You're a general in charge of an allied army on the western front in 1916. You have the knowledge of today but are still limited by the technology of the time. How do you break through?
>>64285843blankets
SEND. ANOTHER. WAVE.
>>64285880
>>64285843>How do you break through?You don't. Simply wait until the germans attack you, kill them, wait until they do it again, repeat until germany is out of men, walk to berlin unopposed.
>>64285899Unfortunately, your supreme allied commander Joseph Joffre (who is known to have a severe temper) doesn't know the meaning of the word wait
I recognize that with the tech and circumstances of the war as it exists, there isn't a meaningful tactical solution that we can implement to overcome the inherent limits of the infantryhttps://youtu.be/gfYMSJXuQAc?si=
>>64285909No worries, we'll simply get him to tour our wonderful sector and have an "infiltrated hun" take care of that problem.
>>64285843Take all the forces under command, and execute all western leaders to usher in a communist revolution that WW1 was created to suppress.
>>64285843Holt tractor based APCs. Cheaper than real tanks and able to get a dozen men to the next trench line without being machine gunned down.
>>64286131>you are an allied general>create the kaiserreich timeline anyways
There was no actual way to win other than what actually happened, which was one side starving and bleeding the other side out of men slightly faster than you were starved and bled out of men. The technology at the time was simply too undeveloped to break the trenchlines.The top generals on both sides realized this was the situation as early as late 1915, which resulted in them being fired by the politicians and replaced with generals who promised more optimistic theories of victory.
>>64285843Manhattan project 30 years early.>still limited by the technology of the timeI suppose it'll cost 5% of America's GDP then instead of 0.2%
>>64285843>logisticsintroduce C-rations>medicaltell them about penicillinintroduce the triage systemteach proper use of the tourniquet>tanksdesign Vickers MkVI type tankettes and StuH III type assault guns>doctrineintroduce proper tank-infantry combined-arms tacticsform Commando units to conduct raids behind enemy lines>artilleryintroduce the creeping barrage tacticexpand the FOO systemteach all FDCs to use firing tables>infantry weaponsretool for Stens and Owensintroduce base of fire and manoeuvre platoon tactics centred on the Lewis gun>navydesign AP shells based on the Munroe effectdesign and build modern carriers>aircraftinstitute formal pilot training; basically Top Gunand teach the retards to use wing-mounted guns for fuck's sakeA LOT of the tactics we know today is the result of mistakes made in WW1 and early WW2 while attempting to discover what are the correct procedures and tactics for each situation. a lot of the above is simply using this hindsight to tell them "no you don't have to try options 1, 2, 3 and 4 to figure out what works and what doesn't, the solution is 3", and formal training
>>64285843Dig tunnels under enemy positions and fill them with explosives. No, I don't think that'll actually work. It's a delaying tactic while I invest in better tech like aircraft and tanks. Hell, I'd do dark, despicable things for an aircraft with a radio.
>>64287199>and teach the retards to use wing-mounted guns for fuck's sakeThey tried that, didn't work very well.
>>64287199Most of these were already in effect to some degree by 1916, but your Navy suggestions would be actively harmful
I don't, cause from my knowledge of modern history, I know that entente is starving because of the naval blockade and lack of men on fields. I also know that meat charges were never effective enough to make up for the lives lost. Instead, I will relay to my command to put all resources in tanks and to kill this Lenin guy, who is going to cripple our largest ally.
>>64288431>Most of these were already in effect to some degree by 1916some of them are, but not "most", and not army-wide but in small-scale experiments>your Navy suggestions would be actively harmfulwith hollow-charge AP shells and bombs you can kill enemy ships much more efficiently; you get more bang for less buckit also took them 20 years to experiment and figure out all the best tactics for carrier air. for example, they couldn't even figure out if islands were good or bad (that's why for example HMS Furious, IJN Ryujo and USS Langley don't have islands)even if we are limited in technology, this is knowledge that can save a lot of time and effort from pursuing dead-ends>>64288391what happened? I'm guessing that they didn't use electrically operated guns and didn't synchronise themintroducing WW2 combat tactics, again, would be something that doesn't need great investment in R&D, just knowledge.
>>64285843I disband my army. Ultimately, that's the only action I could make that should allow a breakthrough.
