TeMagic
Sergeant
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: In a tranch overlooking the James River

Economics of war... a Confederate brigadier-general's study

Fri May 04, 2007 1:46 pm

As Brig. General Frederick "The Bullet" Magic was promoted to take over the Department of the Treasury, located in Richmond, following the note of resignation from the incumbent Secretary of the Treasury, sir Christopher Gustavus Memminger, Magic soon set-up a war-economy based on the principles of total-war and total mobilization.

Memminger had served as Secretary since February the 21st, 1861 until September the 29th, following the battles of Alexandria (a major confederate victory). As the confederate casualties in the battle amounted to some 20 000 men, it was soon apparent for the Davis' administration that they did not have the means to replenish the losses in any effective way, while continuing the buildup of forces in the West. Also, the major Confederate victory in the field (G. T. Beauregard was the biggest hero of the South,) didn't seem to result in the end of the conflict, as many officials believed it would. "One big battle and it will all be over" was the norm of thinking, on both sides of the conflict.

Well, Lincoln obviously had other plans, as the war dragged on for several months. A new strategy was needed. Jefferson Davis held a cabinet meeting on the 25th of August to confer with his advisors and secretaries on what would need to be done in order to win the war.

His friend and military advisor, General Robert E. Lee suggested that since the union had struck the first blow since the southerners were forced to fire at Fort Sumter, and that the union had since then invaded both "neutral" border-states of Missouri and Kentucky, the war should be brought to the enemy.

Inspector-General of the Army, General Samuel Cooper voiced concern over the fact that while the union blockade of southern port were at that point in time totally ineffective, and war-equipment and supplies were pouring into the southern ports, there simply was no means availible to afford even more equipment.

Sir Memminger had already raised taxes on the population and issued war-bonds in an attempt to raise assets, and while those measures were successfull, it didn't provide the necessary means to finance an invasion of the north. Being a moderate conservative (like the rest of the cabinet at the time), he was reluctant to take more drastic measures to raise the funds needed. No orders of impressments, and no un-backed fiat currency were to issued under his leadership of the Treasury.

After confering with his advisors, President Davis forced Memmingers resignation and appointed Brig. General Magic to lead the combined War-and-Treasury Department. In this role, Magic started a major campaign of impressment throughout the land (upsetting many governors, most notably governor Brown of Georgia (who threatened to secede from the Confederacy) and governors Rector and Pickens of Arkansas and South Carolina.

In addition to requisitioning war-material, the population were subject to harsh taxation, and the printing press in Richmond was working overtime, printing paper money for the government. Inflation was soaring.

The new assets were quickly put to use though, as the Secretary of the Navy, sir Stephen Mallory noted in the official records of the Confederacy, dated november 11th 1861, 28 new blockade runners had either been commisioned or were in construction, 12 new ironclads were being fitted out and 6 frigates (excluding two being built in Liverpool).

The army also grew substantially, as the army of the Potomac now numbered some 60 000 men, the Army of the Shenandoah another 30 000, and the Army of Tennesse over 80 000. In the Trans-Mississippi, the department could call upon 12 000 men. As winter came and the Confederate armies were readying for winterquarters, the spirit in the military leadership was great, as they knew that the spring of 1862 would bring the end to the war and complete victory for the South, as campaigns were being drawn up for simultanious invasions of Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland and Arizona...

And here's the question, having printed money at every possible moment, and using the surplus to increase war-manufacturing capabilities, I now have an income of heavy war-materials at over 100 per turn (I think 130 + blockade runners), I have nearly 300 locomotives and 100 riverboats for transporting supplies, and my armies as of December 1861 are as noted, my inflation of course is rampant, and I won't go into details of the number, as I'm sure even the Treasury Department doesn't quite know the figures. However, I now have an army that I think equals or even outnumbers the federals at some sectors of the front, I have a navy that can make a stand against the enemy, and my only shortage of resources are really manpower... What is the long-term downside of using this strategy? (Appart from the suffering of the population. Though I'm quite sure the Davis' administration will devalue the CS Dollar following an end of hostilities and repay the war-bonds at the promised interest rate)

Well, I'm looking forward to the campaigns of the spring of 1862.

