Was Australia really that good?

One breakdown of BEF combat deaths on the western front by year gives the following figures (1914-17,174), (1915-66,415), (1916-150,131), (1917-190,015) and 1918-162,613. One of the most-reliable sources on BEF casualties seems to be the book Medical Services: Casualties and Medical Statistics from 1931. This source gives a lower figure for combat deaths but it only mentions the categories killed in action and died of wounds so perhaps it excludes guys who were missing in action.

If defense was so superior to offense in this period how do people account for Caporetto and the Brusilov Offensive?

Of course there were offensives, but pdf definitely has a point. The armies of the world had heavy machine guns, mines, barbed wire and artillery for defense, but were using almost exclusively infantry and cavalry with bolt-action rifles, supported by artillery, for offensives - that the defender has a distinct advantage is pretty obvious.

How easy is this going to be? Caporetto, also known as “the 12th Battle of Isonzo” (shall I stop here?) had the Italian defences fairly effectively neutralized by a heavy mist which allowed the Germans a significant element of surprise. And the mist prevented the machine guns (defence) from neutralizing the advancing infantry (the offence). As a result of this, and also the use of on an new innovation of storm troop tractics…which took from 1914 to 1916 to develop (Caporetto being in Oct. 1917, if memory serves) to break the defensive lines. And the Italian morale was suffering heavily already from attrition in the trenches which helped the Germans breakthrough. Ummmm…and 12th battle, does that sound like defences caved on the first go?

On to the Brusilov Offensive. This is the first battle where Russians utilized to Storm Troops/Shock tactics instead of the bloody ‘human wave’ formations that they used before AND afterwards with limited success. Any battle with over 1.5 million casaulties I don’t can be held up as a glowing example of superior offensive power. Besides, the length of the frontline and types of defences on the Eastern front were far more diffused and not nearly the same as the powerful trench networks of the Western front…and so the defences were weaker here than almost every other major front. Oh, and the Russians had more men. Still, I think Russia suffered around half a million casualties-- ahhh, to be the victor in the Great War.