>>64285843Lead my army in revolt against the corrupt capitalist bankers in charge of the war.
>>64285843>more tanks and tanks with APC ability>parachutes for pilots>KILL LENIN
>>64287199>tell them about penicillin>introduce the triage systemboth of these predate the first world war, through the western front is where triage as a concept was codified and understood
>>64285843>Be completely defensive on the western front>Dig the fuck in and make proper trenches and fortifications.>Focus on bringing down the Turks and especially the Austrians by sowing discontent and ethnic strife. >Go full in on the sub-machine conceptThe same would be for the Germans just that you'd focus on getting Italy and Russia out of the war, doubling down on promising Ukrainians/Finns/Belarusians/Baltics independence while also DON'T SINK American boats or talk with Mexico. Also send out the navy to get BTFO by the brits so they don't mutiny.
>>64287075Kek. And how would you deliver the payload?
>>64289037japan is an ally at the moment
>>64285843Bombard the German trenches 24 hours a day for one week until there is nothing left, no one would survive that then instruct my infantry to don full packs and walk towards the now empty Germans lines to prepare for a counter from their reserves. I'd also mine underneath their trenches to detonate one of the biggest man made explosions of the time but in order to not injure any of my men I'd tell them to wait 10 minutes until after the explosion to approach it and take up defensive positions. There. I've just won the war.
>>64289051>detonate one of the biggest man made explosionsThere's one of those still out there, it didn't go off and nobody has been back.
>>64289055Some poor little french peasant will become a statistic in the future
>>64289051
>>64289037NTA but they had gigantic artillery in WW1. The Paris gun could shell shit from 120 km's away. They'd just use something like that.
>limited by the technology of the time.>"Here's how I would implement APCs, tanks and CAS in a combined armed effort"I hope you lot aren't in any position of power in life.
>>64289103all of those things existed and were used during the hundred day's offensive
>>64285899This.Also this >>64286114
Speak to Fisher to see if can get the 18inch naval gun on trains a lot faster and tell him if he helps will back his funding for a 20 inch armed Battlecruiser and arrange for Beatty to have an unfortunate accident.
>>64289124Forgot pic
>>64289009I might be wrong but penicillin was post-WW1 and triage use was not widespread although the concept was around and maybe used on a small scale
>>64289103that's why I specified AFVs that are duplicable using the technology of the timeinterwar tankettes for example were perfectly possible technologically, but no one had yet hit upon the right shape or doctrine>CASoo I forgot that one
>>64285843>You're a general in charge of an allied army on the western front in 1916. You have the knowledge of today but are still limited by the technology of the time. How do you break through?If I'm a British General I make a secret pact with the Germans to backstab the French and wipe their filthy country off the map. Split it right down the middle& live happily ever-after. Solves literally every problem of the 20th century
>>64285843Lie low and try to build up political oposition to kneecap the treaty system in the post war world.
>>64285843Boom boom boom, tanky tanky apc apc while under air cover.All the toys were there in ww1.
>>64285843I guess the best method that doesn't involve pulling tech out of my ass would be to hold back tank deployment until several hundred are ready to be unleashed under suitable conditions. Maybe try to get Renault FT production started earlier and establish an Allied equivalent of the Sturmtruppen a bit sooner than in real life.
>>64287633Imagine the underground warfare kino we could have gotten if they went all-in on tunnelling.Gun fights in pitch black at knife-fighting range, underground superfortresses built like labyrinths, floods that turn the lower levels into rancid pools, cave-ins from a penetrating artillery shell, men lost in the tunnels turning to cannibalism, gas settling in permanently, chokepoints with 1 machine gun which finally gets overrun when they run out of bullets or simply overheat. It would be pure horror.
>>64285843The American plans for comprehensive body armor were pretty interesting and the drip was phenomenal, unfortunately we were broke bitches back then so the prototypes never went into production. Would have greatly reduced attrition in regular trench fighting.
>>64289310>I guess the best method that doesn't involve pulling tech out of my ass would be to hold back tank deployment until several hundred are ready to be unleashed under suitable conditionsYou've literally just described the battle of Cambrai. 47,596 casualties in the first week btw
>>64289449>47,596 casualties in the first weekInstead of one day? Seems like progress.
