WI: Verdun goes as EvF Intel Reports

[BlondieBC]

Due to the rotation of French Divisions, Falkenhayn thought he was inflicting more French casualties than the French were actually taking. So what if battle had been as EvF thought. The French were taking 1.5 dead for each Germany. I have seen a wide variety of estimates for total dead in Verdun, but we should be looking at a ballpark of 150,000 more French dying, or about 15,000 per month. How would this impact the rest of the war?

At first blush, I would like to say it would be a war winner. But on a second looks, it appears to be much more modest success. Romania still likely enters the war since Romania does not have accurate information about Verdun ITTL or IOTL. Falkenhayn will likely lose his job. USW seems likely to occur since the Germans will simply have accurate information. Russia still should collapse on schedule. The big impact is France will be lacking several extra corps. French morale will be lower. But it does not seem to be enough to break France before the USA can enter. Sure in 1918, H&L should have better success since the Entente will be weaker, but the offensive will tend to still stall at some point. The Entente counter attack will be weaker, and may start later. So it looks like the likely result is Germany survives into the winter, only to lose the combine Entente offensive in the spring of mostly American and English troops.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Well, first of all that would mean the French wouldn't be able to participate in the Somme, which brings down German casualties significantly. Not only that, but it makes the British going at the Somme tougher and bloodier, as the Germans can concentrate more guns on a shorter front, so can match the Brits tube for tube. It also probably moves up the Somme offensive too, if the French are bleeding that badly.

I think the Germans would have to achieve Falkenhayn's goal of taking Souville and Tavannes, which would give them artillery observation over Verdun and the Meuse. The result would be a horrific grinding up of French forces and the Germans would sit still. In fact the Germans would be inflicting casualties 2:1 or worse.

The butterflies would be pretty nasty there then. Falkenhayn can point to his success at Verdun to prove his concept, which then cripples France into 1917, potentially resulting in a mutiny in France in 1916 instead of 1917. We would also likely not have the French launch their successful counter offensive in November-December, which means Nivelle isn't necessarily an option in 1917, but then Petain might be discredited too, which knocks out one of the very best French generals.

In this case Brusilov's offensive runs like OTL, as does Romania, but with a different, more successful Verdun and a less bad Somme, then Falkenhayn probably won't lose his job over Romania. It will hurt, don't get me wrong, but IOTL it was the straw that broke EvF's back. Remove other straws and Romania won't push his career over the edge.

A worse off France and probably Britain thanks to less 'success' at the Somme will have serious effects into 1917. Of course if Falkenhayn survives politically then everything changes and Germany probably wins; if not then Germany could still have a chance. France has more losses than IOTL, so are weaker than IOTL. The Somme is probably more costly for the British earlier, so its either called off early, so less losses all around or it grinds on and is worse for the Brits than IOTL. They can take it, because of their manpower reserves, but they won't have the same experienced manpower after the battle than IOTL, as the soldiers that would have survived IOTL by the end of it wouldn't. Overall the German losses at the Somme are less bad than IOTL if they are just facing the Brits.

So Germany has less losses at the Somme and Verdun, while the Brits and French are worse off. 1917 then is less successful for the Entente and Germany has more strength to throw around in 1917 on any front. Italy and Russia probably happen as per OTL.
France is more a basket case in 1917, so fewer German losses and they may hold Verdun, lowering morale in France. Peace movement is stronger in France so when the Italians are wacked at Caporetto and the French government falls (as per OTL) we may not see Clemenceau asked to form a government. This might give us negotiations in 1917 even with the US in the war, but Ludendorff's intransigence drags the war on, but France isn't stable. This may mean an early war end in 1918 and a less harsh peace.
If not though Germany gathers for a 1918 offensive, but is relatively stronger because of the events of 1916-7.

The German offensives could work better, as more German survivors of earlier battles and less British/French ones means that the near run events of OTL could be tipped. We would need to know how the losses of 1916 are different and how events in 1917 are affected.

 

[BlondieBC]

Snip

I see your point on the Somme. The Germans move in more reserves, so the first few days go like OTL, but after that the UK is fighting into heavier artillery fire. Even if they just move the shells, not the guns. And the old saying of "Artillery does the killing and Infantry does the dying" holds a lot of weight.

What type of POD is required to take the locations you list? Is just moving in the men later, so you get more surprise enough? Or better weather than OTL with the same date of attack?

