To hopefully help out and not add more confusion:
The Fly-By-Wire A320neo is based on model A320-251N, which is the neo with CFM Leap1A-26 engines. It is specifically weight variant 055. The CG envelope/trim chart differs from that provided above for the A320-271N model. Within that weight variant, there are several different CG envelopes that customers can buy and use. For example, here is the basic CG envelope:
And here is an extended forward CG envelope:
Why the different envelopes, and what is the effect of using a different envelope?
Basically loading flexibility vs takeoff and landing performance. The more forward the CG limit, the higher the stall speeds, which leads to higher takeoff and landing speeds. Takeoff and landing performance must be based on the forward limit CG position, so the regulatory takeoff and landing performance is better for more aft forward limits. A more forward limit provides more loading flexibility, but penalizes takeoff and landing performance. The performance data are tied to the CG envelopes (when there are multiple envelopes available). Since the performance is based on the forward envelope, operating aft of the forward limit does not provide any increase in the regulatory performance although it will provide more of a safety margin.
The CG envelopes in MSFS contain limits that do not vary with weight as the real envelopes do. As a result, the MSFS forward and aft limits don’t correspond exactly to any real CG envelope. What is in there now (16% and 40% for the forward and aft limits is close to the extended forward CG envelope.
We are in the process of implementing a 4-hold/4-section 1-class cabin with 174 economy class seats. This has been in work for quite some time, so no idea when it will be finished. Loading will be accomplished via the EFB.
We are aware that the takeoff trim scale in the current flight deck is not correct for our airplane. We are waiting on access to the model to be able to fix it.
As far as setting the takeoff trim, the airplane will be able to safely take off with the trim anywhere in the green range, but you should be setting it according to the takeoff CG position. Using the “incorrect” trim scale in the current flight deck is okay.
For cruise, an aft cg should generally result in less drag and lower fuel burn. The MSFS flight model does not correctly account for aerodynamic center vs CG for swept wing airplanes at this time, but for differences in CG position, the effects should generally be representative.