The pragmatic sanction probably would of worked if old fritz wasn't quietly sitting on the best army in Europe.Austria was pretty strong in 1740s, it's just that they had too many fires to put out at once. They also were caught with their pants down since Charles VI rather naively thought that once everyone signed the Pragmatic Sanction papers, no more war right? And their officer corps was weak. I expected the ethnic Poles, Bohemians (Mostly Czech speakers), and Croatians to desert like they did in late WW1 making them crappy soldiers meaning most of the Hapsburg manpower pool was worthless, but when I looked into the War of Austrian Succession, the soldiers of the Hapsburg kingdoms fought hard (instead of auto-deserting like I expected) and Austria eventually managed to get a working logistical operation going in Central Europe, but Frederick was just a better tactician than them.
Austria was pretty strong in 1740s, it's just that they had too many fires to put out at once. They also were caught with their pants down since Charles VI rather naively thought that once everyone signed the Pragmatic Sanction papers, no more war right? And their officer corps was weak. I expected the ethnic Poles, Bohemians (Mostly Czech speakers), and Croatians to desert like they did in late WW1 making them crappy soldiers meaning most of the Hapsburg manpower pool was worthless, but when I looked into the War of Austrian Succession, the soldiers of the Hapsburg kingdoms fought hard (instead of auto-deserting like I expected) and Austria eventually managed to get a working logistical operation going in Central Europe, but Frederick was just a better tactician than them.
The Austrians have Radetzky, and Prussia literally just lost to Denmark... I'm no expert of the militaries of the period, but that math seems simple enough.I'm a little more interested in the 19th century than the 18th to be honest. Could Prussia have won a struggle with Austria in 1848-1850?