JulianJ

It's safe to remove all the content folders (mods, scenarios, campaigns and quick battle maps) and put them someplace safe.  When you have your desired game version installed you can add them back in making sure there are no duplications. 

And of course any saves, additional scenarios and campaigns you might have collected, and incoming and outgoing PBEM if you have any.  Have I missed anything?

Thanks Vacillator.  I've actually found yet another rogue copy on my HD.  I'm going to consolidate everything into one version in the right place and get rid of the rest. I will check in the z folder too!  Don't want to lose any mods.

Hi Julian.  That's not actually a question 😉.
Can you right click on your shortcuts to get the location?  And maybe do the same for the start menu?  If they all point to the same place you can trash the other one (first checking for any additional content you might have added in the Z folder etc. that might not be in your 'correct' place).
That's probably a dim answer, forgive me if so.

Is this a joke? I will play whatever the cost.

This is not really new news.  We played wargames vs military professionals back in the day (15-20- years ago) when my company was designing games for DoD and gamers regularly beat the milpros.  Yet it is ludicrous to conclude that means that the gamers would make better commanders.  The reason is that these are games and simply do not have the fidelity to accurately depict the complexities of war, and also, as gamers we can play vs the game system(s) better than the less experienced at playing games milpros.  Even on these forums I vaguely recall one of the frequent poster milpros post that he doesn't play the game much.  Playing a lot of games simply makes you very good at playing the games due to a better understanding of the game system.

I have no problem believing that guys who play computer wargames regularly do better at CM than military professionals.
But I think the implication in that article is reaching a bit. There is no end to the dumb **** I do while playing CM -- suicide scouting, shooting machine guns over and around my own troops, driving armor over my dismounts in a heavy undergrowth forest, etc. -- that I'd never even consider doing IRL for good reasons. Playing the game as a game, and not as an actual exercise or operation, certainly opens up the possibilities for clever tactics but I'm skeptical that it correlates to doing better in the real deal.

@Free Whisky has just released this excellent video on the use of artillery, showing the results of his experimentation: 
Some great stuff, such as how many guns of given calibers are needed to achieve a rate of fire which will suppress a given distance, the distances from impact at which units will be "pinned", the effects of regular smoke versus WP (regular smoke is better at obscuration), and the effects of weather conditions on smoke (turns out only wind affects smoke in CM, rain does not), and the efficacy of general versus personnel fire missions on infantry in the open, woods, buildings, and fortifications.

I found the BBC series to be rather good.
It certainly was not highly fictionalised. In fact it follows Ben Macintyres book pretty closely.
Most of the major incidents and raids are portrayed much as they happened; indeed some have been slightly downplayed as it was felt that they would be too unbelievable.
Sure, there is some dramatisation - its a TV series; what do you expect? Could have done without the totally fictional love interest and some of the timelines are a bit wonky. The music? .......depends on personal taste.
But it captures the wild nature of the formation of the unit and does a pretty good job of capturing the personalities of the main (real) characters. And it was never meant to be a documentary.

@BornGinger Didn't watch Rings of Power, but I watched the summary...
 
 

Right there is the problem for many of us...  The facility of playing when one can squeeze time and then stopping whenever a crisis or distraction arises without inconveniencing a human oppo is a primary advantage of single-player.  

Probably had them gold plated first. 
IMHO we are well & truly on the wrong side in that one.....Quite apart from anything else the Houthis are gonna win.

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?
Ignoring Erwin's repeated attempts to make this thread political and sticking to military ways and means, projecting 2 PLA divisions across the Taiwan Strait that are then in a condition to conduct offensive operations is harder today than it ever has been in history.
The Taiwanese army, and the nation in general, certainly could be better prepared, but they will certainly fight, using a wide array of high tech and often autonomous ranged weapons. The PLAF isn't going to eliminate all these things on Day 1 or Day 10.

Please, please look at the Red C2 and give the Uncons some more Specialist Teams (esp. Breach Teams) & Individual Vehicles.....Giving the US access to Predator Drones would really be cool too (the timing is so close and it's a fictional war after all). 
There's still a huge amount of life in CM:SF2. 

@Erwin 
Firstly, this is politics, and we avoid it here, so let's not go there. But you started it.
Secondly, you couldn't be more wrong. The whole point about Chinese civilisation (and this is somewhat nationalistic) is that it is only applicable to China, and nowhere else. They aren't remotely interested in any sort of hegemony, and if you read any of the thinking of the CPC or previous Chinese philosophers going back a long time you would know this is the case. China has made no secret they want a multi-polar world, where everyone goes their own way. That does threaten the West, but not in the way you think.

Over the years I've asked for China to be done and impression has been its not going to happen. The person who is in charge of doing the OOB and related stuff was reputed to be suicidal at the thought of having to take on the task. It would be great to have a modern module on the Pacific, but I'm not holding my breath.
On an operational level I would love to a Flashpoint Campaigns type of game covering China and Taiwan...
China at the moment has huge issues. They are in the middle of a massive housing bust, energy issues and blackouts and a large group of nations has revoked favorable tariff treatment for Chinese goods.
In addition Japan has indicated they would assist Taiwan and any sort of Chinese invasion of Taiwan would incur massive diplomatic and economic isolation. The JMSDF is very well equipped and competent.
Taiwan has been preparing for a Chinese invasion for decades. There are only a few beaches suitable for amphibious assault and the tides and weather has to be favorable. 
Any large scale Chinese preparation for invasion would likely be detected. Complete air and naval dominance would be required. While much of the attention is focused on Carriers, surface ships and aircraft, what lurks beneath the waters is where the real danger lurks. IMO US, Taiwan and other allied nation subs could cause havoc to any Chinese invasion. Mines and underwater drones is also a major threat to any invasion.
American carriers and surface ships would likely be kept far back away from any threats.
Taiwan is very rugged and defensible. Resupply of and large scale amphibious invasion would also be a big headache.
These days bombers with massive loads of precision long range missiles can take off from the continental US and launch large scale barrages against naval forces.
One thing is for sure. If there is a war between China and the US it will begin with massive cyber attacks and targeting of space based assets.
The US Marines and Special Forces have been quietly training the Taiwan military. I saw a video that mentioned Taiwan if invaded will fight asymmetric against the numerically superior Chinese. The terrain is well suited for this-probably tunnels left over from the Japanese who occupied Taiwan and prepared for possible US invasion in WW2, plus more have been built. Plus the urban areas would be an absolute nightmare to try and take. 
These days with systems like Javelin urban combat would be very tough and time consuming and the consumption rate of ammo would be through the roof. I don't think China has the capability to mount and supply this sort of undertaking yet. Perhaps in 10 years, but any failure would mean the end of any regime that attempted it
 