>>64289241>Yamato most advanced
>>64287633Fauld was a bit of an oopsie. It's up there with the largest non nuclear oopsies. It's just down the road from me.
>>64288934>what happened? I'm guessing that they didn't use electrically operated guns and didn't synchronise themThey could shoot the guns just fine but it was basically impossible to reload or unjam them. Foster mounting was the only one that worked and only kinda. If you needed to mess with the guns you needed to stand up, unlock the gun, and then drag it down to the cockpit.
>>64289404Certainly, it would be horrifying but I suspect there'd be less casualties simply because there's a limit to how many men you could stuff down a tunnel. >>64289519I admit, part of my motive is my desire to see big explosions. That, and showing footage of the explosions is great for propaganda.
>>64289590>there's a limit to how many men you could stuff down a tunnel. Sounds like a challenge for Robert Nivelle
>>64289489The chart just tracks displacement, not 'advancement'
>>64289241>advancementRetard take. Treaty battleships were more advanced in technology and design than anything before them. They had to be, because the treaty meant you couldn't just build a bigger WWI boat like the krauts did with Bismarck. You actually had to design your ships smarter and more efficient.
>>64289051Flawless concept! The war will be over after anons big push
>launch offensives in line with what happened in reality so that I don't get removed for not launching offensives and still tie up German forces>but call them off much sooner as "my genius tactical mind" recognises when they fail, this saves hundreds of thousands of my troops lives but still wears the Germans down.>when Germany launches the spring offensive in 1918 my troops are prepared and blunt it much sooner, war ends in the same manner but with much lower death tolls.I don't want to butterfly effect to much and as one person I can't influence everything to pull off a Flawless victory within a year. It would possibly be worse thinking you have some genius strategy to avoid something like the Somme and fuck up just as badly elsewhere.
>>64288934>with hollow-charge AP shells and bombs you can kill enemy ships much more efficiently; you get more bang for less buckExcept that ships are not laid out in the same way as tanks. Even with the comparatively large penetrator, the sheer amount of empty space within a ship before you get to the vitals is going to negate it. Sure, you might be able to penetrate the belt armor, but odds are you don't find anything particularly juicy for another 50 feet or so. Hit one of those upper deck layers and it might be that far before you even get to the actual armor layer. Worse still, the Monroe Effect suffers when a shell is spinning, so unless you manage to develop massive fin-stabilized shells in the next year you're not going to be getting the degree of penetration that modern HEAT warheads are known for.>it also took them 20 years to experiment and figure out all the best tactics for carrier air. for example, they couldn't even figure out if islands were good or badI can let this go since I was assuming you were advocating for skipping over the point where carriers were armed to cruiser standards since they had to operate so close to the battle line
>>64290393>the sheer amount of empty space within a ship before you get to the vitals is going to negate itregardless, it would achieve so many penetrations that something explodey would eventually be struckwe're talking about piercing the likes of Bayern-class battleships with C-class light cruiserson which note: I could also improve ship survivability a tad by introducing WW2 subdivision and enclosed turrets>the Monroe Effect suffers when a shell is spinningwe are still looking at an increase in penetration of 2x to 3x over solid shot AP, which is ample margin for inefficiencies from spinning>so unless you manage to develop massive fin-stabilized shellsthat is easily taught too
>>64289590One of the mine charges at Vimy Ridge? didn't go off. It's still down there if you want to explore that kind of thing.
>>64285843As Germany has proven to be an extremely generous winner both during the franco-prussian war and during the negotiations post-napoleon, I immediately switch sides to prevent the situation we are in now caused by French retardation and Anglo apathy.
>>64285843>line current trench with a massive amount of explosives along the entire trench line>tactical retreat from next German attack>detonate explosives and counterattack the fissure in the earth >repeat
>>64285843Gather all the motor vehicles in France and attempt a blitzkrieg supported by air power on the southern flank after performing troop movements and artillery barrages to project the illusion of a major push in the north. When the Jerries begin to fall back and reconsolidate to protect their flank, have the troops still in the trenches go over the top in an attempt to turn the German repositioning into a route.
