HOI4 Dev Diary - Ally Down Under

[rcbricker33]

http://www.americanforeignrelations.com/O-W/Oil-Oil-and-world-power.html

even this one states that today only Saudi Arabia makes the top three between Russia and the US.

http://www.marketplace.org/2011/04/20/business/maps-tough-oil/short-history-oil-1900-2010

there are more. It is pretty well known that the US was the dominant Oil producer through about 1950.

 

[Zarathustra_the]

And your still missing the point. The British relied upon Persian Oil exclusively. See the settelment of Iraq and and Jordan. Also oil production in Saudi began in 1938. The entire British War Machine was run on Oil from Persia the fact that Persia gives less than 100 oil, compared to the 1,000 or so that America gives is the issue. 26 Oil from Iraq is just stupid, should be at least comparable to Malaya's Rubber. Even in 1944 there was a shift in oil production, with Churchill and Roosevelt dividing up the Middle East. See https://books.google.com.au/books?i...PAhUJnZQKHVS6DS0Q6AEIJTAB#v=onepage&q&f=false

1944, Churchill sent a telegram to insure that Roosevelt was aware that some were concerned with an American British war if America sought to deny Britain her Oil Assets in the Middle East.

In the Great Crisis volume 1, Churchill as the First Lord of the Admiralty agrees to the move towards the Oil Navy based on British control over the Iranian Oil Reserves. This precipitates the Queen Elizabeth Super Dreadnoughts. Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, all possessed substantive oil reserves being exploited from the early 1930s at the latest, and from 1908 at the earliest that was such that Britain never felt the need for American Oil Exports. That the middle east has bugger all oil is a travesty.

 

[Balesir]

I agree with @Zarathustra_the on this. The point is not that the USA should not have the most oil, it is that Persia (Iran) should have more oil, proportionately, than it does in vanilla at present. At the start of the War the First Lord said words to the effect that "as long as we hold Suez I can supply the whole of the navy from our Persian wells. Many of the wells and refineries in Persia belonged to British companies, so their supply was assured (i.e. Britain should have high trade influence with Iran/Persia).

This whole issue fed into why Britain invaded Persia when Germany/the USSR threatened in 1941 (operation Countenance).

 

[Zarathustra_the]

Iraq as well, they took Iraq and had total military access from 1932 onwards after the end of their mandate rule that had been from the end of the Great War.

 

[Alex_brunius]

America was not the largest producer, rather it was the largest self-contained consumer of oil and that is what made their economy so strong.

Even in 1950 USA produced 5-6 million barrels of oil per day out of the global total of 10 million barrels, so America was indeed the largest produced by far with more then half the global production. And they were even more dominant then that in the 30s and 40s...

Iran on the other hand produced around 0.2 million barrels of oil per day, not even 10% of USA, which is also the case in HoI4.

Iraq was about half of Iran, again the same thing as the resource numbers in HoI4 say.

It's almost as if they have based the oil production number in the game off the Historical numbers?

Some data I found while googling:

http://forum.axishistory.com/download/file.php?id=384035&t=1

Source: RML. Vol XXI. Nro 80. March 1941. Acc to user on Axis history forum.

 

[Axe99]

Even in 1950 USA produced 5-6 million barrels of oil per day out of the global total of 10 million barrels, so America was indeed the largest produced by far with more then half the global production. And they were even more dominant then that in the 30s and 40s...

Iran on the other hand produced around 0.2 million barrels of oil per day, not even 10% of USA, which is also the case in HoI4.

Iraq was about half of Iran, again the same thing as the resource numbers in HoI4 say.

It's almost as if they have based the oil production number in the game off the Historical numbers?

Some data I found while googling:

http://forum.axishistory.com/download/file.php?id=384035&t=1

Source: RML. Vol XXI. Nro 80. March 1941. Acc to user on Axis history forum.