Any pistol in the game will go 'bang-bang-bang' as fast as you can pull the trigger. That's a luxury bolt action rifles don't have, especially if the rifleman is on his feet and moving. A low chance of hitting the target is not the same as no chance of hitting the target.
People talk of CM casualty rate being too high but we're talking WWII where as many men can die in a single afternoon's battle as died in all eight years of the Iraq war. In the Battle of the Bulge the US saw 89,500 casualties. That averages out to more than 2,000 men a day, every day for 40 days. and that's just the Americans.

Based on anecdotal information, I would be inclined to agree. But it is important to remember that this is not saying a pistol is more accurate at that range, just that it’s RoF overcomes it’s inaccuracy relative to bolt action rifles. How true that is, I can’t say. It seems slightly counterintuitive, but I’ve often seen that when one really gets real world data what we expect and what truly happens are not always the same.
PS: tests are invaluable in gathering data, but it’s also important to remember that they are modelling one specific situation: what the tester designed, and that situation may be uncommon or even extremely rare in real battles. How often does a single man with a pistol face a single man with a rifle, both with no cover or concealment? Compound that with the fact that this number (kills/min) is derived from thousands of such encounters, which tends to make what are actually a great number of outcomes distilled into a single number that we see as a singular possibility rather than the full range of possibilities. 

Of course in the Army all soldiers do is complain! lol

While that is the concept, we almost always start our CM battles with no info re where the enemy units or even strongpoints are located.  In every game I have played, one needs to do recon to locate the enemy.  Assuming the scenario provides sufficient time, sneaking around doing recon is the most fun part (imo) of a scenario, so not a problem.  However, have often wondered why 99% of the time, no info is given.

The way to think about this issue is if a game and its scenarios was very realistic, then being really good at playing the game should make one eligible for a RL Company or Battalion command.  
As an experiment maybe contact DoD with one's CM xnt CM2 win record/qualifications and maybe they'll immediately commission you?  (Probably best to wait for the next war when there will be an immediate shortage of officers.)

As a general remark: In another thread a long time ago, one of the professionals in this forum estimated that battles in CM play out about four times faster than on reality.

I imagine suffering a barrage in a forest is like a barrage in the open by finely tuned proximity fuses. In Band of Brothers they were all in foxholes for a very good reason. 

Interesting question.  Well first off no RL battle is reproducible either in simulation or RL, too many variables and chaos to really try and recreate in hi resolution.  As has been well said, CM is a game with a lot of simulation elements.  CM Pro, is obviously pushing towards simulation, that is why MOD and other defence is interested.  But the needs of defence and a gamer are very different, if overlapping.  Defence want to either train, in which CM is really the "last hour" of an entire process or they want to experiment (e.g. introducing new equipment). Either way, CM (or any simulation) is one tool in a pretty long chain to make troops as ready as they can, and still then there is a steep learning curve when they "get there".
Gamers want to be entertained, and maybe learn a little something...for the most part.  Some gamers think they want to re-create and re-experience warfare but they really do not.  If we made CM more realistic we would take the UI away, or stream it down to something most would find extremely frustrating.  You could give initial orders and then very few after that, once the dogs are off the leash your control of them gets much harder at the level of CM.  The add real friction of war and you have what most would find to be a chaotic mess.  Players want to be the god of war flying over the battlefield, able to tell that 3rd jeep to go 10 feet left and then complain loudly when the jeep takes a 5 second pause or goes around the tree "wrong".
But...
We do try and get CM as close as we can.  So scenario designers use real world maps and organizations.  They build in to reflect doctrine and military after actions.  They work to put a lot of detail in the initial setup so at least the start line is pretty much where it was (or in the fictional titles where it "would be").  However, we all realize that once that first "GO" button is pushed the whole thing becomes a custom experience for the player.  If we do it well, they get all those micro-dramas that occur and spontaneous actions.  They get excited and feel like they have accomplished solving a realistic military problem and that is really positive.
Wars are about being really crappy to people, games, even wargames, are about having fun...I prefer the latter.  

It was designed as an exercise in frustration.
Damned if you do - damned if you don't.
But good job in getting a major victory - you can screw this up rather easily - or not if you are careful.
Some players like max time. Mind some players are new to this or just want some fun so having lots of time to slowly work out what to do suits some play styles. In truth that was the idea - something straightforward and easy enough to play for those new to the game. Not every scenario has to be a session in existential angst.
But in reality you can push through this sooner.
Better trying 'Halte! Hammerzeit' more up your street I suspect. Or 'Daraya Tank Raid' now that will keep you on your toes..
Oh don't even trying playing as Syrians as its play as Blue vs AI only.