Rushing fuel points without connection

I have noticed in 3v3 around rank 100 that people on my team tend to rush the fuel point closest to us without even capping the points behind it. Why?
Why would someone play defensively around the fuel point when even after capturing it, you get no fuel due to it being cut off. Also people tend not to be bothered with capping in general (VPs or ordinary) in high rank team games. One person in team will always end the game with around 2-5 captures and maybe higher damage output while one will end up with 20+ captures and lower damage.
I have also noticed that I usually lose games where stuff like that occurs. People ignore ordinary points, rush fuel and camp on it while the enemy lets you have your point and just circles around you, or your teammates just focus all their forces on the fuel point, farm damage and low manpower bleed but you end up with 0 munitions and even less fuel and 0 VPs (I'm usually the one with 20+ captures in teamgames).
Why is that the general notion in high rank team games?

The absolute income does not matter in the initial phases. What matters is how much more you get compared to your enemies. You can rush important points with the first 2, maybe 3 squads while your team mate or the fourth squad of yours caps the map. Most faction have a really hard time driving you out of garrisons in the first 5 min, so as long as you deny the resources you are good to go.

OKW sturms can drive out rifleman squads in garrison and Volks molly too (since it burns it's much better than one nade that can easily be dodged if paying attention). OST has the long range no fuse nade that can easily drive you out. Especially since 50% of audio cues do not play (GRANADE!) or less. I've lost many a unit due to no audio being played on nade use (or playing with Asians/US and having 3 sec latency). Soviets can easily drive out with molly too. US and UK don't really have anything to drive out effectively. Still, absolute income in early game can dictate the rest of the game, especially munitions. Most players tend to ignore munition points and then flame OKW OP! OST OP! when they can easily nade and molly your positoins, while you can't (or they just leave like it happened last 5 games in a row, 2 wins -- 3 loses --> 5 abandones, rank 100 xD).

I'd argue that absolute income matters at each stage of the game. And that's how I usually play USF. 3 Rifles fight while echelon caps what it can. I usually win games where I have munitions income early on cause it allows rifles to equip bars to fight medium range since they lose long range (green cover vs green cover directional) to everything except CQC units and no MG42 grens (that's where MG42 comes into play as a counter).

I don't know, I have noticed a trend that if I win early game and have a lot of capped positions, it's easier to transition into next stages. This is of course 3v3. 1v1 is vastly different. 2v2 a bit less but still different.

OKW sturms can drive out rifleman squads in garrison and Volks molly too (since it burns it's much better than one nade that can easily be dodged if paying attention). OST has the long range no fuse nade that can easily drive you out. Especially since 50% of audio cues do not play (GRANADE!) or less. I've lost many a unit due to no audio being played on nade use (or playing with Asians/US and having 3 sec latency). Soviets can easily drive out with molly too. US and UK don't really have anything to drive out effectively. Still, absolute income in early game can dictate the rest of the game, especially munitions. Most players tend to ignore munition points and then flame OKW OP! OST OP! when they can easily nade and molly your positoins, while you can't (or they just leave like it happened last 5 games in a row, 2 wins -- 3 loses --> 5 abandones, rank 100 xD).

I'd argue that absolute income matters at each stage of the game. And that's how I usually play USF. 3 Rifles fight while echelon caps what it can. I usually win games where I have munitions income early on cause it allows rifles to equip bars to fight medium range since they lose long range (green cover vs green cover directional) to everything except CQC units and no MG42 grens (that's where MG42 comes into play as a counter).

I don't know, I have noticed a trend that if I win early game and have a lot of capped positions, it's easier to transition into next stages. This is of course 3v3. 1v1 is vastly different. 2v2 a bit less but still different.

OST riflenades only come after 40 fuel which is about 3 minutes into the game and becomes even longer when the fuel is contested, molotows come even later. And Sturmpios only work well against garrison when there is no or only one window on one side, otherwise you will likely lose or at the very best are forced into a bad trade. Many team maps have garrisons or cover positions near the fuel point (and if not many mainlines can build it). If you manage to contest it for even two to three minutes, that's 14-21 fuel your opponent does not have. And if you manage to get the income of that for one of those minutes, you gain another 7 fuel, giving you an effective 21-28 fuel surplus over your opponents.
The tactic is not as popular in 1v1 because it is easier to just ignore your own fuel point and take cut offs from your opponent to deny his resources and even it out again. Relative income is the whole reason why cutoffs exist: because you can cause a lot of resource damage by only neutralizing them and keeping them neutralized. You don't need to get the income from that point to gain an advantage.

I do not understand your points about absolute income. If you manage get ahead of your opponent for 50 fuel, munitions or whatever, you will get your tank/mine/upgrade earlier and manifest the lead. You do not get an advantage by having an high absolute income, you get it by having a higher income than your opponent.

OST riflenades only come after 40 fuel which is about 3 minutes into the game and becomes even longer when the fuel is contested, molotows come even later. And Sturmpios only work well against garrison when there is no or only one window on one side, otherwise you will likely lose or at the very best are forced into a bad trade. Many team maps have garrisons or cover positions near the fuel point (and if not many mainlines can build it). If you manage to contest it for even two to three minutes, that's 14-21 fuel your opponent does not have. And if you manage to get the income of that for one of those minutes, you gain another 7 fuel, giving you an effective 21-28 fuel surplus over your opponents.
The tactic is not as popular in 1v1 because it is easier to just ignore your own fuel point and take cut offs from your opponent to deny his resources and even it out again. Relative income is the whole reason why cutoffs exist: because you can cause a lot of resource damage by only neutralizing them and keeping them neutralized. You don't need to get the income from that point to gain an advantage.

I do not understand your points about absolute income. If you manage get ahead of your opponent for 50 fuel, munitions or whatever, you will get your tank/mine/upgrade earlier and manifest the lead. You do not get an advantage by having an high absolute income, you get it by having a higher income than your opponent.

There is truth and logic in what you're saying - no doubt about it. I'm saying it's from my experience that capping points and not rushing something (focusing on opportunity and flanking and retaking with flanks) usually led me to easier wins than playing the usual rush this and that and hold it. Also, I always ban maps that have lots of garrisons so winnekendonk and maps like that are my preference (redball, whiteball, mud... wide open maps).
Just some food for thought if you believe me and my experience.

In most team games, fuel lies on a central location with direct access to VPs so there is going to be heavy grind around it. Also the unit density on these game modes is so high, that the equilibrium line or "front" naturally lies on these points.

Thus, containing these locations do not offer only resources but strategic staging grounds for assaults. Waiting for 30 seconds to cap with your 3rd-4th squad is not that important as getting to the frontline and building sandbags/ barb wiring your opponent's cover or hiding assault units for an ambush.

This has probably do with blobbing being an effective way of playing COh2