I don't see it saving his career. He will not know he is doing better. The French will really be rotating out broken divisions at the same rate, so GHQ could still think it is inflicting the same losses as OTL. So with the perception of the battle of Verdun the same plus Romania, we only have better Somme reports to help save his job. Still looks like he losses the job.

I agree some near run battles in 1918 will be tipped to the Germans. And some near run battles in 1917. So I guess this POD comes back to a question in previous threads if we assume H&L take charge. Will the 1918 attack be enough to force a negotiated peace before the growing weight of America can be decisive in 1919.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

I see your point on the Somme. The Germans move in more reserves, so the first few days go like OTL, but after that the UK is fighting into heavier artillery fire. Even if they just move the shells, not the guns. And the old saying of "Artillery does the killing and Infantry does the dying" holds a lot of weight.

The effect will be felt the first day when the French don't attack. All that land won't be lost, nor will those soldiers and equipment (including artillery) be lost to the French.
It creates a shoulder to the British advance that will offer flanking fire.

See the huge gain around Flacourt?
Also north of the river the French 6th army helped, which likely won't be part of the British offensive ITTL, as the French will need everyone south of the Somme river. If anything bigger losses mean the Brits take over more of the Front, as they already had double the division density on frontage they held.
The effects are immediate and compound, especially if the British are forced to take over more frontage than IOTL as the French lose more and more men.

What type of POD is required to take the locations you list? Is just moving in the men later, so you get more surprise enough? Or better weather than OTL with the same date of attack?

A later start date really helps. Plus a small attack on Morte Homme and the West Bank defenses will prevent German infantry from getting flanking fire as they advance after the initial breakthrough.

I don't see it saving his career. He will not know he is doing better. The French will really be rotating out broken divisions at the same rate, so GHQ could still think it is inflicting the same losses as OTL. So with the perception of the battle of Verdun the same plus Romania, we only have better Somme reports to help save his job. Still looks like he losses the job.

He will realize something is up when the French don't attack on the Somme as predicted. Seeing the French get weaker and weaker in their follow up attacks will be another indication. Spies reporting about worsening morale will also add to the picture, as will probably the French abandoning Verdun proper and holding on the West Bank eventually, which will cause a serious morale and political crisis. The French will only do this once they have lost too many men to function offensively or a mutiny starts.

Plus the less dangerous Somme, which really caused EvF's downfall IOTL, especially when the French proved strong enough to fight there, contrary to Falkenhayn's predictions, and were able to roll up the front they attacked on easily because Falkenhayn authorized it stripped to shore up the rest of the expect attack sectors. If Falkenhayn is proved right about the French being too weak to attack at the Somme he maintains credibility, plus can concentrate much more for the defense against the British. The lesser cost of that campaign, plus the added success of capturing the forts I mentioned, which alone would potentially be enough to stave off his dismissal, as they were seriously important politically both for France and Germany. Taking the defensive line he wanted means that Germany can stop attacking, so he gets credit for calling off the Verdun offensive AND inflicting heavy losses on the French AND taking very critical ground that is easily defensible. German casualties drop once they stop attacking and when they hold the best defensive ground in the area. The French won't be able to budge them and will have to attack to hold Verdun otherwise the French government will fall (in the sense of parliamentary politics).

I agree some near run battles in 1918 will be tipped to the Germans. And some near run battles in 1917. So I guess this POD comes back to a question in previous threads if we assume H&L take charge. Will the 1918 attack be enough to force a negotiated peace before the growing weight of America can be decisive in 1919.

That would be the interesting question. Of course I still maintain that Falkenhayn losing his job is not the most likely option if he is able to take the defensive line he wanted AND the Somme is less severe.

 

[rast]

French initial gains at the Somme were mainly due to Fritz von Below's decision to withdraw his units into a cohesive frontline further back. The original result of the attacks had been more like in the Champagne in autumn 1915, but there the Germans had clung to every inch - and finally regained some parts of the terrain. Below's idea of manoeuvre, immediately criticised as one taken by a typical 'Easterner' (unfair considering Below's record on both fronts), had been to withdraw to a solid position - and then mount a powerful counter attack to regain the ground lost. - All 'Westerners' knew this wouldn't work - and were shaking their heads in disgust.

As to Falkenhayn's intentions at Verdun, if he ever had any he utterly failed to transmit them - and he even more failed to enforce them. At Gorlice-Tarnow he had the luck to have Seeckt in place; at Verdun he only had Schmidt von Knobelsdorf, who was fighting his own battle - not that of Falkenhayn. So, the right thing to do would have been to promote Knobelsdorf away and bring in a chap like Seeckt.