I can't comment on the historic numbers of oil production, but given production figures bear little resemblance to the use of oil (let alone gameplay), I'm not sure these are so helpful. There's no question Iran and the Middle East were important sources of British oil, and in-game Iran in particular is underdone here. It's not a huge gameplay issue as long as the US stays friendly, as they've also got oodles of the stuff to trade until the late-game resource crunch, but it does undervalue the strategic important of Iraq and Iran (which, in game, are neither here nor there - it doesn't take terribly long to build synthetic production levels equivalent to what Iran produces in-game, and while I'm guessing, I'd wager this would have been a far harder task historically.

It's not a biggy in my view (not least because it's easy enough to mod more oil in, although I suspect modding in the relationship between Britain and Iran re; oil will be trickier), but I think it'd be nice if the strategic value of the middle-east was a bit better reflected in the resource balance in-game (at the moment, the middle-east seems mainly to be a Soviet punching bag when Stalin runs out of other things to do).

 

[Zarathustra_the]

The other issue is the quality of the Oil. There is a reason for such a significant shift away from US oil production, the quality of Middle Eastern Oil is higher. In Abbadan, the British were extracting a specific quality of oil for the production of Aviation Gas. Remember Crude production figures also include low quality crude that can only be used in the production of Kerosene and other low quality sources. Furthermore, I would be careful of looking at contemporaneous figures. In the 1930s, though America was the highest producer of Oil, Venezuela was the highest exporter. The Persian Oil in these calculations are not included as it was counted as British domestic production, and thus much less of it was exported.

 

[terminalstatus]

Excited!

 

[Asakhra]

With all this talk of annexing and/or puppetting my home country in Australia's focus tree, I must say I'm quite interested to see what GLORIOUS NATION New Zealand's focus tree will look like. Do we get to puppet Australia? Carve off Tasmania as a protectorate? Or perhaps just go after all the Pacific islands?

 

[Sir Garnet]

Dateline: Australia

"Prime Minister, we've been invaded!"
"What? Good God, by whom?"
"Those treacherous Kiwis, Sir."
"Blackguards landed just before first light, did they?"
"Indeed, Sir, but three weeks past."
"Three weeks! Heavens! How - where? Why were we not informed?"
"They seized Tasmania, Sir. No one noticed until today."
"Very well then - not so surprising then. Could have been worse for us - anywhere else."
"And, Prime Minister, it shall surely a great deal worse for them when the fleet keeps them interned in Tasmania until they surrender."
"I'm loathe to admit it, but I must admit I feel sorry for the poor devils."

 

[shnukshnuk]

Manchukuo wasn't overlooked, it was deliberately cut. It ain't coming back outside some of the mods unless something major changes. I'm certainly planning on copying the Commonwealth framework over to the Co-Prosperity Sphere in mine, but it's very bare-bones at the moment.

well the devs did hint at it coming back so you never know

 

[shnukshnuk]

Manchukuo and further improvements to workings of puppet states would be prime material for an expansion focused on the land war in Asia, which is sure to come. I'd bet it will be the next one.

yep i sure do hope so. the pacific and its proper actual nations are barely existant. Mengkukuo should actually control more land then it currently has and get formed by japan rather then being there from the start

Manchukuo would be japans greatest ally and a powerful puppet

they also need to sort out the puppet mechanics

 

[Broletariat90]

yep i sure do hope so. the pacific and its proper actual nations are barely existant. Mengkukuo should actually control more land then it currently has and get formed by japan rather then being there from the start

Manchukuo would be japans greatest ally and a powerful puppet

they also need to sort out the puppet mechanics

The devs will do whatever the hell they want as long as people buy it. I mean you seem to be someone who likes historical accuracy and your on probation. Honestly, I say ditch these guys and look at other games. That's what I've done.

