This patch is actually bigger than I thought. Perhaps just as big as the change in science mechanics are the changes to units' combat strengths. Combat strengths have been reduced across the board. I haven't completely played through it yet, but I'm already seeing some potential problems:
I think the CS changes are messed up as well, but some of the things you say just don't add up.
-Warriors now have 6 strength while scouts still have 5. Warriors are even more useless now when they're nearly even in terms of strength.
-Archer RCS reduced to 5, but is still 33% more expensive than the scout or warrior.
So, the warrior is useless, but the only other unit of comparable level is also useless? Isn't that what's called balance? Or are you comparing the warrior to the scout?
-Spearmen (10) and Pikemen (15) are now even weaker relative to the units they supposedly counter: Horsemen (15), Knights (25).
They are not supposed to counter them. Spearmen and Pikemen are generic foot-soldiers without resource-costs, they aren't supposed to counter anything.
-Swordsman (15) a bit stronger but Longswordsman (20) a bit weaker. The slight buff to the swordsman is very welcome, allowing it to finally be a match with the horseman. Previously, I never built swordsmen if I could just build horsemen and save the iron for siege units. It was also unlocked later, slower, and weaker.
Yeah, this actually makes very little sense to me.
-Where does the weaker Longswordsman fit in all this? Its only advantages against the Knight are terrain bonuses and unpenalized city attacks. With full terain advantages (Hill+Forest), it gets 27 CS, which the Knight can easily match if it gets Shock I. Besides that, any combat bonus the Knight gets is more significant thanks to its higher base CS. It's therefore incorrect to say that Longswordsmen are stronger defensively. I am positive that Knights and Knight UU's are overpowered this beta. As for the city attacks, iron is better spent on siege units.
-The Danish Berserker only has 16 CS, quite noticeably less than its non-unique counterpart.
-The drop in Greece's and Persia's power is even more noticeable now in the Medieval era. It's already bad that their Pikemen (upgraded Hoplites and Immortals) are met with Knights and Longswordsmen, so it's worse with the even lower strength ratios.
This is the exact reason why the weaker long-swords fit in, it is however really weird that both the regular swords and the knights got buffed.
With the overall weaker units (aside from the sword and the knight) I think the unique spears fare better now.
Danish Berserkers got gutted for no good reason at all.
-I'm worried about the Siege Units' higher CS than regular ranged units. The latter might lose its niche.
I haven't checked the actual numbers on the siege units ingame but as long as they need to set up to attack and cost resources, there is still room for archers, especially with the horse-archers getting their ranged reduced.
This patch have way too much going on, the science-rework by itself is enough of a change. But the questionable CS re-distribution the really weird scout-change and the lowered faith of about half the pantheons is a bit too much.
I mean just the pantheon change alone, some of the weakest pantheons got gutted while some of the absolute strongest one went untouched, makes this really hard to actually judge.
Just kidding! 
No offense!
Lack of science per pop and gold deflict severely hinders my teching. When they are producing embassies in 250AD, I'm stuck at military tradition with 0 beaker. 
As a CP user, I’d like to know which changes I should be looking out for and which ones I can ignore.
