akd

Best possible use of a GoPro:
 

For August to September 1944, SA Armoured Regiment 44A allows for 2x IBs per squadron and 1x troop of Sherman IIAs.  For October 1944 on, SA Armoured Regiment has 2x IBs per squadron HQ standard, allows you to replace all 75mm Shermans in regiment except in 4th troop with Sherman IIAs, and allows 4th troop to be Fireflies.  Disagree with above chart that says SA 6th Division should hold no fireflies in Spring '45 as I have actual 15th AG returns showing 12x ICs in the division in April '45.
It's not perfect as it doesn't allow for nuanced transition like 2x IIA troops, 1x 75mm troop and 1x Firefly troops, but otherwise captures everything you describe above.
I see you are copy-pasting from this old axis history post: 
https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=92903
Unfortunately, neither that nor other information I've seen posted provides any good information on how common use of SS smocks was in the division in Italy.

The front of the Archer and the driver position is opposite the gun muzzle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATOM_(IFV)
Back to APS:

Arena-M field trials on T-72B3.

I recognize fully that in reality you could encounter huge diversity with individual units, but the TO&E system in CM is not setup to capture the exceptional, but the typical.  Sometimes exceptions can be carved for very particular units, but generally this is avoided as "soldiers" are often reused across multiple formations, and this includes their chances of particular small arms.  That means that even the "poor" setting needs to reflect what was typical across many formations, not what might be seen in a handful of units (of course more accommodations for the exceptional will be found with armor, since even in small numbers these could have more significant effects on individual organizations). 
Just poking through my files, here is an excellent example of how it would be nearly impossible to code a "generic" system to capture the individual diversity of particular units.

Backside of Kriegsgliederung for 131. Inf. Div. on Jan. 10, 1945.  This sort of diversity is nearly impossible to capture in the game system (and even includes something I have not seen elsewhere: DP-27s converted to use German ammunition).
I will point out that the TO&E system already accommodates much of your CMFB Volksgrenadier example.  Set one of these to "poor" in CMFB and you will in fact get a unit that has few Sturmgewehr, substituting these with MP40s, Kar98Ks and G43s. Set the same to "excellent" before purchase and you will get a formation with close to its full paper (KStN) establishment of Sturmgewehr.  That reflects what was typical across many formations.  If it were typical for formations that did not receive Sturmgewehr to equipped with mostly with G43s and Italian SMGs, then we could accommodate this, but that was not the case.  There were indeed some divisions that received large numbers of G43s instead of StG44s, and some divisions that had more Italian SMGs than MP40s, but these were not typical.
Indeed, and a typical Sicherungs formation was equipped with German small arms, IIRC.  Ost battalions were definitely a special case and not well-accommodated in the TO&E currently.  I will revise my previous post to make my statement there less categorical.  They would really be better handled as separate formation rather than a "poorly"-equipped standard infantry battalion.  Their defining characteristic was not equipment, but personnel.
 The "Ost Battalion" in the CMBN tutorial falls victim to the general problem of the MP44 in CMBN: there is really no way to know how these were distributed to formations in Normandy because there was no official TO&E or reporting for them at the time.  I don't really like how it is handled currently, but haven't really figured out something better to propose.  That said, setting a formation to "poor" before purchase should lower the chance of seeing MP44s significantly, and this is probably simply an oversight at the time that particular scenario was constructed.

If you are interested in any particular unit, I have the kriegsgliederung for most German divisions for January - March 1945 (or at least for one or two months in that timespan) except Infanterie / Volksgrenadier divisions in the range 1.-99.  These usually have Deutsche Waffen and Beutewaffen listings on the backside.  This provides a much more consistent overview than the somewhat random snap shots in the Forum-der-Wehrmacht material. Having reviewed all these, in my opinion the importance of beutewaffen for small arms in German divisions is often overstated.  Setting every German infantry battalion to, e.g., a 25% chance of Russian or Italian MPs would be deeply misleading.
I will note these were a driving factor in having the option for lower equipment quality give late war panzergrenadiers 1x LMG instead of 2x. That is certainly something that could be characterized as typical rather than exceptional.

