Here you go a link to an older answer by /u/Georgy_K_Zhukov regarding the last day of the war
Well, this is about the navy, not the army, but while you wait for answers you will probably be interested in reading this answer from /u/JDolan283 about the kiel mutiny:
What your question would rely upon is advanced knowledge of the Armistice.
In actual fact, front line units received orders detailing the actions to be taken at H-hour (1100, 1 Nov) in some cases only hours before the orders were meant to take effect. The telegram from British Army HQ to the Canadian Corps headquarters arrived at six that morning, and took hours to disseminate to subordinate units.
This is why it is of no purpose to try and place a charge of callous recklessness in going forward with 2^nd Canadian Division's attack on Mons on the morning of the 11^th. Critics have said that Currie should have not gone forward with the attack if the war was going to end later that same morning.
Except that even Lt. General Arthur Currie, GOC Canadian Corps did not have any definite forewarning of the intended cease-fire. Making a decision to call off a planned attack can be like stopping a train in motion, and wouldn't be done without absolute certainty of the Armistice occurring.
Also, I used the term "cease fire" deliberately. The Armistice did not end the war; that was affected the following year at Versailles by the negotiation of the peace treaty there. The Armistice was only an agreement to cease hostilities and provided instructions as to where German forces were to withdraw, among other conditions. History proved the Armistice adequate to keep the peace until the treaty was finalised. This is why some historians date WWI from 1914-1919, despite there being no hostilities of any note beyond 11 Nov 1918.
In short, anything done on the last day of the war was, up to 11 that morning, more or less what was going to happen in any event.