Most plausible WW1 German Victory?

The Fact is that in OTL the German Empire knew before hand that it would be an up Hill battle (pardon the pun) to win a two front war. It's for this very reason that invaded Belgium to begin with. The Schlieffen Plan hoped to knock the French and her allies out of the war quickly and then like a sledge hammer slam the Russians with the force of their total military might. But as a German General once said, "No Plan survives contact with the Enemy. "

A key factor in why they were defeated was the incompetence of their allies. The Austro-Hungarian Empire and Ottoman Empire were both considered to be "the sick men of Europe." And everyone knew it too. While both Empire's had some competent commanders they often (especially Austria) has to be bailed out by large numbers of German troops again and again.

So another key to how Germany could win WW1 is either have Germany fight alone or have make her allies stronger and better lead.
 
Can one help me?
Exactly when was v.Bülow made ... 'supreme commander' of the left wing? ... aka 'most senior' to 1st and 3rd german army (in addition to also being further responsible for commanding 2nd german army)?​
The only date I can remember off the top of my head is that on 28 August 1st Army began receiving orders directly from OHL again, rather than from V.Bulow. IIUC it was most of August and it wasn't really a thrashed out concept, V.Bulow didn't designate part or all of 2nd Army to a subordinate to lessen his span of control for example.
... found the answer :
Reichsarchiv : Der Weltkrieg​
vol.1 - Die Grenzschlachten im Westen , pp 182 to 187 (esp. p 186)​
On arrival/setting up of the GHQ from Berlin in Coblenz - after some considerations of staying in Berlin but creating a 'supreme commander west' (such commands were already considered in at least (out of my head) 2 former deployment/operation plans) - on the morning of 17th August 1914 the orders for the further operations after the 'initial and preparatory border battles' were now finished were dispatched.
These included aside the 'combined' command in the south => Prince Rupprecht of 6th army over v.Heeringen 7th army also the submission of 1st army v.Kluck under 2nd army v.Bülow. But - as I had just to learn - this did not include 3rd army v. Hausen.
It seems Moltke rendered it well enough organized that the center portion - 3rd, 4th and 5th army - might be lead from him in Coblenz. ... or didn't need 'special' attention.

However, I'm well with you that at that point of time the concept of an 'Army-group'-command for several armies didn't exist yet.


If ... 3rd army might hav submitted to v.Bülow as well ... he might have ordered it to 'secure' his flanks similarly as to IOTL 1st army and circumvent the french 5th army right wing (aka still in contact with held back french I.Corps) with an more 'pressing' attack on dinant and/or south of forcing an east-west crossing of the Meuse and thereby breaking into french 5th army's back.
This would have if not destroyed but considerable diminished french 5th army well before IOTL 1st Marne. ... with whatever recuperations on further operations.
 
Last edited:

Riain

Banned
... found the answer :
Reichsarchiv : Der Weltkrieg​
vol.1 - Die Grenzschlachten im Westen , pp 182 to 187 (exp. p 186)​
On arrival of the GHQ in Coblenz - after some considerations of staying in Berlin but creating a 'supreme commander west' (such commands were already considered in at least (out of my head) 2 former deployment/operation plans) - on the morning of 17th August 1914 the orders for the further operations after the 'initial and preparatory border battles' were now finished were dispatched.
These included aside the 'combined' command in the south => Prince Rupprecht of 6th army over v.Heeringen 7th army also the submission of 1st army v.Kluck under 2nd army v.Bülow. But - as I had just to learn - this did not include 3rd army v. Hausen.
It seems Moltke rendered it well enough organized that the center portion - 3rd, 4th and 5th army - might be lead from him in Coblenz. ... or didn't need 'special' attention.

However, I'm well with you that at that point of time the concept of an 'Army-group'-command for several armies didn't exist yet.


If ... 3rd army might hav submitted to v.Bülow as well ... he might have ordered it to 'secure' his flanks similarly as to IOTL 1st army and circumvent the french 5th army right wing (aka still in contact with held back french I.Corps) with an more 'pressing' attack on dinant and/or south of forcing an east-west crossing of the Meuse and thereby breaking into french 5th army's back.
This would have if not destroyed but considerable diminished french 5th army well before IOTL 1st Marne. ... with whatever recuperations on further operations.

That sounds right, only 2 weeks.

These organizations are so important, they're lines on an org chart but the right lines make all the difference.
 
A key factor in why they were defeated was the incompetence of their allies. The Austro-Hungarian Empire and Ottoman Empire were both considered to be "the sick men of Europe." And everyone knew it too. While both Empire's had some competent commanders they often (especially Austria) has to be bailed out by large numbers of German troops again and again.

So another key to how Germany could win WW1 is either have Germany fight alone or have make her allies stronger and better lead.
The Germans need the Austro-Hungarian Empire as an ally so they can stretch the Russian Army out over a longer front and for the small amount of industry it had. They cannot take on the Dual Entente on their own. However I will concede the the Germans need victory before the Austro-Hungarians become too much of a liability.

What they also need to do is keep the British out of the war as active participants as long as possible so to avoid a naval blockade. However, they cannot stop the British supplying the French but that will be on credit. Also no blockade means they can tap America for finance and munitions.

On the matter of the Ottomans, treat them as allies in name only. The number of Russians they will draw off is not that great so little point sending them much in the way of munitions.

If the Russians wish to pour treasure in a drive to Constantinople it will be easier for the Germans to drive to St Petersburg. They are certainly not going to get any better deal in a Treaty of Brest-Litovsk just because they control the Bosporous. I can just hear the German diplomats saying that they are not fussed either way about who holds the city.
 
Top