axxe

The below was not produced very rigorously, but it's been helpful for me to balance intensity and duration of fire vs. ammo consumption.
It's US only.  Wouldn't expect a huge variation for other armies, but who knows.

A bit more chart below. Not an exhaustive (har har) test, but still helpful.
With a combination of using Target to measure approximate distances, and rough numbers like in the chart, I can fairly well synchronize unit movement, and have an idea of when to expect fatigue, etc.

The below was not produced very rigorously, but it's been helpful for me to balance intensity and duration of fire vs. ammo consumption.
It's US only.  Wouldn't expect a huge variation for other armies, but who knows.

Something else to keep in mind: suppressing the HMG is not absolutely necessary to assault it. You just need it not firing at the assault team. This can sometimes be achieved by keeping it firing at those scouts who first discovered the HMG. I have had success moving one team toward one side of the HMG team with some cover and concealment (enough to keep them alive but with periodic exposure so the HMG will rotate to track them) and then another team moving around the other side of the HMG team for the assault.  If you can open the scout-team / HMG / assault-team arc to 90+ degrees the HMG will have a tougher time spotting the assault team.

No challenge this weekend? Was planning to jump in...
 

The below was not produced very rigorously, but it's been helpful for me to balance intensity and duration of fire vs. ammo consumption.
It's US only.  Wouldn't expect a huge variation for other armies, but who knows.

I did a test today to explore the effects of fatigue on spotting and shooting in CMBN.
TLDR:  there is no apparent negative effect on spotting or shooting for German LMG or sniper teams (comparing "rested" to "tired").
Details:
I set up a 10-lane shooting range, with the shooters looking downrange through a tall hedgerow. All units regular, rested, temp hot, no wind. I then placed some driver volunteers (ahem) from the American motor pool 80m downrange from the hedgerow and let the German LMG teams move to their hedgerow, spot downrange, and engage their targets.  I ran all 10 lanes concurrently, and then reran the whole thing 3 times.  I measured two things: time to spot after reaching the hedgerow, and time to kill the target after spotting it.
Here you can see the snipers at work:

I then redid the whole thing with units made tired by running back and forth.  All 10 units ran the same distance as each other, so should have been equally tired.
Then I redid all of THAT with German sniper teams, the only difference being moving the targ... um, volunteers to 200m downrange.
I was a bit surprised by the number of outliers - where the spotting or firing unit took a VERY long time to spot or hit.  Occasionally longer than two minutes.
Bizarrely, considering all of the data, the LMG teams did a much better job of shooting while tired, and the snipers did a somewhat better job spotting when tired. Stripping out all data points 60 seconds long or longer (an arbitrary value that favors the rested troops) resulted in the rested and tired troops performing about the same. Maybe you can make an argument that spotting is slightly worse when tired.
===  Raw data  ===

===  Removing all data points 60 seconds or longer  ===

For completeness the tests should also be done with fatigued and exhausted units, and I guess also veteran and a broader range of unit types.  But I hardly ever push my troops to that point.
 

I did a test today to explore the effects of fatigue on spotting and shooting in CMBN.
TLDR:  there is no apparent negative effect on spotting or shooting for German LMG or sniper teams (comparing "rested" to "tired").
Details:
I set up a 10-lane shooting range, with the shooters looking downrange through a tall hedgerow. All units regular, rested, temp hot, no wind. I then placed some driver volunteers (ahem) from the American motor pool 80m downrange from the hedgerow and let the German LMG teams move to their hedgerow, spot downrange, and engage their targets.  I ran all 10 lanes concurrently, and then reran the whole thing 3 times.  I measured two things: time to spot after reaching the hedgerow, and time to kill the target after spotting it.
Here you can see the snipers at work:

I then redid the whole thing with units made tired by running back and forth.  All 10 units ran the same distance as each other, so should have been equally tired.
Then I redid all of THAT with German sniper teams, the only difference being moving the targ... um, volunteers to 200m downrange.
I was a bit surprised by the number of outliers - where the spotting or firing unit took a VERY long time to spot or hit.  Occasionally longer than two minutes.
Bizarrely, considering all of the data, the LMG teams did a much better job of shooting while tired, and the snipers did a somewhat better job spotting when tired. Stripping out all data points 60 seconds long or longer (an arbitrary value that favors the rested troops) resulted in the rested and tired troops performing about the same. Maybe you can make an argument that spotting is slightly worse when tired.
===  Raw data  ===

===  Removing all data points 60 seconds or longer  ===

For completeness the tests should also be done with fatigued and exhausted units, and I guess also veteran and a broader range of unit types.  But I hardly ever push my troops to that point.
 

