Something that I realized while taking the 13th me with crossbowmen is the same thing that I have realized about the tech tree.
Both systems have game mechanics that make them poor history simulators. I was wondering why I could always beat history in my tech level and date (railroads in 1500 for example) and then I realized that as a civ player we are leaders who predict the future. Pottery is probably the best early tech choice not only because it gives us shrines and granaries, but because of the techs it leads to. This makes sense and is really the only way the game would work, but this is not how discoveries worked. Issac Newton didn't define laws of physics so that future generations would have theaters and muskets.
IRL the Romans weren't very fond of archers in their ranks, and several medieval generals thought the long bow to be cowardly and un-noble. We have no such honor codes, we are just playing a game after all, so if melee and range are to be balanced to reality. We (the generals and commanders) should be the ones who agree, the archers should be weak, and vulnerable to attack, while melee can dish and take the majority of the heat. A melee defensive penalty for range units (except machine and Gatling guns, who were made for defensive warfare) would be appropriate, and making sure that contemporary melee and range units are uneven in the melee's favor. Or we can play the game and spam crossbowmen, like good ol' times.
(sorry for being so needlessly philosophical, I just finished speaker for the dead by Orson Scott Card and feel very in the mood for deep thinking)