You can't do it "wrong". But aesthetics are in the eyes of the beholder. Paint in a way that satisfies your aesthetics. Informed aesthetics are, of course, going to satisfy you down the road! Instead of saying, "I wish I had know then what I know now, I'd have painted those guys differently", you can say: "I would have painted those guys differently today, but I still like the way they look."
That way your collection won't feel out of touch with your aesthetics.
As for different paint schemes on each figure, and different weapons, that is so Medieval! :) "Blades" is a term coined to satisfy melee troops armed in various ways. We use the term "assorted melee weapons" in a similar way. Melee weapons are one and two handed, spears mixed with side arms, rustic weapons pressed into service.
The legendary "armed peasant" is mostly that, legendary. Peasants pressed into combat service would be armed with distributed weapons, and even given some quick training about how and where to stand in "formation"; and what was expected of them.
No attempt at weapons uniformity existed in most places and most times. Exceptions were the communal militias, Scots schiltrons, Welsh bow and spear, English yeomen archers, Italian civic militia, and mercenaries of course.
Each of these "units" had badges or even some coloring to distinguish themselves to each other. Any retinue did this, as far as I can tell: it was standard military practice to make yourself known to enemy and friendlies alike.
For instance, after the battle of the Standard (Northallerton) the Scots cavalry under the prince, finding themselves in the rear of a victorious English army, removed their badges, mingled with the English army and slowly worked their way to the "Scottish side" and rode away. Their appearance, sans "badges", was identical with their English counterparts………