I did a test today to explore the effects of fatigue on spotting and shooting in CMBN.
TLDR:  there is no apparent negative effect on spotting or shooting for German LMG or sniper teams (comparing "rested" to "tired").
Details:
I set up a 10-lane shooting range, with the shooters looking downrange through a tall hedgerow. All units regular, rested, temp hot, no wind. I then placed some driver volunteers (ahem) from the American motor pool 80m downrange from the hedgerow and let the German LMG teams move to their hedgerow, spot downrange, and engage their targets.  I ran all 10 lanes concurrently, and then reran the whole thing 3 times.  I measured two things: time to spot after reaching the hedgerow, and time to kill the target after spotting it.
Here you can see the snipers at work:

I then redid the whole thing with units made tired by running back and forth.  All 10 units ran the same distance as each other, so should have been equally tired.
Then I redid all of THAT with German sniper teams, the only difference being moving the targ... um, volunteers to 200m downrange.
I was a bit surprised by the number of outliers - where the spotting or firing unit took a VERY long time to spot or hit.  Occasionally longer than two minutes.
Bizarrely, considering all of the data, the LMG teams did a much better job of shooting while tired, and the snipers did a somewhat better job spotting when tired. Stripping out all data points 60 seconds long or longer (an arbitrary value that favors the rested troops) resulted in the rested and tired troops performing about the same. Maybe you can make an argument that spotting is slightly worse when tired.
===  Raw data  ===

===  Removing all data points 60 seconds or longer  ===

For completeness the tests should also be done with fatigued and exhausted units, and I guess also veteran and a broader range of unit types.  But I hardly ever push my troops to that point.
 

I did a test today to explore the effects of fatigue on spotting and shooting in CMBN.
TLDR:  there is no apparent negative effect on spotting or shooting for German LMG or sniper teams (comparing "rested" to "tired").
Details:
I set up a 10-lane shooting range, with the shooters looking downrange through a tall hedgerow. All units regular, rested, temp hot, no wind. I then placed some driver volunteers (ahem) from the American motor pool 80m downrange from the hedgerow and let the German LMG teams move to their hedgerow, spot downrange, and engage their targets.  I ran all 10 lanes concurrently, and then reran the whole thing 3 times.  I measured two things: time to spot after reaching the hedgerow, and time to kill the target after spotting it.
Here you can see the snipers at work:

I then redid the whole thing with units made tired by running back and forth.  All 10 units ran the same distance as each other, so should have been equally tired.
Then I redid all of THAT with German sniper teams, the only difference being moving the targ... um, volunteers to 200m downrange.
I was a bit surprised by the number of outliers - where the spotting or firing unit took a VERY long time to spot or hit.  Occasionally longer than two minutes.
Bizarrely, considering all of the data, the LMG teams did a much better job of shooting while tired, and the snipers did a somewhat better job spotting when tired. Stripping out all data points 60 seconds long or longer (an arbitrary value that favors the rested troops) resulted in the rested and tired troops performing about the same. Maybe you can make an argument that spotting is slightly worse when tired.
===  Raw data  ===

===  Removing all data points 60 seconds or longer  ===

For completeness the tests should also be done with fatigued and exhausted units, and I guess also veteran and a broader range of unit types.  But I hardly ever push my troops to that point.
 

I did a test today to explore the effects of fatigue on spotting and shooting in CMBN.
TLDR:  there is no apparent negative effect on spotting or shooting for German LMG or sniper teams (comparing "rested" to "tired").
Details:
I set up a 10-lane shooting range, with the shooters looking downrange through a tall hedgerow. All units regular, rested, temp hot, no wind. I then placed some driver volunteers (ahem) from the American motor pool 80m downrange from the hedgerow and let the German LMG teams move to their hedgerow, spot downrange, and engage their targets.  I ran all 10 lanes concurrently, and then reran the whole thing 3 times.  I measured two things: time to spot after reaching the hedgerow, and time to kill the target after spotting it.
Here you can see the snipers at work:

I then redid the whole thing with units made tired by running back and forth.  All 10 units ran the same distance as each other, so should have been equally tired.
Then I redid all of THAT with German sniper teams, the only difference being moving the targ... um, volunteers to 200m downrange.
I was a bit surprised by the number of outliers - where the spotting or firing unit took a VERY long time to spot or hit.  Occasionally longer than two minutes.
Bizarrely, considering all of the data, the LMG teams did a much better job of shooting while tired, and the snipers did a somewhat better job spotting when tired. Stripping out all data points 60 seconds long or longer (an arbitrary value that favors the rested troops) resulted in the rested and tired troops performing about the same. Maybe you can make an argument that spotting is slightly worse when tired.
===  Raw data  ===

===  Removing all data points 60 seconds or longer  ===

For completeness the tests should also be done with fatigued and exhausted units, and I guess also veteran and a broader range of unit types.  But I hardly ever push my troops to that point.
 

