It is much harder to capture territory during a blizzard than it is to defend them and having certain maps where the one who is currently winning gets this advantage and other maps where he doesn't is strange.
The mechanic makes being the one who holds certain areas when reaching an arbitrary (<- this word is the biggest problem) point in time is an additional advantage and this isn't good.