PS: I know this was a long and out-drawn post, I just needed some time away from AACW, but not too far away :sourcil:


Edit: just thought I'd add a link for those economists out there interested in history: http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/weidenmier.finance.confederacy.us

Stoneage
Private
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:27 am

Fri May 04, 2007 4:04 pm

Very Interesting. I would like to read more about how your game progresses, it looks like you may have stumbled on a game breaking exploit for the Confedracy.

jimwinsor
General of the Army
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 7:07 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Fri May 04, 2007 4:13 pm

To answer, I think it's really important to know exactly where your inflation is. I imagine it's rather high. The down side to your massive printing/spending spree is that as prices for everything go up, your economy becomes dependant on further inflationary measures. A vicious cycle develops, I would think.

If your invasion of the north does not succeed quickly, your own economy will drag your national morale down in due time, I imagine (?)

User avatar
Spharv2
Posts: 1540
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 5:39 am
Location: Tallahassee, FL

Fri May 04, 2007 5:27 pm

If you start losing battles, or even winning battles with high casualty rates, you could be in trouble, since your replacements will be expensive. I find it hard to keep up with my replacements at times during a particularly active campaign season. Basically, you're in the "Win fast or you'll be in trouble" area. So long as you can win this one pretty quickly, you should be all right, though the post-war period would be hell for a while. :) I'm not sure if the rate of inflation is taken into account in the victory level or not.

TeMagic
Sergeant
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: In a tranch overlooking the James River

Some statistics from current game

Fri May 04, 2007 5:33 pm

My inflation is of late february 1862 app. 40%, so I really can't say that I see a major difference in the prices of war commodities at the moment. What used to cost 10 000 dollars (i. e. the locomotives now cost 14 000, not too bad, considering I rake in an additional half a million bucks every turn...)

Victory is 680 and morale is 112. I've yet to lose a single town or city, and my force disposition is as follows (late feb. '62)

Trans-Miss: Two divisions under Van Dorn : total app. 20 000 men
AoT: Two corps, seven division: app. 86 000 men, with several brigades forming in TX, LA, AL, TN and MS
AotSh: app. 35 000 men
AoP: app. 59 000 men
Richmond reserve: app. 20 000 men

these numbers are front-line combat troops, not militia and not locked units.
Of course I have no idea about union strength, but the union has FoW advantage and no attacks have been made, and the last I saw of Grant, he stuck his tail between his feet and ran away from A. S. Johnston's men at Bowling Green. Now I've finally gotten Forrest to join me, so I've started a destructive campaign in Kentucky, destroying ALL railroad there with Forrest and 3 other cavalry regiments. Other than that, I'm just waiting for 4 depots to be built (building them with captured union supply trains) and waiting for 4 supply trains of my own to be built (+ another two to build a depot in indian land) and waiting for the snow to melt... Then the bloody battles can begin.

Though I will say that I think the Confederacy is in MUCH better shape in this campaign than they were historically, despite a much higher inflation than historically. (price inflation in the Confederacy was app. 100% in the late summer of 1863, after Gettysburg and Vicksburg, then hyperinflation came, and prices began to skyrocket)

Transport capacity:
railroad 284 river 134 ocean 0
(note these are maximum capacity, not availible, due to troop transportation)

Production figures:
Money 95 Manpower 29 War Supply 126 General Supply 2382 Ammo 644

Not bad figures for late february 1862, with the industry expanding, and more locomotives, riverines and supplydepots being built, along with several more brigades and artillerypieces. I also have app. 10% or more of all replacements availible.

As said, inflation is a staggering 40%!

