Reviewed 11 October 2026. The historic case files retain their original source links and depth datums. Regional geometry is interpreted; these scenes are not digitized seismic lines, measured formation tops or surveyed trajectories. Game readings, mechanical responses, tuning and consequences are synthetic.
| Case | Evidence represented | Limits |
|---|---|---|
| Royalite No. 4 | Cable-tool drilling; folded cover and faulted Turner Valley antiformal stack; fractured Mississippian carbonate. | Exact fold, thrust and formation coordinates are illustrative. Bit drift and correction are simulated, not the recorded 1924 survey. |
| Leduc No. 1 | Wilson No. 2 rotary rig, Devonian carbonate discovery and core evidence. | Carbonate buildup and overburden geometry are schematic. No exact stand capacity claimed. |
| Atlantic No. 3 | Period rotary rig and porous/vuggy D-3 reef with fracture/loss pathways. | No arbitrary foothills thrust train. Cavern positions are not mapped observations. |
| Lodgepole | Nabors 14E directional/coring context, 3,002 m casing and documented 3,051 mMD Nisku top. | The pinnacle shape and path are interpretive. Lower section has an explicit scale break; rig stand capacity is not verified. |
| Macondo | Deepwater Horizon floating semisubmersible, marine riser, channel–levee sands within mudstones. | Water column compressed; channel locations not an exact reservoir map. Pressure transition does not become an invented fault. |
| Ixtoc I | Sedco 135 floating semisubmersible and loss-of-circulation context. | Lower lithology remains unresolved in the case evidence. No invented reservoir or fault map. |
| Montara | West Atlas jack-up, sandstone reservoir and near-horizontal well. | Leg-supported rig rather than a floating platform. Shape/fault and trajectory are illustrative; depth axis tracks reported MD, not a surveyed TVD section. |
| Kola SG-3 | Superdeep turbine coring; volcanic–sedimentary rocks over Archean gneiss/amphibolite; high temperature and sidetracks. | Foliation, fracture and branch positions schematic. No sedimentary oil-reservoir cartoon in basement. |
Rig artwork is an artist reconstruction. Documentary photographs and inquiry diagrams guide its silhouette and machinery; unrecorded dimensions, paint and site layout are illustrative. It is not an archival photograph or a certified engineering drawing.
| Case / rig | Documented basis | Reconstruction limits |
|---|---|---|
| Lodgepole 1982 · Nabors 14E | ERCB D84-9 §§3.2, 3.4, 5.4–5.5 and Appendix A6: kelly, rotary table, swivel, hose, travelling block/hook, clad monkeyboard, mud tanks and degasser. Nisku coring needs an actual core assembly in the replay. | Exact derrick height, stand capacity, manufacturer, transmission and paint are not established. |
| Leduc 1947 · Wilson No. 2 | Alberta Heritage documents a 47 m steel derrick, transported in pieces. The earlier wooden depiction is replaced. | Detailed equipment arrangement and colours remain illustrative. Atlantic shares period steel artwork with no claim that its rig was Wilson No. 2. |
| Macondo / Ixtoc / Montara | Four-column twin-pontoon Deepwater Horizon, older Sedco 135 semi, and three-leg cantilever West Atlas beside a separate wellhead platform receive distinct scenes. | Dimensions and deck layouts are illustrative. Sedco 135 hull details require further primary drawings; no modern dynamic-positioning claim is made for Ixtoc. |
| Kola · Uralmash 4E → 15000 | Researcher review and site photographs guide the narrow grey clad early tower and broad enclosed yellow later tower. Programme equipment changes at 7,263 m. | Installation year is not inferred from inconsistent photograph credits. Tower dimensions, turbine rates and thermal responses are not measured operations. |
| Amoco Pacific Brazeau River · 1977 | ERCB D84-9 Appendix 3 records 6 December, 3,311 m, 25% H₂S, 28 days and rig destruction. The inquiry identifies swabbing while tripping and frozen equipment. | Depth datum and precise formation tops are unresolved; intermediate checkpoints and rig layout are illustrative, not a reconstructed log. |
| CNRL Sinclair / Hythe · 2010 | ERCB investigation records repeated mud-motor stalls, a kick, casing-bowl blind-flange leakage/erosion, blowout, fire and specialist intervention. | The exploratory well was confidential. No public TD, named reservoir or exact rig model is invented; the replay uses scenario percentage. |
| Ocean Ranger / Hibernia J-34 · 1982 | Royal Commission: eight-column moored semi, storm and ballast-control failures. The well was properly secured. The playable challenge concerns marine stability and emergency readiness. | A marine rig accident, not a blowout. Scene progress is a simulated storm sequence, not drilling metres; no invented geology or real rescue guarantee. |
| Case | Documented basis | What is reconstructed |
|---|---|---|
| John Shaw · Oil Springs, 1862 | The Oil Museum of Canada identifies John Shaw and 16 January 1862. County method records describe a human-powered treadle and flexible springpole, rope chisel, wooden hoisting tripod and bailer. Oil came from fractured Middle Devonian limestone near the top of Dundee; period packed pipe and tanks eventually contained the flow. | Reported depths differ: about 62–63 m. Displayed contacts, low-relief structure, treadle settings, crew/tool delays and decisions are illustrative. No steam engine, rotary drillpipe or modern BOP is assigned to the well. A photograph of a different torpedo-shot well is not presented as Shaw’s gusher. |
| Blake et al Steen · 1980 | ERCB Appendix 3: 7 February, 70 m, unexpected shallow gas sand, 25 days, sweet hydrocarbon loss not estimated and major rig fire damage. | Formation name, exact sand top, rig identity, pressure, casing programme and control operations are unknown. The gas-sand fabric illustrates the recorded mechanism, not a measured log. |
| Renaissance Petmt Edwand · 1980 | ERCB Appendix 3: 1 December, 648 m, circulation loss and split surface casing, three days, 566 × 10³ m³ sweet gas and a burned rig. | Printed location 7-10-61-17 (W5M) is retained as printed; locality remains unresolved. No named formation, casing-shoe depth, measured pressure or actual contractor rig is invented. Period rotary artwork is shared and illustrative. |
Intermediate incident depths and alternative decisions are original game scenarios. They do not claim to reproduce the actual crew’s actions or provide an operating well-control procedure.
Human springpoles have stroke and treadle-rhythm controls, with a hoist/bail review. Cable rigs have percussion-stroke demand and a hoist/bail review. Rotary rigs separate bit loading from rotation. Scientific coring rigs separate feed from turbine circulation demand. Floating rigs add heave/riser/station-keeping readiness; jack-ups instead review leg support and air gap. Reviews spend game reserve and cannot be repeatedly farmed without further drilling.
Campaign rigs are fictional programme assignments: compact singles for heavy-oil/thermal settings, doubles for intermediate programmes and triples for deeper programmes, with floating rigs for offshore exploration. These are not claims about the contractor or exact rig used in any real field. Modern singles can have substantial capacity. Double/triple describes racked stand length during trips; it does not automatically prescribe depth capability or connection frequency.
Prairie and interior-basin laterals use low-relief geometry and facies variability rather than gaining a foothills thrust maze at high levels. Foothills and selected compressive settings use folding/reverse faults; offshore fault-block cases use normal faulting and gentler drape. All individual fault locations, throws, dips and fold wavelengths remain fictional prospect geometry. Existing formation names, coal distributions and basin research are retained in the regional notes.
See each historical case file and the regional expansion notes, world research, Prairie/coal research and frontier research for the supporting geological evidence.