I don't agree with this. In some situations, especially sieges, it can be more important to have a few very fast and very strong soldiers rather than many decent ones. If you quickly breach the first line and let more soldiers land on the city wall, you're likely to win the siege without the defender being able to deploy all its men. If you kill them too slowly, you will be stuck in that eternal 4 vs. 2 fight at the top of the ladder, and you will have to bleed out the defender's whole garrison before you can win. That's why I'd rather advocate a pure skill monkeys and pure elite fighters distribution.
More importantly, I think 2h hammers a poor choice of weapon. Companions should definitely be protected by shields. Especially in harder difficulty level, without a shield, they will be very quickly taken out by a lost arrow shot from across the map... Also, I prefer fast hitting 1h weapons over strong slow weapons, as taking a hit interrupts your own attack. Theoretically, in a duel, a fast hitting recruit defeats a slow elite fighter this way. Think of the noob training in an arena: what do you most like to spawn with? Polearm? 2h sword? Or 1h + shield? Even without a shield, I'd rather go with a 1h sword than a 2h one.