In this campaign, there's been 3 major battles, all confederate victories near manassas/alexandria/harper's ferry, and a minor battle near Fort Monroe (which I attempted to lay siege to, but gen. Butler broke the siege, giving me some 6000 casualties to his 3500). This was in summer/early autumn, so I've had winter to prepare, and my armies are in good shape now. Only problem I have is a lack of corps commanders...

Playing the CSA, diff. Normal, Medium FoW bonus to the AI, and giving the AI longer processing time, + all availible AI manuevers (or whatever)

AI blue-water blockade is 0% and I've got heaps of brigs in both the guld and the atlantic. I'm not using the CSS Alabama or CSS Florida, though they are not locked, because I'd wait until they were actually constructed...

jimwinsor
General of the Army
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 7:07 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Fri May 04, 2007 6:13 pm

Hmmm, 40% higher prices in 1862 vs. a very secure military and morale position. Hmmm...

It would be interesting to play this out; perhaps printing money develops harsher penalties/lesser rewards in later years?

For now, the Union couter to the strategy would be to match the massive spree, exceed it, printing greenbacks itself as needed.

Which leads to another issue: Perhaps the Political, Draft and Financial choices the other side makes should be NOT be hidden from the other side? That way, if the CSA does go for broke like this, the Union can at least follow suit?

Seems like the massive national choices above would not be able to kept as state secrets from the opposing side. Newspapers would blurt editorials about worthless paper money and oppresive conscription. Thus they should be announced in the events section to BOTH sides, the turn after they occur.

This would go a long way towards curing an exploit (if indeed this is one).

Otherwise, we get a situation where BOTH players will be forced do this as a precautionary measure, to avoid getting surprise-outspent by the other.

TeMagic
Sergeant
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: In a tranch overlooking the James River

Fri May 04, 2007 6:23 pm

jimwinsor wrote:Hmmm, 40% higher prices in 1862 vs. a very secure military and morale position. Hmmm...

It would be interesting to play this out; perhaps printing money develops harsher penalties/lesser rewards in later years?

For now, the Union couter to the strategy would be to match the massive spree, exceed it, printing greenbacks itself as needed.

Which leads to another issue: Perhaps the Political, Draft and Financial choices the other side makes should be NOT be hidden from the other side? That way, if the CSA does go for broke like this, the Union can at least follow suit?

Seems like the massive national choices above would not be able to kept as state secrets from the opposing side. Newspapers would blurt editorials about worthless paper money and oppresive conscription. Thus they should be announced in the events section to BOTH sides, the turn after they occur.

This would go a long way towards curing an exploit (if indeed this is one).

Otherwise, we get a situation where BOTH players will be forced do this as a precautionary measure, to avoid getting surprise-outspent by the other.


I totally and utterly concur with your statement, considering the fact that Lincolns call for volunteers was well known, same as Davis, that the conscription acts of '62 and '63 were well known in the north, and that the southerners were well aware of the fact that the union started drafting men to the military ranks. Issuing bonds, printing money etc was also probably well known (as in the south at least it was the congress that authorized the flushing of more funds into the market, and Davis was a strong believer of an open government, so the newspapers probably reported on it, as can be seen by the staggering loss of the CS Dollars' purchasing power, even while southern morale was still high.

BTW. for me, this does indeed seem like a exploit at the moment, though I'm not sure how it will unfold. It'll be interesting to find out.

jimwinsor
General of the Army
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 7:07 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Fri May 04, 2007 7:45 pm

BTW I found some historic inflation figures, for both sides:

CSA:
May 1861: $1 gold = $1.10 Confederate currency. (10% inflation to start?)
Jan 1862: $1 gold = $1.25 " "
Dec 1862: $1 gold = $3.00 " " (200% inflation!!!)
Jun 1863: $1 gold = $7.00 to $8.00 " "
Jan 1864: $1 gold = $20 " "
Dec 1864: $ gold = $34 to $49 " "
Mar 1865: $1 gold = $60 to $70 " "

I recall when booting up the '64 scenario, CSA inflation was 40%. Seems according to these statistics it should have been 1900% or something (?!)