As you can see even with these few examples, the ratio of of any particular beutewaffen small arm to standard small arms is often incredibly small, almost to the point of meaninglessness.  Including something then setting it's appearance rate at 5% or less averaged over every formation in game does not really add much and can have some odd effects, particularly if you are dealing with weapons that draw on different ammo stocks.  If one squad in your company randomly ends up with a French LMG then runs out of ammo in the first battle of a series without resupply, you will be deeply annoyed.
The exception is Beretta MPs, as the Germans took over the factory in Northern Italy late in the war and began to produce Beretta MPs to supplant MP40 production as those production lines themselves were turning to MP44 production.  And of course these could use German 9mm supplies without modification. Consequently a number of divisions in Italy, being closest to to this production center, did receive significant numbers. You will see this reflected to some degree in Rome to Victory.  715. Infanterie Division was in Italy until March 1945, so I would guess was one of the divisions to benefit from this "official production beutewaffen" and then take that to the East Front for the last few months of war. Note that 15. PGD was also in  Italy until summer of 1944, but it's holding of Beretta MPs may have come from disarming Italian divisions in '43 rather than from northern Italian Beretta production.
Where "beutewaffen" are more significant is actually heavy weapons like mortars, field guns and light flak rather than small arms. Even Ost battalions were equipped mostly with German production small arms, but some did have large numbers of Russian heavy weapons. might be equipped entirely with German weapons.
*note that English MPs are almost certainly Stens, not Thompsons, especially considering the significant numbers sent to resistance groups.  Thompson would probably be listed as an "American" MP, although I'm not off the top of my head remembering a "beutewaffen" listing I have seen for that.

12 is correct, both on paper and at times in practice.  Six in heavy company, two in each panzergrenadier company.

The 81mm and 60mm mortars for the Stryker Battalion are still in the most recent TO&E.  The recon battalion is a bit different.

Mr. Kennedy's site is back, but still in the process of rebuilding!
www.bayonetstrength.uk

I found Steve's post on this:

Some vehicles do not get benefit from their primary thermal sensor if buttoned:
 
M1151 Recon Humvee
M1167 ATGM Humvee
M1127 Stryker RV
M1131 Stryker FSV
M1200 Armored Knight

Well, the fake machine guns make me wonder...

Yes, anything that is in CMFB you will almost certainly see in RT module (trying to think of an exception and not coming up with anything), along with additional vehicles and units (as Steve already mentioned above).

12 is correct, both on paper and at times in practice.  Six in heavy company, two in each panzergrenadier company.

The core problem here is that it does not interact well with the player as god problem and the map as contained arena problem.  Drive one guy in a Jeep fast down the road and he will probably die, but you’ll know exactly where to place your indirect fire.

http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/

Here is a short write-up:
https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.com/search/label/T-80#smoke

This is actually helpful to the player.  If you were making tactical decisions based on the incremental difference between M1A1HC and M1A2s front turret armor, you would be making poor tactical decisions.

AFAIK, there is no default 7-man squad with a 3-team structure.  IIRC, UKR has a mountain motor rifle platoon with a 10 or 11 man squad which would require the 3-team structure to still be capable of a 2-man split off (1 team cannot have more than 7 men, and the total number of teams is hard-coded to the squad).  Such a squad that is understrength or has taken casualties might appear as 7 men in 3 teams.
Personally I'd prefer that US squads did have a 3-team structure, with the SL in his own team alone and 2x 4-man fire teams, but I believe Steve does not like putting only 1 man into a team. (He really worries about his pixeltruppen creations getting lonely and lamenting their creator.)

AFAIK, there is no default 7-man squad with a 3-team structure.  IIRC, UKR has a mountain motor rifle platoon with a 10 or 11 man squad which would require the 3-team structure to still be capable of a 2-man split off (1 team cannot have more than 7 men, and the total number of teams is hard-coded to the squad).  Such a squad that is understrength or has taken casualties might appear as 7 men in 3 teams.
Personally I'd prefer that US squads did have a 3-team structure, with the SL in his own team alone and 2x 4-man fire teams, but I believe Steve does not like putting only 1 man into a team. (He really worries about his pixeltruppen creations getting lonely and lamenting their creator.)

AFAIK, there is no default 7-man squad with a 3-team structure.  IIRC, UKR has a mountain motor rifle platoon with a 10 or 11 man squad which would require the 3-team structure to still be capable of a 2-man split off (1 team cannot have more than 7 men, and the total number of teams is hard-coded to the squad).  Such a squad that is understrength or has taken casualties might appear as 7 men in 3 teams.
Personally I'd prefer that US squads did have a 3-team structure, with the SL in his own team alone and 2x 4-man fire teams, but I believe Steve does not like putting only 1 man into a team. (He really worries about his pixeltruppen creations getting lonely and lamenting their creator.)

Not an opinion piece, but the conclusions are built on some big assumptions (for example, what is the scientific basis for their definition of suppression) and very artificial test conditions.  How often is an LMG likely to be attempting immediate suppression on a single spotted individual.  Much more likely for the LMG to be tasked with immediately suppressing an area with an unknown number of targets, and for that it is pretty well-suited, especially if we are talking about 4x rifles vs. 3x rifles + belt-fed LMG.

Sure on that Bil?  At one time during CMBS development the decals were basically the same diameter as the penetrators, but this was clearly wrong.

Sure on that Bil?  At one time during CMBS development the decals were basically the same diameter as the penetrators, but this was clearly wrong.