So 2h get better animations and supposedly epic horseback weapons (which are far inferior to lances), while polearms gets versatility (lots of weapon type choices), balanced shield breakers, generally heavier weapons (stun ftw), pole stagger (free hits ftw) and a good selection of long spammy weapons (vs the 2h's 1 truly long weapon, the slow ass flamberge).
Well that seems fair.
Also the better animation argument is getting old. That may have been true once, but these days there really isn't any difference. If you can block decently, it doesn't matter if you're facing a polearm of 2h (except for stun, pole stagger and constantly being outreached if you don't use a greatsword as a 2h).
Not that I actually want a buff for 2hs, I'm fine with the melee balance as it is (flawed though it may be). I just completely disagree with the idea that polearms and 2hs are "balanced"