Earlier entente victory possible?

I am not really knowledgeable on the era so rather then asking the usual cp victory how could we have an early entente victory if possible?
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Sure, many ways

1) Ottomans neutral, lets supplies to Russia.
2) Bulgaria remains neutral.
3) USA enters after Lusitania in 1915.
4) France does not attack into A-L, but uses war plans from earlier years and counters the wheel of German Plan.
5) Russians encode battle orders in 1914.
6) Have A-H or Germany make a really dumb mistake.

There a lots of other ways. I doubt they Entente could win in 1914 or 1915, but it is easy to move up the November 1918 win.
 
Sure, many ways

1) Ottomans neutral, lets supplies to Russia.
2) Bulgaria remains neutral.
3) USA enters after Lusitania in 1915.
4) France does not attack into A-L, but uses war plans from earlier years and counters the wheel of German Plan.
5) Russians encode battle orders in 1914.
6) Have A-H or Germany make a really dumb mistake.

There a lots of other ways. I doubt they Entente could win in 1914 or 1915, but it is easy to move up the November 1918 win.

Its possible for the entente to win in 1914, although it might be a fairly limited victory. I.e. decisive defeat of the German army followed by a peace agreement that is essentially a small victory for the allies, say Serbia secured and enlarged, possibly A-L back to France, Russian Poland gains some land and the German fleet is seriously cut back. Best single POD would be what you mention above with the French using their earlier, more defensive plan and bleeding the attacking Germans white. Possibly coupled with a bit better Russian performance in the east.

Steve
 
One possible way to do this is to have the Germans screw up in all the right ways so that Tannenberg winds up an extremely expensive tactical victory for Sasonov, and by the time the Germans restore the line the political shockwaves of a Russian victory in the Battle of Allenstein will force the Germans to start overextending themselves faster. There's almost no means to turn the defects of Imperial Russia into a battlefield victory over Germany, but keeping Imperial Russia in the war and giving it a modicum more effectiveness goes a long way to making Entente victory in a shorter, less bloody fashion possible and probable. A set of expensive Russian victories in East Prussia to go with the victories at Gnila Lipa and Rava Russka will put the Central Powers in a set of tactical binds and may well lead the Ottomans to decide neutrality is the best policy, which further simplifies Russia's needs in the war.
 

Cook

Banned
Have someone competent as British Secretary for State for War instead of Kitchener for a start. As a serving member of the armed forces and not a Member of Parliament he should never have been considered for the position anyway and it he was unsuited and unskilled for the position.
 
If the Antwerpen nitrates aren't captured by the Germans, for whatever reasons, then the Germans will run our of shells in the winter of 1914 before the Haber properly becomes online.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Its possible for the entente to win in 1914, although it might be a fairly limited victory. I.e. decisive defeat of the German army followed by a peace agreement that is essentially a small victory for the allies, say Serbia secured and enlarged, possibly A-L back to France, Russian Poland gains some land and the German fleet is seriously cut back. Best single POD would be what you mention above with the French using their earlier, more defensive plan and bleeding the attacking Germans white. Possibly coupled with a bit better Russian performance in the east.

Steve

yes, you are right on limited victory, i was thinking of a full victory with harsh terms like the ToV. If the Germans perform badly in France in 1914 and the Russians a little better, then a limited peace deal looks very attractive to Germany, especially if there is a small sweetener that the Germans can sell to their public as a tie, not a loss. The difficulty is that the Entente and the PC seemed to be set on very harsh terms from the beginning. It is a combination of the power of the defensive combined with very overreaching leaders that allows the war to bleed Europe so white.

Did you have any ideas on a full victory for Entente that occurs before September 1915, say the first year of the war?
 
yes, you are right on limited victory, i was thinking of a full victory with harsh terms like the ToV. If the Germans perform badly in France in 1914 and the Russians a little better, then a limited peace deal looks very attractive to Germany, especially if there is a small sweetener that the Germans can sell to their public as a tie, not a loss. The difficulty is that the Entente and the PC seemed to be set on very harsh terms from the beginning. It is a combination of the power of the defensive combined with very overreaching leaders that allows the war to bleed Europe so white.

Did you have any ideas on a full victory for Entente that occurs before September 1915, say the first year of the war?

BlondieBC

I don't know that the allies wanted a draconian peace from the start. Some German propaganda predicted a brutal peace, whichever side won but I rather doubt even they believed that. Early on, before the costs became so high I think a far more moderate settlement would have been possible with Germany forced to accept defeat but not the humiliation of OTL. Of course with all the powers stronger and Russia still present as a counter to German strength in the east, and probably a continued Hapsburg state in the south, there would have been less need for a harsh peace.

It depends on what you mean by a full victory. Possibly a bit better co-ordination. It was recognised that Germany was the core of the central powers and Austria basically dependent on it. So if say:
a) The French plan to counter the Germans head on, in defensive positions as the latter come through southern Belgium and give them a very bloody nose. [The Germans suffer more as they are required to attack to meet their strategic aims and also because their advancing in sequence due to the lack of room top deploy forces.

b) In co-ordination with Britain the allies then at least secure northern Belgium, which was only occupied by a later wave of German forces. This strengthens control of the channel, gives the rump Belgium far more men to recruit from and as Alratan says causes a serious nitrate problem for Germany.

c) OTL in the east while two Russian armies, badly co-ordinated, advanced to disaster in E Prussia 4 more faced off against 4 Austrian armies and I think generally drove them back, occupying much of Austrian Galaicia. TTL say 3 sit on the defensive against the Austrians, who had split their army to attack Serbia. Instead the spare army operates against Germany, possibly advancing down the Vistula to combine with the two coming from the east or possibly advancing westward against Silesian. The latter as an important industrial centre is likely to prompt a strong response but the Germans are very thinly stretched here so to counter this might mean opening the path for other armies.

With the attack in the west a bloody disaster, Russians advancing through eastern Germany, Austria also stalling and munitions rapidly running out you might see a collapse of will [as occurred to a degree in Sept 18] and the Germans deciding them must make peace. Its still unlikely to be a draconian peace, because they will fight if the proposed terms are harsh and the allies will see they can get what they require without prolonged bloody and costly fighting.

Its difficult to see both sides being irrational enough to continue fighting to the end when both would clearly lose from that, although I could be being too optimistic about human nature here.;)

One other factor with such early set-backs for the central powers. Its unlikely that any other power would join what looks like a lost cause so no Ottomans or Bulgarian involvement. This would free up sizeable allied resources as well as prevent the Russia trade routes through the straits being cut off. Also Serbia, which put up a hell of a fight OTL, is likely to survive until aid reaches it and Italy is likely to commit much earlier to the allied cause if fighting continues. Romania might take longer because of the family links of its king but if for some reasons the central powers fight to the bitter end you might well see the war continue until 1915 or possibly even later but once the allies start getting into Germany and Austria the latter's capacity to continue fighting drops.

Steve
 
yes, you are right on limited victory, i was thinking of a full victory with harsh terms like the ToV.

Did you have any ideas on a full victory for Entente that occurs before September 1915, say the first year of the war?

The war radicalised in 1916, before that I doubt harsh B-L or ToV terms would have been on the table. If a full victory was achieved in 1915 I doubt the crushing war guilt and unlimited reparations clauses would have been in the peace treaty.
 
Top