Was WW1 such a nightmare situation that, even if someone from the future arrived in 1915 with strong historical knowledge of the war and military theory, they wouldn't be able to implement these changes fast enough to make battles more decisive? The technology to attack with mobility just didn't exist, or was far from being produced.
>>65552191>The technology to attack with mobility just didn't exist, or was far from being produced.The doctrines do help, actually, particurally since it does give (brief) knowledge of enemy movements and battleplans. And if you know about the gear, you can advise them on what's a 'dead end', and the most efficient designs and such. A lot of trial and error went into these things.
>>65552191If that someone were able to convince the Entente to stand on the defensive and let the naval blockade strangle Germany they would't have squandered so much of their manpower advantage by 1918 when Germany's domestic economy began to collapse and starvation was setting in.
>>65552224>If that someone were able to convince the Entente to stand on the defensivepolitically impossible
I will always take the chance to shill this series, which while hardly comprehensive does a quite good job of giving a general overview of the way warfare developed throughout WWI. Short version: tactics and doctrine could only take you so far
>>65552228So is time travel.
>>65552264Wooooah, good one, anon. Such big brain. Much impress!
>>65552191Building off what the other anons said so far, the only thing you realistically could do is push the entente to adopt small squad tactics and submachine guns much earlier so that 1915 -1917 were not wasted being a meat grinder. I dont include 1914 because it was mostly a maneuver war at that point while the germans were trying the blitzkrieg open beta in Belgium. But 1915-1917 was just gigantic wastes of resources throwing hundreds of thousands of men away in massed attacks that would nudge the line 3 inches.
>>65552228Then they deserve what they get.
>>65552191Just tell all sides what the european racial demographics are like in 2026. Everyone decides it's not worth it and everyone goes home, shrimples.
>>65552432Better yet, everyone agrees that colonialism hasn't been nearly harsh enough.
>>65552321The best possible outcome of WWI is a Central Powers victory>No WWII>No Yugoslavia>No Communist Russia (hopefully)>No British Palestine
>>65552495But anon, the Central Powers still beat the Russian Empire in our timeline
>>65552504Lenin's government surrendered, they weren't removed and replaced.
>>65552504But the Armistice nullified the Treaty of Brest.
>>65552191Like every war ever it would depend a lot on who you are when you go back.If you are some random guy no one is going to give a shit what you say, if you are a countries ruler you can just do whatever you want.For example lets send you back to WW2 as youself living in the same place you do now, how the fuck do you effect the outcome?The best you could do is use historic knowledge to get very rich and start buying politicians but that's going to take a decade or two unless you have memorized the daily stock prices.
If Germany had focused its efforts on the Eastern Front at an earlier stage, would it have been able to utilize the food and resources from the vast occupied territories in time?
>>65552191They didn't have a problem attacking with mobility, the first few months of the war were extremely mobile. Their problems were1) communications on the move. This caused the problems that collapsed the germans initial advance, and repeatedly halted successful penetrations of the trench networks.2) moving heavy equipment across ground that had been churned to mud 6 ft deep. This halted the german advance at Verdun when they were unable to bring their artillery past the initial french lines due to the impassable ground conditions.Both of these problems were solved by tanks, which were large enough to carry a radio, could cross torn-up ground, and carried heavy-ish weapons.
>>65552568>they didn't have problems attacking with mobility, they just had communication and logistics problems when attacking
>>65552588I see you are unable to comprehend basic English. Which part of "the first few months of the war" would you like me to explain to you?
>>65552599Yeah and the other 4 years of the war, the relevant problem?
>>65552599>They didn't have a problem attacking with mobility>manuever phase lasted only a few monthsIf they didn't have a problem then why did they stop?
>>65552608As maneuvering became less shrimple, prawnblems developed.
>>65552191>two years after the Federal Reserve ActNope The current timeline has been locked in.
>>65552862>Help the Central Powers Win>Make England, France, Russia your vassals>Conquer the US>Reinstate gold standard
>>65552864Fugg>Abolish Central Bank
>>65552864If there is any opponent whom I would willingly submit to ”Bankers” not to lose to, it would be a Turk.
>>65552191https://archive.org/details/futureofwarinits00blocuoft/mode/2up+Ten years before the war, a Pacifist business owner sat down and collected and reviewed all the data regarding the current technological capabilities of weapons and derived the shape of the future war from that. His conclusion was that the data says ya all fucked.The brass was like: Wow, u gay.
>>65552918Fair, at least most bankers won't rape you, your wife, your daughter, your son, your grandparents, and your dog.
>>65553085I'm not so confident about that.
>>65552495Point stands, ok so convince the Central Powers to do that instead. The biggest killer of infantry fighting besides the two obvious for the era (disease and artillery) is outdated tactics butchering huge masses of infantry. Germany adopted small trench raid specialist squads first and while it was much too late to win the war, these radical new tactics and equipment paid dividends and actually gained ground with much less catastrophic losses.
>>65552191Just show European a picture of their capital city now and they would stop fighting each other instantly.