>>64285843Take all royal navy battleships and have them bombard Bremen and Hamburg day and night until it's flat, if Jerries don't surrender afterwards repeat the process in Kieln, Stettin and Konigsberg
>>64285843lets get crazy, intentionally allow them to advance out of their fortified positions and funnel their "breakthrough" into terrain prepared for battle of annihilation
>>64293655Germany has just enough naval assets to make this a bad idea. The Battle of Jutland was a close call and if you add in air recon from the shore and coastal defense guns it's going to go bad for Britain.
>>64293702Don't forget the mines. A single minelayer fucked up the Dardanelles campaign.
>>64285843No I'm not.
>>64293655Good luck convincing Jellico to leave the safety of Scapa
>>64293714pipe down pipsqueak
>>64289128Lord Clive class were cool. I can a few sneaking up an undefended river under cover of darkness, camouflage, and flags, and wreaking havoc on river side industrial towns before a defense could be mounted.
>>64289051How will we deal with the Hun elephants though?
>>64285843Invade Netherlands and rush to Germany through there, they will never expect attack through neutral country
>>64293711Yet another reason to hate seamines. Wasn't this also the era where Germany first used magnetic influence mines?
>>64289037By mining under enemy lines, duh. Repeat the process as many times as needed.
>>64289103Well then this scenario wouldn't be possible at all then. Very fun.
>>64289051>Bombard the German trenches 24 hours a day for one week until there is nothing left, no one would survive that then instruct my infantry to don full packs and walk towards the now empty Germans lines to prepare for a counter from their reservesA simple, logical plan using existing technologies. Which is why both the British and German armies used it. Didn't work. The defenders evacuated to bunkers until the bombardment was done and then rushed back in to reman the defenses. The barbed wire slowed down the attackers enough that the whole thing turned into a bloodbath every time. That and it was getting harder to get enough shells for a 24 hour bombardment. >I'd also mine underneath their trenches to detonate one of the biggest man made explosions of the time but in order to not injure any of my men I'd tell them to wait 10 minutes until after the explosion to approach it and take up defensive positions.Good, after weeks of digging you managed to cross the first two lines of defenses. Unfortunately, there's 5 in your area alone and the crater is difficult to refortify. >There. I've just won the war.You've really got to do more research.
>>64298194It really went over your head didn't it?
>>64289219The idea of CAS was actually pretty well fleshed out by the mid war. Ground troops used flares and signal flags to direct aircraft on station, and when the US entered the war the SCR-68 radio even allowed for voice communication between aircraft and ground observers.The issue was with air superiority. Both sides struggled to develop doctrine that allowed their air forces to clear the skies long enough for CAS to be utilized effectively. The Germans almost nailed it during the Fokker Scourge but ended up spreading their aircraft too thinly over the entire front instead of concentrating them in key battlespaces like the Entente would later do.
>>64298244I am of the impression that WW1 and interwar CAS doctrine, such as it is, mainly involved recon and operational mobility interdiction. Most bombers were assigned to strategic bombing against fixed enemy installations ie bases deep in the rear, and only a relatively small number were expected to attack enemy troop concentrations. (by 1939 it was understood that most divisions would have attached recon squadrons but the air forces tended to hold onto operational control of their fighter and bomber squadrons)The "Blitzkrieg" of 1939-40 therefore was a unique advancement in doctrine, in that the Luftwaffe focused a large proportion of its bombing efforts on attacking enemy troop concentrations, usually HQs, motor pools, artillery and troops on the road. The Germans made it a policy to target road junctions just behind the front line on the assumption that they would nearly always be congested with troops and they were often right.(In Poland this meant bombing and strafing horses pretty extensively.)Applying this doctrine to a WW1 air force instead of wasting bomber efforts on attempts at "strategic bombing" might yield more direct and useful results, I think
>>64298244P.s.>The issue was with air superiorityPartly this, but also partly because it is difficult to arrange strikes on field targets in a timely manner. Flags don't really cut it. The Allied "cab rank" method for example is not workable without large numbers of radios.
>>64298223You tried to use sarcasm in text, didn't you?
>>64298605I got that he was joking anon, because that's what they tried in real life and it didn't work.Have you been checked for autism?
>>64298629Let's do a test>We should slaughter the innocent>We should slaughter the innocentWhich one was typed in a sarcastic tone?
