CAUCASUS OIL

[Aurelian]

Oil production at Baku decreased during the war. In 1942 only 15.7 million tons of oil were produced. In 1943 - 12.7 million tons, in 1944 - 11.8 million tons, and in 1945 - already 11.5 million tons.

[kg_1007]

I think , no offense, but it is ridiculous to assume that oil"manufacturing" can be transported, in the same way as a factory..oil must actually be A)discovered(not an easy thing, then B) successfully drilled(harder)..as an example, with far greater technology now in the 21st century, new discoveries of oil take, on average, 5yrs to actually have an output. To assume that the Soviets could simply transfer non existent "factories" (oil is not produced, hence the " " ) and then magically gain other oil at another unexplored site with no drilling equipment set up, etc..is incredibly fictional...NOW..having said that,...
The German armies who in reality reached the Caucasus in '42, would also have taken some years to actually show any gain from capturing oil fields, especially as the Soviets destroyed the only oil fields the Germans managed to get.
Second.. despite Europe being the primary theater, the United States had no ability in 1942 to transport anywhere near enough oil to fuel the Red Army...mostly American resources were aimed towards trying to assemble a force in Britain, and trying to push the British to launch an invasion of the mainland. Even with a great effort there, it still took many months for the US to have enough fuel delivered to supply several Corps on the island of Britain, whats more trying to fuel an army that dwarfed them in size(the Red Army)..any such effort by the US Navy would have far delayed their own landings, with likely far worse consequences for the Red Army.

[kg_1007]

ORIGINAL: Brandle

Can we use the editor to adjust and limit the other sources of oil on the map to make Baku and/or Ploesti more important?

Although I have not playted German yet, it seems like we dont need any more modifications to make their life harder.

I have done this, but really will require a lot of testing to see what impact it has..in general the logistics, along with everything associated with them, in this game is the weak point, despite that it is also very obvious that a great deal of work went into making them. I do hold out hope that it will improve through WiW, and then a "lessons learned" type of deal in a future WiE2

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: kg_1007

I think , no offense, but it is ridiculous to assume that oil"manufacturing" can be transported, in the same way as a factory..oil must actually be A)discovered(not an easy thing, then B) successfully drilled(harder)..as an example, with far greater technology now in the 21st century, new discoveries of oil take, on average, 5yrs to actually have an output. To assume that the Soviets could simply transfer non existent "factories" (oil is not produced, hence the " " ) and then magically gain other oil at another unexplored site with no drilling equipment set up, etc..is incredibly fictional...NOW..having said that,...
The German armies who in reality reached the Caucasus in '42, would also have taken some years to actually show any gain from capturing oil fields, especially as the Soviets destroyed the only oil fields the Germans managed to get.
Second.. despite Europe being the primary theater, the United States had no ability in 1942 to transport anywhere near enough oil to fuel the Red Army...mostly American resources were aimed towards trying to assemble a force in Britain, and trying to push the British to launch an invasion of the mainland. Even with a great effort there, it still took many months for the US to have enough fuel delivered to supply several Corps on the island of Britain, whats more trying to fuel an army that dwarfed them in size(the Red Army)..any such effort by the US Navy would have far delayed their own landings, with likely far worse consequences for the Red Army.

Oil *was* discovered. And exploited at Second Baku.

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: kg_1007

I think , no offense, but it is ridiculous to assume that oil"manufacturing" can be transported, in the same way as a factory..oil must actually be A)discovered(not an easy thing, then B) successfully drilled(harder)..as an example, with far greater technology now in the 21st century, new discoveries of oil take, on average, 5yrs to actually have an output. To assume that the Soviets could simply transfer non existent "factories" (oil is not produced, hence the " " ) and then magically gain other oil at another unexplored site with no drilling equipment set up, etc..is incredibly fictional...NOW..having said that,...
The German armies who in reality reached the Caucasus in '42, would also have taken some years to actually show any gain from capturing oil fields, especially as the Soviets destroyed the only oil fields the Germans managed to get.
Second.. despite Europe being the primary theater, the United States had no ability in 1942 to transport anywhere near enough oil to fuel the Red Army...mostly American resources were aimed towards trying to assemble a force in Britain, and trying to push the British to launch an invasion of the mainland. Even with a great effort there, it still took many months for the US to have enough fuel delivered to supply several Corps on the island of Britain, whats more trying to fuel an army that dwarfed them in size(the Red Army)..any such effort by the US Navy would have far delayed their own landings, with likely far worse consequences for the Red Army.

All true. But I hardly think the United States would have thrown up its hands and done nothing in response to Soviet oil shortages. It was well understood by the American leadership (except for perhaps Ernest King) that keeping Russia in the war was vital.

I would expect drastic changes in strategy in these circumstances. Perhaps no torch at all, for starters. (Those forces going to Persia, instead, to forestall any Axis movement in that direction.) Stalin might well extend an invitation to direct allied involved in the east front. (An offer had already been made, and ignored, along these lines in 1941.)

I simply do not understand this myopic attempt at alternate history where the Western Allies stick to the historic script while events elsewhere take a different direction.

[glvaca]

Common guys, losing Baku would have had serious effects on the Allied war effort. Be that in shifting strategy or the Soviets having to economize on gaz at least for several month if not years before the measures taken would have had full effect.

You mention no Torch. Torch was a serious drain on Axis resources. Not having one would basically make Normandy in 44 even more risky. Perhaps pushing the invasion back a year. If that aren't serious consequence I don't know what. If your counter arguement is now going to be that is out of the scope of the game, then I would argue it is not and the Axis should receive a decent increase in replacements and reinforcements when they capture Baku. The bloody place has to be worth something.

[kg_1007]

@ Flaviusx..
glvaca pointed out the key that I was saying, better than I did..I am not saying America would have thrown up its hands, or even that there would not have been another way found..what I am saying, is that it would have drastically altered the future course of the war. It likely would have taken until AFTER the war, even had the German side won, for THEM to have any benefit from Baku...but it would instantly have altered the Soviet side, and an attempt(you are correct, and attempts would have been made) to make up the lost resources on the part of the Americans, would have altered everything that happened in the west, and created many more serious questions there.
To assume that the western powers, or the Soviets, either one, was perhaps not giving 100% effort already, and had some magical point where..if they lost a city, NOW..they will give 100% to correct for it, is, I am sorry, just insulting and ridiculous...and even though I am certain that is not your intent, if you step back, and see your argument from a neutral perspective, that is what you are saying..So..the USA effort, already maxed out, was somehow still not "giving their all"..but if the Soviets lost Baku,..NOW they are going to give 100%?

edit: I also note this sentence.."I simply do not understand this myopic attempt at alternate history where the Western Allies stick to the historic script while events elsewhere take a different direction. " of yours as the same argument used by Axis supporters on this very forum, where it has been argued that if events in Russia (in game) take a different course than historical, why would one expect the same historic strategy(withdrawing units, TOE changes, etc) to be made by the (in game) German High Command.

[mooreshawnm]

ORIGINAL: kg_1007

... then B) successfully drilled(harder)..as an example, with far greater technology now in the 21st century, new discoveries of oil take, on average, 5yrs to actually have an output.

Regulation plays the majority of the role in that 5 year timeline. A country fighting for it's survival isn't going to have any procedures that slow production or create inefficiencies (or at the least these inefficiencies would be identified and eliminated ASAP). I know it borders on political and I appologize, but it is reality.

Shawn