I've played wargames (including Fire in the East) for more than 40 years. I've gone from the time of complete knowledge and understanding to what will happen (factor countering to that magical 3 to 1) to the hidden unit values that flip in the SPI games to the early computer games when you literally didn't have clue to what would happen.
In many, if not most, computer games, the random events in the combat table (or combat factors) are really just guessimates by the players.
So I'm having a problem with the whole CV value issue. As long as the game provides relatively consistent results that seem close to historical norms (some extremes are needed to add uncertainity), then its fine. After that, its just a matter of getting use to the numbers to get close to an expectation.
I actually don't use the CV values at all or very very little. I try to get a feel for the number of men, approximate arms (tanks, artillery) and other factors (how well supplied I expect everyone to be, fort level). And then make my attacks. I just haven't found them that valuable EXCEPT for giving me an idea of how strong a unit is - for the Soviets, a division with a CV 1 is weak, 2 regular, 3 strong and greater than 3 is very strong. And I'm used to seeing them and would like to continue to see them.
I like this game - a lot, and its taking up a large part of my spare time. And while I'm new to the game, the CV value seems relatively minor compared to some other issues (like the air combat system).
I understand the frustration over the potential CV error, but have a hard time getting that worked up over it. Anyone buying this game isn't a going to play this for a couple of hours, but will invest a lot of time in it. Or no time at all.