USA:
Jan 1862: $1 gold = $1.03 US currency (3% inflation)
Dec 1862: $1 gold = $1.32 " " (32% inflation)
Jan 1864: $1 gold = $1.55 " " (55% ")
Jun 1864: $1 gold = $2.06
Aug 1864: $1 gold = $2.59 (US peaks at 159% inflation)
Mar 1865: $1 gold = $1.79 (going down now)
Apr 1865: $1 gold = $1.46

Obviously neither side was shy about adopting inflationary monetary policies.

TeMagic
Sergeant
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: In a tranch overlooking the James River

Update to current game

Sat May 05, 2007 5:16 am

[RIGHT]Inspector General,
Samuel Cooper,
War Department,
Richmond, Va[/RIGHT]


To: Gen. Robert E. Lee, advisor to the staff of President Davis:


Dear Sir,

The preparations for our invasion of the North continues. Thanks to the new textile industry in North Carolina and the shippent of shoes from the factories in Texas, I am happy to report that our entire army is well clothed in brand new uniforms and boots are readily availible. New Lorenz rifles have been bought from Austria and are being destributed to our troops as I'm writing this letter. Also a shipment of Whitworth rifles have arrived from England and will be supplied to our sharpshooter regiments.

We also have an app. 10-15% of our entire army held as replenishments, as we are sure to see some heavy fighting this coming campaign.
All corps (with the exception of the forces in Department No. 3) have signal and medical comapnies attached.

Secretary of the Navy, the honourable sir Mallory can inform that new ironclads are being built in Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana for the defence of Mississippi River, and Lieutenant-General Polk (Polk's Corps, Columbus, Ky) report that the depot at our fortress of Island No. 10 has been built and are being stockpiled with supplies and munitions. The Mississippi river will be impregnable.

Sir Mallory has further instructed me to inform you that new ironclads will be laid down as of next month for the defence of the Tennessee and Cumberland Rivers.

I hope that your conferring with President Davis regarding the strategic manuevers required for the actual invasion plans are going as smoothly as possible. I have full confidence with you, and are sure that once the plans have been worked out, that you will join the army, to carry out the orders.

May god be with us.

Your friend and servant,


General S. Cooper
.sign.



Attachment:

[CENTER]OOB of the Confederate Armed Forces, 30th of March 1862[/CENTER]


[CENTER]Eastern Theater (Department No. 1):[/CENTER]

Army of Northern Virginia
3 corps, 9 divisions of infantry: app. 10 000 men each div
cavalry division, 10 000 men, reserve division 10 000 men
total app. 120 000 men
General G. T. Beauregard commanding (temp.)
The men are eagerly awaiting your command, General Lee

Troops are located on the Alexandria-Leesburg-Harper's Ferry -line. Reserve division at James River to prevent incursions from Fortress Monroe.


[CENTER]Western Theater (Department No. 2):[/CENTER]

Army of Tennessee
3 corps, 9 divisions of infantry: app. ~10 000 men each div
cavalry division, soon 10 000 men, reserve division fitting out
total app. 120 000 men (in another month)
General A. S. Johnston commanding
Troops are located (main force) in Bowling Green, Ky (2 corps), one corps in Columbus, Ky, and a reserve division at Forts Donelson and Henry


[CENTER]Trans-Mississippi Theater (Department No. 3):[/CENTER]

Army of the Trans-Mississippi
1 corps, 2 divisions of mixed infantry and cavalry: app. 10 000 men each
total app. 20 000 men + 6 regiments of natives under Cheif Watie
Major-General Van Dorn commanding
Troops are located (relieve force, led by Van Dorn) at Fort Smith, AR, with one division to relieve Brig. Gen Price's division at Jefferson City, Mo, and claim Missouri for the Confederacy. Recapture of Fayetteville and Welcome, Arkansas already underway.





