French victory in 1870

Hi all,

With a PoD no earlier than the declaration of war, no ASB and no foreign intervention (as there wasn't any OTL), how could the French have won or get a draw in the war against Prussia?

I imagine no disaster at Sedan might have helped, what else?
 
The French army missed one or two opportunity to win a battle against the Prussian in the beginning of the war and i don't know how much it could have helped in the long term but i think they would have eventually lost the war because the French army was too unprepared. Even Napoleon III was aware of it and tried to reform the army in 1866 (probably based on the Prussian model who ironically was adopted later by the third republic) but the parlement and the clergy were against it (for varied reasons) and he was too politically weakened (only some minor reforms were done in 1868).
 
Last edited:
The French army missed one or two opportunity to win a battle against the Prussian in the beginning of the war and i don't know how much it could have helped in the long term but i think they would have eventually lost the war because the French army was too unprepared. Even Napoleon III was aware of it and tried to reform the army in 1866 (probably based on the Prussian model who ironically was adopted later by the third republic) but the parlement and the clergy were against it (for varied reasons) and he was too politically weakened (only some minor reforms were done in 1868).

That's the point.

Bismarck deliberately provoked France again and again until he obtained the war declaration he longed for because he knew that Prussia and its german allies could but win.

If he had had strong doubts about the outcome of a war against France, he would just not have provoked the french government into war.
 
The bulk of engagements in the Franco-Prussian War tended to follow a drearily predictable cycle. It usually began with some manner of meeting engagement, and the French settling into the most defensible terrain available. (Which, as often as not, was some manner of pre-existing prepared fortification.) The Prussians -- being disciples of an operational methodology which stressed aggression in the name of kurz und vives warmaking -- would frontally assault the French and suffer withering casualties from chassepot fire. The Prussians would fall back, regroup, and then continue to attack and suffer murderous counterfire until they either found a flank from which to get some offensive traction or a battery of Krupp steel guns were wheeled up and the French position blasted to hell. In either case, the French passively stayed in place, firing until they ran out of ammunition and/or were dislodged, and usually taking even more casualties than they dished out because of the near inevitability of the Prussians breaking in.

So how do you get a French victory or two, assuming all other things being equal? Get the French to be just a bit more active while under fire and the Prussians would have their hands full. You don't need Plan XIV-levels of aggression, either. Just, you know, doing something to other than remaining stationary when confronted with the enemy.
 
The bulk of engagements in the Franco-Prussian War tended to follow a drearily predictable cycle. It usually began with some manner of meeting engagement, and the French settling into the most defensible terrain available. (Which, as often as not, was some manner of pre-existing prepared fortification.) The Prussians -- being disciples of an operational methodology which stressed aggression in the name of kurz und vives warmaking -- would frontally assault the French and suffer withering casualties from chassepot fire. The Prussians would fall back, regroup, and then continue to attack and suffer murderous counterfire until they either found a flank from which to get some offensive traction or a battery of Krupp steel guns were wheeled up and the French position blasted to hell. In either case, the French passively stayed in place, firing until they ran out of ammunition and/or were dislodged, and usually taking even more casualties than they dished out because of the near inevitability of the Prussians breaking in.

So how do you get a French victory or two, assuming all other things being equal? Get the French to be just a bit more active while under fire and the Prussians would have their hands full. You don't need Plan XIV-levels of aggression, either. Just, you know, doing something to other than remaining stationary when confronted with the enemy.
How could they have done that without being blasted?
It's my understanding the Germans had more men?
 
Why no foreign intervention? The Austrians hated the Prussians, so a POD 3 months or so earlier can easily get the Austrians in if they think Napoleon III isn't a complete failure. And maybe if someone would kindly remove his painful kidney stone (or maybe it was a bladder stone? His uncle had a kidney one) 7 cm big he might think better.
 
How about McMahon falls off his horse? Can you get someone better placed to halt or strike back at the Prussians?
 
Why no foreign intervention? The Austrians hated the Prussians, so a POD 3 months or so earlier can easily get the Austrians in if they think Napoleon III isn't a complete failure.
I'm afraid the problem was that both the earlier Second Italian Independence War and France's promised-but-retracted support for Austria in the Austro-Prussian War were just enough to paint Napoleon III as a treacherous bastard in austrian eyes. Not to mention that, after the Austro-Prussian War, the hungarians ended up opposing any further foreign intervention for a few decades.
 
Why no foreign intervention? The Austrians hated the Prussians, so a POD 3 months or so earlier can easily get the Austrians in if they think Napoleon III isn't a complete failure. And maybe if someone would kindly remove his painful kidney stone (or maybe it was a bladder stone? His uncle had a kidney one) 7 cm big he might think better.
It's to avoid "well, with PoD x or y, US/UK intervenes and stomps Prussia", I'm more interested in what the French could have done differently :)
 
Why no foreign intervention? The Austrians hated the Prussians, so a POD 3 months or so earlier can easily get the Austrians in if they think Napoleon III isn't a complete failure. And maybe if someone would kindly remove his painful kidney stone (or maybe it was a bladder stone? His uncle had a kidney one) 7 cm big he might think better.

I'm afraid the problem was that both the earlier Second Italian Independence War and France's promised-but-retracted support for Austria in the Austro-Prussian War were just enough to paint Napoleon III as a treacherous bastard in austrian eyes. Not to mention that, after the Austro-Prussian War, the hungarians ended up opposing any further foreign intervention for a few decades.

Might not a longer, extended conflict in which Prussia appears to be unable to make headway prove to be too tempting an opportunity for Austria and Denmark to right past wrongs? There could be more to gain in that case with participation in the war, rather than simply waiting for a negotiated peace after a stalemate.
 
Top