Yeah

>>65077139
Its hard to dig up the specifics, but WWI and something about a German Prince counter attacking just a little too early saved the French. Apparently, had he waited, an entire French Army would have been destroyed and that sector left completely defenseless, and France would have fallen quickly. The knock on effects of this are tremendous, as in, the war genuinely ends before Christmas.

>>65079304
>Apparently, had he waited, an entire French Army would have been destroyed and that sector left completely defenseless
How does this even work?
The French were doing a zapp brannigan, and the Germans just needed to tank it a bit longer?

>>65079341
The French were baited into Alsace Lorraine and the plan called for them to be let in even deeper while the strong right hook swept into northern France and towards Paris. Then the French who had penetrated too deeply into German would be engaged and routed while being too far from reinforcement and too far to attempt to reinforce to attack going towards Paris.

Rupprecht of Bavaria was the one. Anyways, even originally, the Western Front was almost won by the Germans in the first year anyways.

>>65077139
>>65079358
Another example would be either the English Civil War or William the Conqueror's conquest.

>>65077139
>spam Zeppelin gas attacks on London
>don't go full retard with submarines

>>65077139
>the most difficult war that could be overcome

Alexander's Army taking the rest of the Subcontinent post-death.

Hannibal getting to Rome (or Attila)

Papal aligned powers winning the 30 Years War (or vice versa)

Making Napoleon's march into Russia work.

Operation Sea Lion (while doing a limited spoiling attack Barbarossa, depending on if it looked like picrel was a go on Stalin's side)

IJA presenting a sustained credible threat in Manchuria, such that those forces aren't released for the Planet Themed counteroffensives (Stalingrad et. al.) IJN winning Midway and making Guadalcanal stick for broader negotiation purposes.

Cold War limited nuclear exchange conventional fight in Western Europe.

>>65079438
>IJA presenting a sustained credible threat in Manchuria, such that those forces aren't released for the Planet Themed counteroffensives (Stalingrad et. al.) IJN winning Midway and making Guadalcanal stick for broader negotiation purposes.
These are some interesting scenarios.

>Cold War limited nuclear exchange conventional fight in Western Europe.
That is probably just not happening, I doubt there is a way to stop at a limited exchange.

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (80.7 KB)

80.7 KB JPG

>>65077139
Ah shit, here we go again

test

>>65079438
>Making Napoleon's march into Russia work.
Tactically? Capture Smolensk and stay there for the winter. Resupply and continue campaign in 1813. Strategically? Probably impossible because the intent of the campaign was forcing the Russians into peace treaty and Alexander was adamant about not signing any, short of maybe St. Petersburg being besieged.

>>65079438
>30 years war
I think that this would be one of the hardest ones along side the 7 years war or the war of the spanish succession
not because those wars would be "hard" to win but because the shifting alliences that kept those wars going.
you can't just pop on over, tell them to do x and then y and hope to win the war. because the other parties interested in keeping things going would just change their own response.
early Imperial succes in the 30 years war might have seen the French join earlier canceling it out

>>65079304
That wasn't just Ruprecht, it was Moltke the Younger who absolutely did not understand Schlieffen's plan and insisted that German soil needed to be defended at all cost, not one metre will be sacrificed. Whereas Schlieffen wanted to retreat across the Rhine to trap the French.
It cannot be emphasized enough just how utterly incompetent Moltke the Younger was.

>>65080080
>Schlieffen's plan
von Kluck fucked up his part too, so the plan has failed either way

>>65079438
>Operation Sea Lion
I honestly think this one's unwinnable, but not for any strategic or logistical reason; it's just purely technological. Until it was made necessary by the US, the ballast tech and construction techniques hadn't been invented or were scattered across the globe, making its development time well over a year. Maybe you could engineer Hitler buying some landing craft from the Japanese, but there's no way they're going to be able to create enough boats, capable of taking on the channel, in sufficient numbers to pull it off anywhere near the proposed date. On top of that, landing ships would consume all the same industry as other maritime construction at the time. To add to that, you'd need to simultaneously engineer a new tank for the handful of landing ships you could produce, or else it'd just be zerg-rushing the beaches of Britain into waiting machinegun fire with no air cover because the Brits already had the upper hand by that time.

>>65077139
I think that if you spent a year unfucking the Austrians they would have been able to knock Italy out of the war and open a second front in Southern France. I don't know if it would have been possible for all the changes that needed to be done in a year, but it would have put them on the right track well before it was too late.
>standardize the rail gauges
>standardize small arms
>improve and standardize rations
>teaching one fucking language to everyone for basic orders at least, and developing a pigdin for combat
>rooting out worthless nepo officers and general staff
>reinforcing the border with russia and improving logistics there
>imoroving manufacturing and agricultural base
At the very least it would have meant Germany didn't have to waste so much propping them up which by itself probably would have changed the outcome of the war. I also would have sent a note to the Germans to have Lenin quietly executed.