EDIT:
Early april, 1862
Game options; July campaign, Normal difficulty, normal aggressiveness, medium FoW advantage to the AI. Infaltion as of early april, 43%. Union army hold following confederate territories (not including the border states):
Welcome, Ar,
Fayetteville, Ar
Fort Pickens, Fl
Fort Monroe, Va
All of Western Virginia, with the exception of Bath, Morefield, Romney and Harper's Ferry

In Kentucky, all of Western Kentucky is secure for the Confederacy and the state capitol is located at Bowling Green. Union will be driven out of the state in due time.
In Missouri, Price's forces are cut off at Jefferson City, with all other important areas of the state in Union hands.
Chief Watie has cleared the union from the Indian Territories.
Brig. General Sibley has secured Arizona for the confederacy.

I'd say it doesn't look bad... What do ya'll say?

User avatar
Stonewall
Posts: 267
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 4:33 pm
Location: Florida, USA

Sat May 05, 2007 9:19 am

I'd say it looks like you're doing well.

As for the strategy, its one I use myself. Inflation is not necessarily a bad thing. If you can use the added money to to build stuff early, you get longer to enjoy their use.

I've found inflation to be quite manageable up to a certain point. About 100% is where it starts getting tough.

I do suspect this strategy will soon go by the wayside as the Union ai learns how to effectively build and enforce the blockade. A strategy like this depends, in large part, on getting enough WS through the blockade runners to be able to spend the money on. If you're not getting any WS, there is no reason to use inflationary monetary policy since there is nothing to spend the money on.

My blockade running policy is to build 12 frigates as soon as possible as well as basic transport ships. Then rush the Gulf Blockade box and overwhelm the one Union blockade flotilla there. Then the transport ships and their large transport capacities can start working. Its usually in place by September 1861 starting in an April campaign.

I can pull 150-200 supplies/money per turn with this method. However, an effective Union blockade policy can easily negate this. And this kind of strategy would never work against a human opponent. There's simply too much risk.

Its equally effective for the Union to mass produce transports to send into the Atlantic shipping lanes.

TeMagic
Sergeant
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: In a tranch overlooking the James River

Sat May 05, 2007 10:58 am

Well, I didn't use the money to buy ships in the beginning, but rather to invest it all in my industry, seeing that home produced would be far better than being dependant on import through blockade running.

I think it is a sound strategy, but it all dependt on wether I'll be able to defeat the union in 1862. The union has 68 morale at the moment, and I need to bring that down to 40...

AP514
Private
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 9:37 pm

Sat May 05, 2007 2:45 pm

Stonewall wrote:My blockade running policy is to build 12 frigates as soon as possible as well as basic transport ships. Then rush the Gulf Blockade box and overwhelm the one Union blockade flotilla there. Then the transport ships and their large transport capacities can start working.
I can pull 150-200 supplies/money per turn with this method. However, an effective Union blockade policy can easily negate this.


Well, I read in another POST that Transport Ships "DO NOT" bring in more supplies..they are just EZ'er for the union Ships to spot and KILL.


AP514

TeMagic
Sergeant
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: In a tranch overlooking the James River

Sat May 05, 2007 6:21 pm

yeah, that's true. Building transportships for as the south is a waste of resources, as the brigs do the same job, yet have an easier time escaping combat. I hope tis gets fixed in a patch though, as the larger transports should be able to haul more, if they're undetected.

User avatar
marecone
Posts: 1530
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Zagreb, Croatia

Sat May 05, 2007 6:22 pm

Emphazis on IF :sourcil:
Forrest said something about killing a Yankee for each of his horses that they shot. In the last days of the war, Forrest had killed 30 of the enemy and had 30 horses shot from under him. In a brief but savage conflict, a Yankee soldier "saw glory for himself" with an opportunity to kill the famous Confederate General... Forrest killed the fellow. Making 31 Yankees personally killed, and 30 horses lost...

He remarked, "I ended the war a horse ahead."

TeMagic
Sergeant
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: In a tranch overlooking the James River

Sat May 05, 2007 6:41 pm

marecone wrote:Emphazis on IF :sourcil:


Definitely!