 

[adam_grif]

Dateline: Australia

"Prime Minister, we've been invaded!"
"What? Good God, by whom?"
"Those treacherous Kiwis, Sir."
"Blackguards landed just before first light, did they?"
"Indeed, Sir, but three weeks past."
"Three weeks! Heavens! How - where? Why were we not informed?"
"They seized Tasmania, Sir. No one noticed until today."
"Very well then - not so surprising then. Could have been worse for us - anywhere else."
"And, Prime Minister, it shall surely a great deal worse for them when the fleet keeps them interned in Tasmania until they surrender."
"I'm loathe to admit it, but I must admit I feel sorry for the poor devils."

The Kiwis would love it here in Tasmania. Tasmania is like a less-mountainous New Zealand geographically. Less Earthquakes too. Not like the desolate scorching wastelands of the mainland.

(Posting from Hobart)

 

[Alex_brunius]

The Persian Oil in these calculations are not included as it was counted as British domestic production, and thus much less of it was exported.

We can actually be 100% sure that your "Persian Oil" is included in Iran's number in that chart, because "British domestic production" is not even listed at all on the top 25, while Iran is top 4 ( a similar position which they enjoy in the game ).

There's no question Iran and the Middle East were important sources of British oil, and in-game Iran in particular is underdone here. It's not a huge gameplay issue as long as the US stays friendly, as they've also got oodles of the stuff to trade until the late-game resource crunch, but it does undervalue the strategic important of Iraq and Iran (which, in game, are neither here nor there - it doesn't take terribly long to build synthetic production levels equivalent to what Iran produces in-game, and while I'm guessing, I'd wager this would have been a far harder task historically.

I agree with you that UK can't get out as much oil as they could historically from the territories ( due to how trade works where iran only exports half their oil and to many others ). But I don't agree that the amount of oil in the middle east is underrepresented compared to historical numbers.

If you include the oil in Caucasus/Baku the area actually has more oil then any other place in the world except for USA.


Another issue here is that USA's production has been nerfed alot compared to historical for balance reasons, which means that they end up with relative more oil then they can consume, compared to other nations like UK. So I do also agree with your points that resource and oil usage for various production tasks does not make a whole lot of sense in the game.

But the solution to one part of the game (oil consumption) being badly balanced compared to historical is IMHO not to destroy historical balance in other areas that are accurate (oil production). This can only lead to a less historical game, even if it feels better balanced.



Another thing to keep in mind was that the political situation in the area was unstable, and in 1941 UK and Soviet backed forces had to intervene to secure control of the oil in both Iran and Iraq. If you have alot of oil that is available for free for UK from this region it would also make the game less historical.

 

[Axe99]

I agree with you that UK can't get out as much oil as they could historically from the territories ( due to how trade works where iran only exports half their oil and to many others ). But I don't agree that the amount of oil in the middle east is underrepresented compared to historical numbers.

I'm not saying that the amount out of Iran is necessarily incorrect or out of proportion (not my wheelhouse), but I do know that Britain could do far more with the oil it got from Iran and other ME sources than it did historically - that's what I was getting at by it being underdone - so not having a go at the amount, but more how that amount works in a gameplay sense, which actually runs nicely into.....

Another thing to keep in mind was that the political situation in the area was unstable, and in 1941 UK and Soviet backed forces had to intervene to secure control of the oil in both Iran and Iraq. If you have alot of oil that is available for free for UK from this region it would also make the game less historical.

...which is a very good point and they absolutely did . However, in HoI4, if I'm playing as the UK I don't worry at all about what's happening in Iran, beyond possibly making sure Raj's border is covered if Iran gets rolled over. If I think Germany (or the Soviets, if that's who I'm fighting) will take Iran, I don't worry about the oil at all - in-game terms, it's virtually insignificant. That's what I'm kind of getting at - if there was some way for that resource relationship to be modelled in-game, it'd make things a bit more interesting (although it's probably a tad tricky to do). My best guess would be that it's a combination of less oil getting out of Iran, and the oil consumption model (presumably, if the oil production numbers are on the money) not modelling the domestic needs quite like it should (for example, I expect far less of the US oil was available for trade than there is in game) - but that's just a guess. Just trying to think how to perhaps make that trade/resource dependency relationship a bit more interesting/existent.

