Oil in T2k

[Legbreaker]

The beauty of T2K is it's an alternate reality. Who says the world has to be the same as ours up until some arbitrary event or date? Nothing wrong with having a few minor tweaks in the proceeding few decades to allow the game situation to make more logical sense.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

The beauty of T2K is it's an alternate reality. Who says the world has to be the same as ours up until some arbitrary event or date? Nothing wrong with having a few minor tweaks in the proceeding few decades to allow the game situation to make more logical sense.

Agreed. I'm not trying to push my version of events on anyone. It's just an option. But, at the risk of tooting my own horn, I think it pretty seamlessly reconciles RL events (Romania's strained relationship with the rest of the WTO, its economic links to China and the west, and the domestic unpopularity of Nicolae Ceaușescu and the Romanian Communist Party) with the v1 timeline, which culminates in the Soviet invasion of Romania, just 6-7 years after the RL Romanian Revolution. In any case, it seems a lot more plausible than Italy and Greece turning against NATO.

But then, I fall into the Reconcile with Canon camp. If there's a way to rationalize the unlikely so that it makes more sense, change implausible to slightly-less-implausible, then that's what I try to do.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Raellus

But then, I fall into the Reconcile with Canon camp. If there's a way to rationalize the unlikely so that it makes more sense, change implausible to slightly-less-implausible, then that's what I try to do.

As a group, that approach makes the most sense to me. Individually do whatever the hell you want, it's YOUR game world, but don't try ramming your opinion down other peoples throats and call it fact. That was the whole point of the "What is canon?" thread from about a decade ago that developed into a whole lot of butthurt.

[Raellus]

Who nuked the oil fields/refineries of Ploesti, Romania? Does canon specify?

The Soviets are cited as using tactical nukes in Romania first, to break Romanian resistance in September, 1997. However, it doesn't make a lot of sense to nuke a strategic objective that you have every intention, and realistic chances, of capturing.

I think it makes the most sense that the US did it. With Romania's organized resistance crumbling in the summer of 1997, and no realistic prospects of NATO forces recapturing Ploesti, NATO would be eager to deny its use to the Soviets.

But from Med Cruise, we know that oil production at Ploesti resumed some time prior to summer, 2000. That suggests tactical nuclear weapons were used, rather than strategic, and airbursts instead of ground strikes.

-

[Targan]

France? Deny the resource to everybody?

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Targan

France? Deny the resource to everybody?

Now that is a very interesting idea. I was so intrigued by it that I jsut double-checked the v1 history to see if the timing would line up. Unfortunately, I don't think it does. The Ploesti oil fields would have been under Soviet control when France enters the war in 1998. A French nuclear strike on Soviet-controlled territory (and Soviet troops in the area) wouldn't be taken too kindly.

Bummer. I wanted it to work.

[Legbreaker]

France wouldn't be about to publicise their involvement, and would anyone else really be in a condition to determine where the strike came from, especially if fired from a sub?
France's move into the middle east and Africa wouldn't have happened on the spur of the moment either. They've clearly had time to observe what's going on around the world and make plans. Very likely any overt move on their part would have been preceded by months of build up and covert action.

That said, I doubt it was them. More likely in my opinion the Soviets used low yield tac nukes on Romanian troop concentrations rather than infrastructure. We know that the Romanians took out at least one Soviet Division (the 280th) by ambush (albeit one wracked by desertions, etc). What better way to neutralise them than by making them glow in the dark? A handful of nukes is also a lot quicker than moving other units into the area for conventional operations and would be able to be carried out before the Romanians could disburse.

Hmm, evil thought - what if the Soviets used the 280th as bait? It was a mobilisation only unit and not exactly effective anyway.... Timeline probably doesn't work too well, but...