I think you need to elaborate a little on what you're asking - what tactics are you referring to?

My instinct says you've got Blitzkrieg-style warfare in mind. If so, the answer is 'no' because the technological advances that nullified the fortified defensive lines of World War 1 and allowed for powerful breakthroughs were just out of reach of those times.

I'm referring specifically to several things:

• Military aviation at this point was relatively primitive, and unable to have the substantial impact on the ground combat that we would see in WW2.
• The tank was also in its infancy, and while it provided the armored hull necessary to withstand small arms fire, they were still slow and notoriously prone to mechanical problems. More theoretical prototype than reliable weapon of war.
• Wireless communication was also just out of reach. While in World War 2 you could immediately call for an artillery strike or air support on your company's radio, in World War 1 you could only, at best, communicate via telephone with wires that were notorious for becoming damaged as soon as artillery fire began. Therefore artillery attacks were placed on timetables and relied on estimations of the rate of infantry advance an instantaneous communication to adjust firing was not generally available.

Well, if we consider that British, American, French, and Soviet operational methods in WWII closely mirrored the 'Methodical/Scientific Battle' methods mastered by the French and British from 1916 onwards, then yes. Of course, tanks were significantly less advanced, as were aircraft, motorized transport, and wireless communications. By 1918-19 however, set-piece attacks of this type had become quite advanced, and the tactics utilized by Montgomery in 1944-45, and to an extent by the Americans, had their origins in WWI.