Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Some of these considerations are also on the Combat Mod plan track. Morale and Route rules are going to be handled in a more direct manner so that will remove the need to consider those factors. As it looks like you've read, we've been discussing forced splitting. And the blend of weaponry may take place to some extent still (this system DOES use fuzzy math) but the equipment project will make that more clear what is being utilized. Furthermore, there is an interesting concept of hybrid unit types that may eventually be implemented that will allow units of different types to merge into a hybrid blend. This may prove to press too far for a 32 bit engine though. However, a Combat Mod option coming up fairly soon will be introducing some synergy bonuses from other unit types that are on the same plot (Strength in Numbers). It's ready to go aside from the XML work required for it. This will account for some of the 'blends' of combat weaponry factors you discuss.A whole can of worms was opened here...
Throwing in my two cents, with regard to the forced splitting idea...
Remember that in Vanilla BtS, "killing" a unit was never intended to mean 100% casualty. "Destroying" (as IIRC is the word they use) a unit meant inflicting enough damage to the extent that the unit could no longer operate as a cohesive fighting force. In other words, destroying a unit in Vanilla Bts already is a forced splitting. Split so much that the force scatters.
(See for example the war game Advanced Squad Leader. Only under the more extreme odds do KIA's result from taking fire. Most commonly "damage" is represented by "broken" units after a failed morale check. Broken units are not dead, but they are forced to flee and hide from enemies, and will not take orders unless a leader/officer can rally them again. They are effectively taken out of combat. I see Civ4 as doing the same, on a much larger scale: a defeated unit is not killed, but it is effectively unable to fight. Obviously these assumptions were introduced to make the game simpler, and I know people at C2C love realism more than simplicity. But ASL doesn't shy away from realism either.)
However, now that individual soldiers can be directly seen within the context of armies, now that there's a clear path from man to squad to regiment to battalion etc, we no longer use our imagination to fill in the gaps of what happens. (Examples: I use to imagine that units healing outside of friendly borders would recruit from the native population. I always assumed the soldiers of a melee unit don't all have swords; only the core force does, and they have auxiliary troops that could draw bows or scout ahead.) By introducing this mod, C2C is taking the responsibility of explaining what actually happens when a unit is destroyed.
I'm playing with this mod off until the team and community works through these issues. Originally I thought it might help save RAM, with fewer units and smaller stacks, but there are too many wildcards. With AI, with promotions and xp, and with these fundamental questions about the simulation. I do agree, that having larger and smaller forces adds to the realism and immersion. But to split all the way down to a single man?
Play with it or not, the Combat Mod as a whole is intended to each include a segment of greater realism. Some of those segments may cause one to feel LESS realism if they don't feel that they can fill in gaps, as you state, until other Combat Mod options are included. Just depends on how far deep you'll want to go. But as a whole, the Combat Mod is a massive work in progress.