>>64298244Considering that you could land a plane on a balloon during those day and be able to take off again I always wondering why nobody attempted an airship aircraft carrier outside the 23 class?>>64298737You are literally autistic.
>>64298737Both of them because you're a retard who cant detect sarcasm in context. >this anon has just written out exactly what happened in ww1 with references to specific occurances, who knows if he's joking or not?How would you feel if you hadn't had breakfast this morning.
>>64298194Sarcasm, motherfucker, do you speak it?
>>64285843Use trucks and whatever armored vehicle available in ww1 and move fast. Go around the defenses before they entrench themselves heavily there too. It worked in ww2. Use planes to locate the least defended areas to break trough. Use radios on planes to keep info about enemy troop movements live. Rotate planes to keep constant info flowing. On any heavily defended areas just play defensive too. If needed use gas and flamethrowers to break trough the softer points and use truck mobility to cut enemy supply lines.Use small units tactics like Germans developed in 1917 with their stormtroopers for initial breakthrough than follow Rommel footsteps and beeline for lightly defended supplies depots. Use planes for some cover even if it mainly psychological any aerial danger keeps the enemy in cover for longer before they react to your moves. Once you disrupt supply lines, cause artillery to be ordered to to move to safety in the sector and substantial frontline troops are redirected to chase after you with urgency you can order a full assault in the area and if you can achieved a breaktrough due to lack of enemy artillery and reduced troops numbers you keep pushing fast moving troops trough to repeat along the front and slowly try to roll the enemy trenches sideways while your fast moving units go quickly towards the main supply nodes and disrupt an increasingly large area and potentially threathen nearby civilian areas.
>>64298930I bet you blame your boyfriend for not knowing what you want without you saying it.
>>64299043So your a fag as well?
>>64298269Im not too knowledgeable on strategic bombing efforts in WW1 aside from the Italian General Douhet brainstorming the concept, going full schitzomode over it, and getting thrown in jail for misappropriating Air Force funds to pay for these new bombers he just invented without asking anyone's permission.I know on the Western Front at least, truck convoys were considered priority targets by the Entente. The US Army Air Service created uparmored gun trucks from armored cars and fire engines that would escort convoys and protect them from air attack.>>64298273You're right, I should have specified that the system only worked if visible conditions permitted it and the ground troops were well trained enough to competently direct the strikes on station. Many troops reported never using their signal flags because unfurling them and placing them on the ground exposed them to enemy fire. Even the SCR-68 radio had a flaw where the observer couldn't receive radio traffic unless the intercom system with the pilot was turned off. Aircrew found that they had failed to send and receive important messages because they were too busy talking to each other.
>>64299034Good idea on paper and is actually something they tried. Problem is have you seen the roads or lack of to be more precise during this time period?
>>64299208>DouhetLolI only know about the Western Front myself.>strategic bombingGenerally, supply dumps, railways, and as you say, roads were the main targets for WW1 strike missions. There is often confusion amongst on what precisely is tactical vs strategic targets. One way to look at this is whether the intended effect is direct or indirect, immediate or long-term. (Attacking a convoy of troops headed to the front line because you are conducting an attack and want to prevent him from reinforcing is operational; attacking a convoy of troops just to kill them without any other aim in mind is arguably strategic.) Regarding convoy defence in WW1, it was usually a defence against a strategic raid because the bombing objective tended to be planned like this: "we know the enemy uses this route to bring troops and supplies, fly there tomorrow and attack whatever you see". ie more like bombing the Ho Chi Minh Trail, not so much bombing enemy roads approaching Khe Sanh (operational) or attacking the enemy right at the front (tactical).In large part this was because of the inability for front line troops to locate and identify targets and communicate to bombers in time, which wouldn't be solved on a large scale until 1939. But also because the huge impact of tactical CAS wasn't yet understood.Although in WW1 "trench strafers" were a thing, relatively few aircraft* were devoted to this mission and it was somewhat different from WW2 CAS which was increasingly intended to help friendly troops win the close combat fight.*By 1917, there were usually as many aircraft solely dedicated to recon as there were bombers of all types. Recon and forward observation multiplied the effectiveness of artillery barrages many fold
Adapt the stokes mortar as quickly and as widely as possible, at the platoon or even squad level. Reorganize artillery, speed up the kill chain in any way possible. Remove as much chain of command as possible. Train infantry for infiltration.
