alternatehistory.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attaque_à_outrance
This philosophy was a response to the increasing weight of defensive firepower that accrued to armies in the nineteenth century, as a result of several technological innovations, notably breech-loading rifled guns, machine guns, and light field artillery firing high-explosive shells. It held that the victor would be the side with the strongest will, courage, and dash (élan), and that every attack must therefore be pushed to the limit.[1] The invention of machine guns and barbed wire as well as the subsequent development of trench warfare rendered this tactic extremely costly and usually ineffective.
What if WW1 was delayed into the 1920s or 30s and without the experience of WW1 in 1914 the French continued to develop the idea of the Attaque à Outrance, but with motorization, SP artillery, and automatic weaponry? Would it be a more viable battle doctrine with the right weaponry and technology to support it on the attack or would it just lead to disaster against a better armed defender?
Top