Also, sorry if I sound a bit blunt as well, a bit off and sleep deprived - you're making good posts .

 

[Gamer_1745]

Part of the problem is the lack of fuel in the game. What is the service life of an aircraft? In war 6 months? a Year? and then in Peace time? When you build an aircraft & build it's fuel it is likely using up oil too much at the start of of it's life & not as it needs it. And with tanks & trucks? Even more so with ships!

I don't know if they can get it right without a good fuel system in the game.

 

[Alex_brunius]

If I think Germany (or the Soviets, if that's who I'm fighting) will take Iran, I don't worry about the oil at all - in-game terms, it's virtually insignificant. That's what I'm kind of getting at - if there was some way for that resource relationship to be modelled in-game, it'd make things a bit more interesting (although it's probably a tad tricky to do)

I actually think the amount of oil that's present there is pretty significant even in HoI4 terms. ~70 in Iran and ~35 in Iraq is about 100 oil. That's nothing to sneeze at, and more natural oil then all of the European Axis controls even if they take all of Europe. It also represents about 13 Civilian factories traded away, or many years of Civilian production for the 20 Synthetic Refineries that can produce that kind of oil.

Then multiply that benefit by 2 if you can deny it to your enemy and keep it for yourself.

Part of the problem why it doesn't feel that significant IMO is that Synthetic Refineries with the excavation techs can give you hundreds of oil as UK or as Germany, so the importance of the natural oil gets a bit downplayed. And as already mentioned the lack of fuel consumption which means the only impact oil has ( if you can get the other resources ) is a -30% production output on your reinforcements. It's important but it doesn't always feel that way or a least doesn't feel quite as important as it historically should be.

 

[Axe99]

I actually think the amount of oil that's present there is pretty significant even in HoI4 terms. ~70 in Iran and ~35 in Iraq is about 100 oil. That's nothing to sneeze at, and more natural oil then all of the European Axis controls even if they take all of Europe. It also represents about 13 Civilian factories traded away, or many years of Civilian production for the 20 Synthetic Refineries that can produce that kind of oil.

That does sound a lot, but once you factor in that each NIC is pretty much guaranteed to use one oil (and 2 if it's building a BB) and same for any MIC building (almost any - see random note below) aircraft, and any factory building mechanised equipment or trucks. Assuming Iran and Iraq are exporting half their oil (the situation at the start of the game) that's 50 oil the UK might be able to get via trade, and it'll be using half of that on day one (21 NIC, plus say half of the 14 MIC being spent on fuel stuff, and no BBs in production yet). If the UK decided to through that NIC into BBs, and build all aircraft, trucks and tanks, it could exhaust the Middle Eastern fuel supply on day 1. I haven't done the research, but that doesn't 'feel' right.

Even moreso though, it doesn't feel right that say the USSR wanted to invade Persia, the UK would go "well, I can get 20 times as much for the same cost trading with the US, so what do I care?", which is what it should do in-game, but that'd be quite the stretch from how Persia was viewed during the time period. Again, it doesn't 'feel' right. Sorry I don't have a more scientific argument.


Random note below:
I noticed when doing a quick skim through the equipment files for oil costs - by the look of it, the jet strat bomber only costs aluminium, tungsten and rubber - it doesn't need oil to fly or be built - not sure if deliberate or not (or if I've just missed something - not entirely improbable!)

 

[Balesir]

Hmm. Something I sent @podcat as a pm was a model for supply analogous to the one we used for AoD that works with an "ink splot" routine, working out from ICs (the capital link is no longer required). If something similar were also used for oil - working out from oil production (or reserve holding?) supply areas - that might make a difference. The location of the oil would then be relevant as it would determine the convoy requirements, and for the British naval elelments in the Med and the Indian Ocean the sources in Persia would be a lot closer. That would change the strategic value of the middle east oil, maybe?