Were knights on foot feared/intimidating to the average man-at-arms,

knight with poleaxe = nasty

Depends on your man at arms, some where mostly security guards of a castle who most harassed peasants, some where mercenaries who were criminals during peacetime and fought for pay during times of war and some where serfs who could barely hold a spear and point it in the right direction

>>1332961
Not really, infantry of the time still relied heavily on densely packed formations. Individuals, regardless of how well equipped and trained, would be pretty ineffective against a shield-wall of mass of pikes unless the knights had appropriate numbers, and the average soldier would know this.
>>1334425
A man-at-arms denoted someone who had access to the same kind of equipment as a typical knight, it wasn't a literal term, there is no way a serf could ever be one.