I dont think fuel is necessary to a WW2 simulator.zyankali89 wrote: Thu Nov 03, 2022 9:24 am I am currently playing my first grand campaign as Axis. It is the end of May '42 and I am within the last preparation steps for my summer offensive. My fuel reserves are dangerously running low. Gauging from the metrics with current consumption I should run out of fuel in 4-6 months. That is why I chose to aim for Maikop and other Caucasian oil fields to secure the ability to wage (mobile) war in the future.
Now I just read on the forum that there are no adverse effect of low fuel reserves since there is a hardcoded, guaranteed reserve that makes it impossible to run out, even if you continue to use more fuel than you produce.
If that is really the case, there is no point in implementing production cycles, resources and factories in the first place in this game. Why did the devs go such a long way researching all the different factory and resource locations, production mechanisms etc. if there is no strategic meaning of it whatsoever?
Don't get me wrong: This is a fantastic game, one of my favorites of all time. But I think the devs wasted a huge opportunity here. On the one hand, historic accuracy and immersion are what makes this game so much fun. But on the other hand the prerequisites of war, the strategic objectives of warfare itself are neglected. Oil played a dominant role in the war. Some even say, Barbarossa itself was a war for oil. I do not feel this at all in the game.
Long story short: Dear developers, please abolish the invisible minimum fuel reserve, thereby increase the importance of oil (and possibly other resources) and hence make strategic planning mandatory. Thank you!
Hitler infact didnt not need oil and attacked the Caucasus to seize the vital areas of Grozny (to form SS chechen divisions which have 99 morale)