Stoneage
Private
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:27 am

Sun May 06, 2007 12:43 pm

Stonewall wrote:I'd say it looks like you're doing well.

As for the strategy, its one I use myself. Inflation is not necessarily a bad thing. If you can use the added money to to build stuff early, you get longer to enjoy their use.

I've found inflation to be quite manageable up to a certain point. About 100% is where it starts getting tough.

I do suspect this strategy will soon go by the wayside as the Union ai learns how to effectively build and enforce the blockade. A strategy like this depends, in large part, on getting enough WS through the blockade runners to be able to spend the money on. If you're not getting any WS, there is no reason to use inflationary monetary policy since there is nothing to spend the money on.

My blockade running policy is to build 12 frigates as soon as possible as well as basic transport ships. Then rush the Gulf Blockade box and overwhelm the one Union blockade flotilla there. Then the transport ships and their large transport capacities can start working. Its usually in place by September 1861 starting in an April campaign.

I can pull 150-200 supplies/money per turn with this method. However, an effective Union blockade policy can easily negate this. And this kind of strategy would never work against a human opponent. There's simply too much risk.

Its equally effective for the Union to mass produce transports to send into the Atlantic shipping lanes.


I dont think WS is going to be an issue using this strategy because the original poster said that he has heavily invested in industry and has a war supply level of 130 per turn plus what ever the blockader runners bring in. Also all the counter strategies mentioned depend on the AI being coded to respond to a non historical turbo charged economy.

jimwinsor
General of the Army
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 7:07 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Sun May 06, 2007 9:08 pm

I think a good tweak to make would be to make printing money both progressively more inflationary and/or less rewarding. And maybe greater morale/VP penalties too.

I was looking at the 64 scenario and noticed that despite starting at 40% inflation, the CSA could keep hitting the print money option for a half million bucks, at a 4% hit every time.

Prinitng money is already a pretty good deal, IMO. As the game nears completion, it gets even more lucrative, as you know have less turns to endure the added inflation penalty.

Maybe each push of the button should raise the % by one? For example, the second time you sign the option, you get +5%? The third, +6%? Etc..

And/or diminishing the option yield by the current inflation rate. For example, doing it while at 40% inflation would yield only 60% of what you were getting the very first time.

This will help to make the pain inflicted by the option more exponential (as it was historically) rather than linear (kinda how it is now).

---

Now, here's another totally different economic suggestion: Have the Conscription options yield some money too.

This is actually historical! Both sides, to varying degrees (Union more than CSA) allowed draftees to buy substitutes or pay communtation fees. These communtation fees added up, and actually brought both sides considerable revenue each time a draft was held.

Just to give you an idea...I actually found a page in the ORs detailing how lucrative a revenue source this was for the North throughout the war; I assume it was the same in the South, perhaps just a bit less so:

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=moa&view=50&root=%2Fmoa%2Fwaro%2Fwaro0126%2F&tif=00695.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DANU4519-0126

User avatar
pasternakski
Colonel
Posts: 341
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 6:50 pm

Mon May 07, 2007 12:50 am

As always, Jim, you are right on the "money."

oldspec4
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 1:14 pm

Mon May 07, 2007 2:26 am

pasternakski wrote:As always, Jim, you are right on the "money."


Yep...totally agree. Some great ideas here.

TeMagic
Sergeant
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: In a tranch overlooking the James River

Mon May 07, 2007 6:02 am

Since I think it might be of interest to the community, I've decided to make an AAR for my game. Havent' gotten far though, since I've got a few chapters to write before the war starts, and then a couple to catch up to where I am in the game. But it's a start. Then we'll see if the "go for a quick victory"-strategy might pay off.

