So what if for some resone bizmarks diplomacy fails and France joinds Austria agenst Prussia, Russia joinds Prussia and a more general eropian war is created.
Based on how domonit Prussia was in both wars agenst Austria and France and whith the help of Russia I still see them winning this war so what if Austria collapses do to this war.
Prussia gets bohimia and the rest of the German majority areas, Russia gets Galicia, Italy gets Venetia , treats and Tarantino, and hungary gets interdependence.
I don't know what France would lose maby what they lost historically maby less.
And I don't know on which side if any England would join in this case but probably France and Austria for balance of power resonse if nothing else.
Probably it would make sense to introduce a less vague timing because between 1860 and 1870 both France and Russia had been seriously reforming their military systems.
So, if you are talking about 1866, then in OTL:
Prussia fielded 437K (total size of the Prussian army was 557K)
and Austria - 407K (total size - 558K)
(total sizes are from
http://loveread.me/read_book.php?id=72783&p=1)
Russia in 1864 - 67 lowered size of a standing army to 742K (stationed mostly close to the Western borders) with a possibility to raise it up to between 1 and 1.5M in the case of war. The numbers were growing (and equipment improving) through the 1860s - 70s (Milutin's Reforms). In 1860's weaponry was still obsolete (introduction of the Berdan rifle - 1868, the same for modern artillery).
https://megabook.ru/article/Военные+реформы+1860-1870-х+годов
Russia, by the obvious reason (called "Crimean War"), did not like France and Austria and was quite friendly with Prussia (among other things, mother of Alexander II was daughter of
Frederick William III of Prussia).
France in 1869 was supposedly able to field in Europe 288K (against anticipated 1M Prussian/German). Niel's reform is applicable only to 1870 time table.
In 1854, the British Army had a total strength of 140,043 men. Of that number 39,750 were stationed in the colonies, 29,208 in India, and the remaining 71,085 in the British Isles. (
https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-...ative-to-its-contemporaneous-rivals-and-peers)
Or in 1883 124K (
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-14218909)
In other words, not a major factor in a land-based war. It remained uncommitted both during the Austro-Prussian and Franco-Prussian wars.
So if in the late 1860s there is a confrontation between Franco-Austrian and Prussian-Russian alliances (plus smaller continental players on both sides), then the Franco-Austrian chances for victory are not very good and an idea that the war could be stopped by the British saying "don't do this!" is rather unconvincing: at that time neither Prussia nor Russia had extensive overseas trade or put too much stress on the naval programs.
Now, as I understand there is a question of the Hungarians choosing or rejecting their independence. If the time frame is 1860s (and there is no earlier Austro - Prussian war), then
there is no dual empire yet and I'm not sure that an overwhelming number of the Hungarians would prefer status quo to the independence. While the memories about Russian intervention in 1848 - 49 were not the happy ones, it was Austrians who did all the hangings. Of course, there would be immediate issue of Croatia.