I did a test today to explore the effects of fatigue on spotting and shooting in CMBN.
TLDR:  there is no apparent negative effect on spotting or shooting for German LMG or sniper teams (comparing "rested" to "tired").
Details:
I set up a 10-lane shooting range, with the shooters looking downrange through a tall hedgerow. All units regular, rested, temp hot, no wind. I then placed some driver volunteers (ahem) from the American motor pool 80m downrange from the hedgerow and let the German LMG teams move to their hedgerow, spot downrange, and engage their targets.  I ran all 10 lanes concurrently, and then reran the whole thing 3 times.  I measured two things: time to spot after reaching the hedgerow, and time to kill the target after spotting it.
Here you can see the snipers at work:

I then redid the whole thing with units made tired by running back and forth.  All 10 units ran the same distance as each other, so should have been equally tired.
Then I redid all of THAT with German sniper teams, the only difference being moving the targ... um, volunteers to 200m downrange.
I was a bit surprised by the number of outliers - where the spotting or firing unit took a VERY long time to spot or hit.  Occasionally longer than two minutes.
Bizarrely, considering all of the data, the LMG teams did a much better job of shooting while tired, and the snipers did a somewhat better job spotting when tired. Stripping out all data points 60 seconds long or longer (an arbitrary value that favors the rested troops) resulted in the rested and tired troops performing about the same. Maybe you can make an argument that spotting is slightly worse when tired.
===  Raw data  ===

===  Removing all data points 60 seconds or longer  ===

For completeness the tests should also be done with fatigued and exhausted units, and I guess also veteran and a broader range of unit types.  But I hardly ever push my troops to that point.
 

Every week I hope this will be the week...  ;-)

Every week I hope this will be the week...  ;-)

Yes

Ignore the out of range text. All on-map mortars show that for smoke missions when they are out of HE rounds. Plot the smoke mission and it should fire.

A bit more chart below. Not an exhaustive (har har) test, but still helpful.
With a combination of using Target to measure approximate distances, and rough numbers like in the chart, I can fairly well synchronize unit movement, and have an idea of when to expect fatigue, etc.

The below was not produced very rigorously, but it's been helpful for me to balance intensity and duration of fire vs. ammo consumption.
It's US only.  Wouldn't expect a huge variation for other armies, but who knows.

Probably. You can open the scenario and check in the editor

I found a comprehensive chart of German arty stats in my old CMBN files dated November 2011. 
 
 
 
 
 
