"Sounds like they just want to get rid of the King that had been fighting them."
True. They want to get rid of the king. In fact, they are fighting for it. But the fact is that Kathmandu valley is a monarchy stronghold. And Nepal is Kathmandu valley. Literally. So, even if they control 80% of villages, they do not have control over Kathmandu. Their ploy of shutting down Kathmandu backfired.
They are weakened militarily because both the police and the military operate from Kathmandu. And people there are not fond of Maoism. It has been a mercantile city from ancient times, and its inhabitants are not enthusiastic about economic communism that the Maoists seek to impose.
"Which one of the two was worse, and can you trust them not to pick their arms back up?"
No question about it. Maoists are by far the worse. There are 3 groups that seek control -- King, political parties, and the Maoists. I would rate the king as the least harmful of the three. Then, the corrupt political parties(all are socialists, one way or another) who are only interested in pocketing foreign aid $$$. They are typically non violent, but extremely corrupt. Then, the Maoists. They are violent thugs similar your typical communists from the bygone era.
If this news is true, then we can expect the king to retain the figurehead position, and the climate back to "normal." By normal I mean the corruption will be rampat, at least the commies won't be killing people.
Don't you suspect a covert alliance with the parties mentioned (socialist philosophy, AKA: a door mat for communists) and the Maoists in the same way that Sinn Fein acted above the table for the IRA? In this way they pretend to be separate and opposed to each other, but they are both more free to advance similar ends. Both elements have great shows of washing their hands of the other's dirty deeds, but their mutual agenda (Marxist control) continually advances.