>>642993332/2So one way I might try to change the historical doctrine is to forget about strategic bombing entirely, and direct all bombers to support ground offensivesPerhaps the communication problem could be solved by training and attaching TACP ground observers to mark targets with coloured smoke and/or tracer. Maybe red smokeshells and tracer to attack, green to cease fire (In practice this would have to be changed at least weekly); and train bomber crews to attack accordingly.The idea is to have a set of complementary tactics that create a unique unified doctrine. My doctrine would be manoeuvrist, to focus on blasting apart the front line and killing as many enemy troops as I can with CAS, machine-gun tankettes and Sturmgeschutz. Tankettes might do better in exploiting breaches too, and might help transport troops to hold terrain by riding desant like Russian mobiks.Hopefully this avoids bogging down in grand artillery duels.No idea if it'd actually work
>>64285843>in charge of an allied armycringe. why can't I be in charge of an imperial german army ?
>>64299410>why can't I be in charge of an imperial german armyonly the ones that win get to set things up.
>>64299351Stokes mortar is based. Still based. We're essentially using an improved version of it for modern 60, 81, and 120mm mortars.
>>64285843Why try to break through? It's a giant siege, Germany lost because they ran out of food and other vital supplies.
>>64299448To conquer and break up the german state.
>>64299448The Ginger one has been reading Mein Kampf, check out his thinking and start prepping.
>>64299484Take your TDS pills
>>64299508>Tylenol Derangement Syndromekek
america enters war. there you just won ithttps://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1758649789284285.webm
>>64299448They were actually pretty good on food. The economy only went badly because all the chemical plants that used to make fertilizer switched to making explosives.
>>64289091You really think it would survive such acceleration?
>>64299536>America joins the war>On the side of the Triple Alliance. >Because Fuck Britain.
>>64299578Which one?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_Alliance
>>64299545...which caused massive crop failures leading to outbreaks of famine and disease. By the end of the war they were stuffing sawdust into anything that could be made edible and making margarine out of coal. There were riots when people learned their bread was being made from potatoes.One of the soldiers in the Lost Battalion who got captured during the fighting said that he would rather go back to the trenches and fight in combat eating rations rather than dealing with food insecurity in his POW camp.
>>64289241That image made me kek massively.
>>64289449Cambrai wasn't the first ever tank deployment. The British blew their load too early and too weak and by Cambrai tanks were no longer a surprise.
do everything the same but ravage germany afterwards until they surrender unconditionally
>>64299545Lack of fertilizer was only one cause. They lost so many men there wasn't enough men for the entire domestic sector, from agriculture to transport.
>>64299737>>64300104Let's assume that's true. If you're not actively causing casualties and creating a demand for artillery there's a good chance that Germany wouldn't collapse at all. In fact, this would cause a perpetual stalemate with a small but ongoing death toll for decades....Then again, it might be a good chance for everyone to calm down and realize it's a stupid war.
Something like this
>>64290530>something explodey would eventually be struckYou can penetrate crew quarters all you want, if your shell is exploding 40 feet away from the vitals it ain't getting through the citadel>solid shot API'm going to be generous and assume you just made a mistake here>that is easily taught tooHow do you do it? Its gonna be alot more than "hey you should make a HE shell that has fins"
>>64290530Maybe you could poke holes in the belt, but beyond that youre not doing much
>>64289091Designing a W48 (11 inch) warhead would unironically cost orders of magnitude more than the Fat Man device. On top of that, we know way way more about the geometries etc of Fat Man and Little boy than we do about most of the warheads that came after. You'd have to recreate that knowlesge. Fat Man was a design they knew would work based on what was know about materials and physics up to about ~1943. The W48 was designed with the knowledge gained from roughly 30 test devices and the better part of a decade of research.
>>64285843I declare an armistice with Germany immediately and kill the Rothschild bloodline forever. Now I don't have to break through and I can modernize our army with my foreknowledge of mechanized warfare and combined arms.
>>64285843Gather a bunch of steam engines together with fans and set it up so that everytime there's a gas attack it blows it back in the direction of the attackermake some positively pressurized bunkers for the same purpose.