GERMAN LIGHT/MEDIUM ARTILLERY
81mm Mortar
120mm Mortar
75mm Inf Gun
150mm Inf Gun
75mm Howitzer
105mm Howitzer
150mm Howitzer
Barrels
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
HE Rounds
100
60
70
50
140
140
120
Smoke Rounds
8
0
20
10
40
40
40
FAO Response Time (mins)
Normal
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
TRP
3
3
4
4
5
5
5
HQ Response Time (mins)
Normal
8
8
13
13
13
13
13
TRP
4
4
8
8
9
9
9
Mission
Harassrnds/min
p/Barrel
3.3
2.1
1.8
0.9
1.8
1.3
0.9
p/Unit
6.7
4.1
3.6
1.8
7.2
5.4
3.6
Max
15min
15min
20min
18min
20min
26min
34min
Shortrnds/min
p/Barrel
10.0
4.0
2.7
1.4
2.7
2.0
1.3
p/Unit
20.0
8.0
5.4
2.7
10.8
8.1
5.4
Max
5min
8min
13min
19min
13min
17min
22min
Mediumrnds/min
p/Barrel
20.0
5.0
4.4
2.2
4.4
3.2
2.1
p/Unit
40.0
10.0
8.8
4.3
17.5
12.7
8.4
Max
2.5mins
5mins
8min
12min
8min
11min
14min
Heavyrnds/min
p/Barrel
25.0
5.0
4.4
2.2
4.4
3.2
2.1
p/Unit
50.0
10.0
8.8
4.3
17.5
12.7
8.4
Max
2min
5min
8min
12min
8min
11min
14min
Duration
Quick
p/barrel
4-7
3-4
2-3
2-3
2-3
2-3
2-3
Short
p/barrel
11-16
8-11
5-10
5-8
5-10
5-10
5-8
Medium
p/barrel
27-32
14-17
11-16
8-11
11-16
9-14
8-11
Long
p/barrel
41-53
23-30
20-28
15-18
22-28
19-24
15-18
Maximum
p/barrel
100
60
70
50
140
140
120
                    GERMAN HEAVY ARTILLERY
210mm Howitzer
170mm Gun
159mm Nbwfr
215mm Nbwfr
280mm Nbwfr
301mm Nbwfr
88mm Flak
Barrels
4
4
6x6
6x5
6x5
6x5
4
HE Rounds
80
100
180
150
108
108
80
Smoke Rounds
0
0
72
0
0
0
0
FAO Response Time (mins)
Normal
21
12
12
12
12
12
12
TRP
17
9
9
9
9
9
9
HQ Response Time (mins)
Normal
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
TRP
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Mission
Harassrnds/min
p/Barrel
0.2
0.4
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.6
1.1
p/Unit
0.9
1.6
5.8
4.5
3.6
3.6
4.2
Max
89min
62min
31min
33min
30min
30min
19min
Shortrnds/min
p/Barrel
0.3
0.6
1.5
1.1
0.9
0.9
1.6
p/Unit
1.4
2.4
8.8
6.8
5.4
5.4
6.3
Max
59min
41min
21min
22min
20min
20min
13min
Mediumrnds/min
p/Barrel
0.6
1.3
4.4
3.4
2.7
2.7
3.0
p/Unit
2.5
5.1
26.3
20.5
16.2
16.2
11.9
Max
32min
20min
7min
7min
7min
7min
7min
Heavyrnds/min
p/Barrel
0.6
1.3
4.4
3.4
2.7
2.7
3.0
p/Unit
2.5
5.1
26.3
20.5
16.2
16.2
11.9
Max
32min
20min
7min
7min
7min
7min
7min
Duration
Quick
p/barrel
1
1
6
6
6
6
2
Short
p/barrel
    36
        Medium
p/barrel
    36-72
        Long
p/barrel
    72
        Maximum
p/barrel
80
100
180
150
108
108
80
NOTES:
MISSION = RATE OF FIRE
· p/barrel = rounds fired per min per single barrel at selected rate of fire i.e. Harass
· p/unit = rounds fired per complete unit i.e. all barrels in action
· Max = time to expend all rounds when firing all barrels at selected rate of fire
· Apart from 81mm Mortar then all other weapons appear to have the same rate of fire for Medium and Heavy... Maybe further testing needed
DURATION = TOTAL ROUNDS PER MISSION
· p/barrel = rounds fired per barrel over duration of mission. Nebelwerfers fire by multiples of its salvo.
 
Here is a much briefer US Arty chart dated the same:
CMBN US Artillery Characteristics
Rate of fire is 1 round per x seconds.
Duration is in rounds, or minutes if m suffix.
 
US 60mm M2 mortar onmap
Mission:             Harass     |     Light      |     Medium     |     Heavy
Rate of fire:          18       |       6        |       3        |       2
Duration:         Q    S    M   |  Q    S    M   |  Q    S    M   |  Q    S    M  
Rounds:           6    7    7m  |  3    20   30  |  3    19   24  |  3    16
 
US 81mm M1 mortar onmap
Mission:             Harass     |     Light      |     Medium     |     Heavy
Rate of fire:          18       |       6        |       3        |       2
Duration:         Q    S    M   |  Q    S    M   |  Q    S    M   |  Q    S    M  
Rounds:           5    10   15  |  6    10   28  |  3    10   25  |  6    12   22+
 
US 105mm M2A1 Howitzer
Mission:             Harass     |     Light      |     Medium     |     Heavy
Rate of fire:        46-48      |     28-32      |     16-19      |     10-12
Duration:         Q    S    M   |  Q    S    M   |  Q    S    M   |  Q    S    M  
Rounds:           3    6    14  |  2    7    12  |  3    6    12  |  2    6    12

The below was not produced very rigorously, but it's been helpful for me to balance intensity and duration of fire vs. ammo consumption.
It's US only.  Wouldn't expect a huge variation for other armies, but who knows.

The below was not produced very rigorously, but it's been helpful for me to balance intensity and duration of fire vs. ammo consumption.
It's US only.  Wouldn't expect a huge variation for other armies, but who knows.

A bit more chart below. Not an exhaustive (har har) test, but still helpful.
With a combination of using Target to measure approximate distances, and rough numbers like in the chart, I can fairly well synchronize unit movement, and have an idea of when to expect fatigue, etc.

A bit more chart below. Not an exhaustive (har har) test, but still helpful.
With a combination of using Target to measure approximate distances, and rough numbers like in the chart, I can fairly well synchronize unit movement, and have an idea of when to expect fatigue, etc.

A bit more chart below. Not an exhaustive (har har) test, but still helpful.
With a combination of using Target to measure approximate distances, and rough numbers like in the chart, I can fairly well synchronize unit movement, and have an idea of when to expect fatigue, etc.