Another thing of notice, coming back on-topic, it seems that the inflation actually DECREASES over time, so now in my game where my inflation is app. 40% (which I can't say I feel the effects of at all), my military and morale position (which has already been pointed out) is STRONG, and what little (I'd say little, you guys might dissagree though) inflation I have is actually decreasing, opting me to actually print more money, to keep it at around 40%

EDIT: It says in the game manual (or in the game itself, can't remember which) that printing greenbacks is a drastic measure, and should only be used as a last resort, well as such, the 4% inflation penalty is hardly enough... I do like the suggestions raised in previous posts about how to increase the penalties, but then again, I'm not sure if I'm qualified to lend my opinion, since it's still only early 1862 in the game, but from loading up the '64 campaign, I can see that my inflation in '62 is the same as the CSA is experiencing in the '64 campaign.

User avatar
Stonewall
Posts: 267
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 4:33 pm
Location: Florida, USA

Tue May 08, 2007 1:22 am

AP514 wrote:Well, I read in another POST that Transport Ships "DO NOT" bring in more supplies..they are just EZ'er for the union Ships to spot and KILL.


AP514


That has not been my experience. I build transports en masse and once the Gulf Blockade box is cleared of Union warships, they start to rake in the money. As said before, when the ai learns how to reinforce that blockade box, this tactic will be stopped as the CSA can't usually afford to fight the Union Navy on a large scale.

User avatar
Charleson
Corporal
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 7:25 pm
Location: Detroit

Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:11 am

bump

Has there been any change with increasing the penalties for repeatedly printing greenbacks? I went through the readme file for the last couple of patches but nothing jumped out at me.

Thanks!

User avatar
Stonewall
Posts: 267
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 4:33 pm
Location: Florida, USA

Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:22 am

Charleson wrote:bump

Has there been any change with increasing the penalties for repeatedly printing greenbacks? I went through the readme file for the last couple of patches but nothing jumped out at me.

Thanks!


No. Nothing has changed. Although, this strategy is less useful that is has been in previous patches.

morgana
Conscript
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:11 am

Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:30 am

The obvious solution here is to remember that inflation is a function of time, not a one-time rise in the price level. Over the short to medium term, which is four years in this case, expectations tend to fuel inflation. If the CSA government, for example, in a wartime emergency, prints money one would expect the price level to quickly adjust to a new level based on the expansion of the money supply.

However, in the short term, it doesn't stop there. A rational person would expect as the war continued that the government would sometime in the future print more money. If the price level jumped from 100 to 140 over the past 3 months, a rational person expects the price level to jump to 196 over the subsequent 3 months. This behavior continues until the government does something to convince people that they are going to practice restraint in the future, a very difficult task in a wartime economy.

So I think the proper way to model the inflationary effects is to quickly raise the price level to whatever level is appropriate at the printing of money, and then have prices continue to accelerate at that level only dropping slowly back as time passes and people begin to believe that prices will stabilize in the future.

For example. CSA prints money. Instantly the price level rises to 110. The next month, though no more money is printed, the price level rises to 119. The month after that 118. This continues until the point that if money is not printed for a long enough time, the price level begins to deflate to the level appropriate to the new money supply.


Also remember when modeling this to take into account V, the velocity of money. If the press prints $1000 and buys a cannon, the cannon maker pays his suppliers and workers who spend the money again to buy materials and food and so on and so forth. If V is 5 in a wartime economy, which is to say that it is spent five times in a year, the actual effect of printing $1000 is to add $5000 to the money supply.

A great source of data for this, though obviously it doesn't begin its study until 1865, is Milton Friedman's great work, A Monetary History of the US.

alexander seil
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 11:22 pm

Mon Jul 23, 2007 3:39 pm

I'm not sure if there would be any deflation in this situation. The game's production mechanism is very simple - things are just produced at a fixed rate (which can be modified with investments). Once money is printed and prices adjust, there's really nowhere else this can go - the production is the same, and there's more money around, so it stands to reason that prices should be higher. The only part of this missing from the equation is the fact that printing money should not just increase prices, but also bring up money income across the board, which would over time decrease the inflation penalty. Although, I suppose it's easy to make an argument that this is already done through the engine's deflationary mechanism.

Return to “AACW Strategy discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests