Question regarding fuel from Caucasus

[sdemonte]

I have isolated the Caucasus and have cut the last rail line that runs up north. By cutting this rail line will this disrupt fuel shipments and/or have any significant impact on the Russia’s fuel supplies?

Or do you have to actually take the fuel cities to stop the fuel shipments?

Thanks!
Scott

[jomni]

Wow! Good progress!  Can't comment on your question though.

[ComradeP]

If what applies to how factories work when you capture them also applies to how they work when you control them, factories need to be linked to a functional rail line to be able to send their production somewhere, so the fuel and oil production centers should begin storing fuel and oil.

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

If what applies to how factories work when you capture them also applies to how they work when you control them, factories need to be linked to a functional rail line to be able to send their production somewhere, so the fuel and oil production centers should begin storing fuel and oil.

I keep struggling with this one.

Baku is a supply source so all of the Caucasus oil centers, resource centers, manpower centers and factories are still linked to a Supply Source so they continue to work (per my interpretaion of the manual and an answer I received on the Question Thread). The logic seems to be that if the Germans capture the other supply center (Chelyabinsk), then Baku would continue to act as a Supply source and every factory etc connected to it via the rail net would continue to work so why should it not continue to work if it is simply not linked to Chelyabinsk.

The issue that bothers my head are the pools. I can even accept the fact that the nebulous pools are unchanged if one of the two supply sources are captured. But when there is no longer a rail link between the two it really bothers me that there continues to be only one nebulous pool equally available to anyone (factory or unit) who is connected to either of them.

Now complicating this question of the OP is the fact that there is still a functioning rail line connected to a functioning Caspian port the allows a connection via port to Baku so all of the Caucasus factories etc still have a supply connection to BOTH supply centers.

[Farfarer61]

There is a great story in "Hitler Moves East" by Carell about a Recce Coy in Armoured cars making it the furthest east of any Axis unit. The come in site of that rail line and destroy a large train of oil tanker cars, then heave to withdraw westwards.

[ComradeP]

That would be odd, there's no way the Soviets would've had the shipping to move all that fuel and oil through Baku and the Caspian sea.

[Korzun]

Hmmm. I would like to see a comment on this by the developers. I have just fired up the 42 scenario as Axis and capturing or cutting off the oil fields seems like a good strategy to me.

[ComradeP]

I've posted the question on the tester forum, and the answer thus far is that as long as there's a rail link between the oil/fuel production centers, a port, and a port connected to the rail network north of the point where you cut it off, units will still be able to use the fuel. I'm waiting for the answer on whether all of it is shipped by sea, or just a portion.

[ComradeP]

The official word is that there's no limit to what can be shipped through the functional rail/sea net, so it seems the only thing that cutting the rail line currently does is prevent the Soviets from moving reinforcements in by rail.

[molchomor]

ComradeP, surely cutting that rail line would affect support to the Sov. troops in the Caucasus ??