Before this all gets hijacked ... is there a way to merge the unit while STILL keeping seperate names for the Elves, Orcs, and Elohim? A simple generalization of course, (and yes swords are a more sophisticated weapon than axes, don't try to say otherwise).
But asides from the fact that axes generally represent large groups of unorganized soldiers, and swords generally organize more fully specialized units (although Dwarven Axes are of course a cultural thing, a Dwarf would no more wield a sword than suddenly hate gold, no matter how specialized he is, so the Khazadi are different) also axes can be organized, although its only a product of a large government choosing the simpler weapon to be made and trained in. (if we wanted to reflect how easier axes could be wielded we would have a separate unit, instead it is representing the units that do not wish to invest the extra time and effort to train swordsmen, whether it is b/c they think axes do just as well (Dwarves, Bannor?) or because cheaper is better (Hippus, Bannor? everyone else)
If you ignore this silly argument that was birthed from me lumping those using swords/axes into their separate groups in order to better refer to them.
Ok, so lets make an assumption that it works. The unit is merged into fighter, but only for the Civilopedia. In game, axe civs have their units called axemen, sword civs have their units called swordsmen, and elohim have their units called spearmen. The civpedia could probably have strategy text to say that all the tier II melee units are the same stat, simply divided for flavor, and it would be impossible for an Elohim with Tolerant to build a vanilla sword from an Alphar city because it would end up calling to the same unit, which would give the "UU" (which would only be linked to name and art, somehow) swordsman, with alphar art.
((HINT: only important part of this post.)) Now, My REAL question is can a unit be referred by the civpedia as one name, and be called multiple other things by other civs, or do you HAVE to have a unique unit.
If you would HAVE to have a unique unit, then it might as well be easier to go ahead and merge tier II melee into one unit, only separated by art, because you might have civs like the elohim, to use spearmen or some other melee tool (like a scythe) which is even MORE obscure and uncovered by current names. This is why I like the strength of Fighter, because their weapon would be culturally based, and upon the foundations of how that particular civ wages war.
(essentially cheap = axe, imo, because you either have cheaply bought militia, or you have large governments funding the cheapest weapons available, which are still effective, to be issued to massive numbers, like the bannor. Additionally, more traditionally barbaric civs like the Orcs and the Doviello culture, dont need to have a government to buy their weapons. They make their own weapons, and the orcs, through cultural fiction, typically use that which enhances their brawn, as opposed to organization. The Doviello to me, seem to have a sophisticated, wolf pack nature to their battle, which seems to focus more on skill and teamwork than pure strength of arms, although due to charadons barbaric nature, in the end a doviello axeman isn't all that surprising. However, under mahala, I could see hunters generally wielding swords in addition to the usual fare (probably bows as well), and melee reforms for specialized melee units to be sword wielding. While sometimes swordsman vs axeman can represent greater organization over pure strength and brawn, I feel this is not always the case, and I will give two good examples. (before that though Dwarves are immune because they will only and always wield axes). The Bannor and the Hippus are great examples of axes being used with a larger degree of organization than the archetype portrays. The bannor, of course, have the superior organization by far, and are probably fielding the most organized and possibly well trained armies (no natural talents, but trained to the best of a conscripts potential, essentially. Of course the proud and arrogant hippus are simply better at horseback riding, but that is partly to do with the fact that, no matter how much the bannor try to posture and organize, cavalry are simply better when given a little more flexibility than pure rank and file, although the Bannor would theoretically have the best military, and Bannor vs Orcs would be much like Rome vs Gaul. Its possible that historical Bannor counterparts never used axes in large numbers, and the Bannor axemen are simply a "what if" scenario for organized axes, however I have no evidence of this. Meanwhile, the hippus axemen, purely from their art, as well as from their lore, simply look trained not for strength but for mobility. Leather Armor, helmets sure, but probably just as protection from archer/projectile fire. The hippus axeman looks like a swift raiding party built for mobility 1. I feel any axeman that starts off being promoted to mobility 1 would look much like a hippus axeman. As such, their axes are not Ghastly large, brutish things, but cheaply bought weapons only used when absolutely necessary, mainly only to convince a farmer to give up his stores, before the enemy military arrives. A hippus army does not march a massive force of axemen against a city on purpose, they have their horses for that. Although If a city needed to be taken badly, I see the axemen being good at scaling walls to meet with the enemy, although that would only happen if the horsemen had the city surrounded/under seige for at least several days, if not weeks. Longer still if no wall-climbers were readily available. Ironically I see assasins as being the most adept at sneaking into cities, atlhough it is right and proper that a city should not be able to be captured and conquered by assasins alone (the city penalty) ... although inside a city, assasins can realistically do alot more damage than outside the city gates. Well, unless at night and in the woods, but thats the Svartalphar's job xD. I must say, while on the topic of unit art depicting how the nations would ACTUALLY FIGHT in a more realistic version of the setting (say a total war mod) I absolutely LOVE the ljosalphar assasin art. Its simply too fitting that ljos assasins are only marksmen in training. I simply cannot get over how awesome it is ^_^
Which also brings up an interesting point. Assasins can look dramatically different and yet have the same name. The only reason, that I can think of, why Tier 2 hasn't been merged into Fighter (or some other name) is because Swordsmen and Axemen are such an integral part of Vanilla civ, and the smoother the transition from vanilla to FFH the better for new players, right?
Well, I'm not saying either way, although as time passes, and I contemplate it more, an actual merger might in fact be an improvement. Although, with only one current odd-duck being the Elohim spearman axeman, its kind of hard to justify implementing such a radical change just yet.