(Yep, Hindsight is such a wonderful thing

Gwynn
I disagree. Historically, Germany did stand on the defensive in the East with minimal forces, and were still able to inflict crippling defeat on the Russians at Tannenberg. With defense in the West, there would be more forces available for defense in the East. Besides, there's nothing against seizing any opportunities that may present themselves should the Russians concentrate their forces elsewhere. Also, there is nothing standing in the way of sending reinforcements to Austria if they're in trouble. Which also in fact is what happened historically, even with the bulk of the German army tied down in the West. The point is - don't go for the decisive knock-out blow. It's beyond you and will only create problems.I think if you went on the defensive in the West, you'd have to strike East, or else the Russian's may simply give up on Germany, and concentrate on breaking Austria. And it wouldn't look good if you stood still while you're only ally got beaten to a pulp.
Gwynn
Andy wrote:The reason Germany was not able to defeat France in 1914 was because the French had a great Army! I consider the French Army of 1914 to be on par with the German ARmy of 1914. Joffre was also a much better leader the Moltke.