I think I am with Mollinary on this; i'm not sure there is anything broken that needs fixing.
When i first came to TtS!, I was surprised at the low probablity of an attempt to hit succeeding. 30% for average troops when fighting and 18% for shooting. Allowing for rallies and failed activations, you have to play a lot of to-hit cards to remove enemy units. Having played a reasonable number of games, it seems to work out fine, but it makes me very wary of reducing further the effect of fighting/shooting. As others have said, this proposal greatly reduces the effect of raw troops. I think it turns them into traffic lights - they may delay you but nothing more.
If the problem is that veterans aren't effective enough, then maybe that can be looked at, but the army lists may then need purging so that only 'real' veterans get the upgrade and the 'veteran' upgrade is very rare and expensive. No more 'veteran' upgrades just for better armour (see the comment about Genoese crosbowmen on page 18 of the rules). There would probably need to be a separate upgrade for better armour that only affected saves. Other complications are that the improved ability that gives 'veteran' staus may only apply to one characteristic of the troops. Veteram archers may have better shooting but be no better than normal troops when it comes to combat. And it is the unit as a whole that must be veteran.
I can see the downgrade for disorder. At the moment, it is quite hard to eliminate a disordered unit, particularly as it may get a chance or two to rally. This makes the difference between normal units and light units more marked, since normal units have the rally option never available to lights. However, I think all that needs is a negative on the save when disordered. I don't see the need to downgrade further the fighting of disordered troops.
Mollinary, taking your point that no-one runs away, maybe mounted that are disordered should retreat a box after a melee, and the enemy have the option (not compulsory) to follow up into the vacated box. That way it is harder for cavalry to hold ground. I don't think it should apply to infantry, and there would have then to be a rule to cover the case where there was a second unit in the box. This change has the disadvantage that it is harder to get a prolonged flank attack on mounted troops, but maybe that is right as mounted troops would tend to get out of the way as soon as they could.
Simon. I'm not worried about 'chrome' causing delay - most reasonably experienced players will know their troops. But I think the proposal just makes raw troops too poor. In most of the period covered byv TtS!, I suspect the difference between raw and normal wasn't that great. Even troops trained to fight as individuals were rarely trained to fight in large numbers, which the units in TtS represent. A collection of experienced fighters doesn't make a veteran unit. There were very few 'professional' armies.
Sorry this has turned into a bit of an essay. I really like the rules; what look like small differences in troop types already have quite a significant effect.