Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-13740085-20140322054844/@comment-13740085-20140401162951

I still disagree,

Since my last post, I've tried and tried to find any mention of Italy having more manpower than A-H, there is none. Every single source I can find in regards to the strength of the two countries shows Italy being outnumbered. You telling me I should throw all those away, and just take your word? No.

As I've said on the article, would revolts show up after a prolonged war? Yes, they would. But after a relatively short war, not so much.

As for the naval forces, I counted the ships myself. I researched the individual ship classes in the A-H and Italian navies, the counted how many were in service during World War I, that is the number I came up with.

As I've said repeatedly, without having to divert troops to deal with the other fronts (heck, A-H had a million tied up with Russia alone) they can concentrate all their forces on Italy. And I don't understand your reasoning behind A-H wouldn't be able to commit more men than otl.

If it is so unreasonable for A-H to win a war (even a short one like mine), how come I don't see "ASB" on timelines like Central Victory?

And your last point is simply,...well I don't know how to put it politely. For instance, I don't see an ASB tag on One Day in Sarajevo. The Great War might not happen, nut trust me, there's going to be a reason why the twenties will be call the "Decade of Ten Wars".

Case in point, I've done days of research just up to this point, and have big plans for this timeline, I'm not going to just watch it be labeled ASB. I'm not going to have it be deemed "implausible" because one guy ignores and disregards every source I find.