German military strategy in both World Wars placed an enormous amount of importance on capturing an opponent's political capital, seeing that capture as the principal objective in which to win a victory. In 1914, the entire German strategy for victory on the Western Front was the capture of Paris, after which France would come to terms and allow Germany to focus its resources on the greater threat of Russia. The fall of Paris and the subsequent surrender of the French government was a part of the objectives for the 1918 Spring Offensive. And Paris, beyond its political and symbolic importance, was enormously important to France's war economy

Popular histories and alternate histories often seem to take this German framing as correct - if Paris fell, France as a whole would follow (and often do the same for Moscow in WW2).

Germany's strategy of "take the capital and win the war" was not borne out elsewhere during the First World War - Romania fought on after losing Bucharest, Serbia fought on after losing Belgrade. In WW2, France fought on for several weeks after losing Paris, and large parts of the French government wanted to continue the war even after being defeated on the French mainland. The Soviets likely would not have capitulated to Germany even if the Germans took Moscow

Is this German framing about Paris and France actually correct? If Paris had fallen in 1914 or 1918 (or elsewhere during the war), could the French be expected to make peace as a consequence?