In the original Colonization military units weren't created by hammers or shields over a series of turns, but simply supplying an (1)existing population unit with (2)horses and (3)muskets. When these units lost in battle they lost their horses and became weaker. If they lost again they would lose their muskets. If they lost again they would simply be captured, having no combat ability. This was somewhat sensible since the original Colonization was purely an economic game, and the combat needed somehow to be tied into that system. When you lose horses and muskets, you're essentially losing money. Or so the designers thought. As it turns out, it's more efficient to completely ignore the cash crops (sugar, tobacco, cotton, and furs) and just produce the horses yourselves instead of trading products for money to buy them. (2)Horses are bred on food, and food is incredibly easy to come by. It can be grown on any tile in reasonable quantities, including sea squares which can't produce any cashcrop whatsoever, and experts skilled in producing food are cheap to hire or easy to train in colonies or by natives. Expert Farmers and Expert Fishermen only require a lowly Schoolhouse which can be built at population 4. (3)Muskets require more steps to their production, but are pretty easy to obtain since they come from ore which is only second to food in it's availability on the map (hills, mountains, swamps, marshes, and deserts) and experts are also cheap to train or hire. Easiest of all is to steal Muskets with Privateers which are a good sink for the pointless money you're bound to accrue if you invest in producing cash crops at all. (1)When you've made it your goal to produce a ton of horses you always have excess food stockpiling which creates extra population, the only other prerequisite for creating soldiers. Having broken combat isn't enough to ruin a Sid Meier franchise game. In fact, his name was built on it. The real problem is that the only victory condition in the original Colonization was declaring independence and beating the king's expeditionary army in battle. Essentially this renders the cash crop production and trade aspects of the game an amusing diversion. The key to beating the king is simply to have a huge food base for raising more horses than you can lose in a round. The only professions you need are farmers, fishermen, ore miners, carpenters, lumberjacks, elder statesmen(to increase your combat odds), a couple of blacksmiths, and one or two gunsmiths. The other professions help you earn cash which helps you buy tools before you can produce enough yourself, and they're an effective way to buy privateers, which actually get you more muskets than gunsmiths ever will. but are unnecessary. Extra. They just speed up the rate at which you can acquire the actual necessary might for killing the king. Even artillery or fortresses are unnecessary effort. They're helpful against European colonial powers, but not against the king. The king lands a handful of troops every turn, and all you need to be able to do is kill that stack the turn it lands, and it'll never attack a colony. In the worst case scenario in the original Colonization you have to fight the king's cavalry on flat land outside a colony. With continental cavalry that's 5(+50% attack bonus) vs. 6. Sometimes they'll land on forested or mountainous squares which increase your ambush bonus by 50% to 100%. There's not much to it, just a lot of horses so you can create and maintain the best combat odds possible. Killing the king's stack the turn it lands is also beneficial because it allows your wagon trains to fly around, bringing horses and materials to where they need to be. Anyone who has won a game of Colonization will probably agree, but it's strange that a game based on economics has so little to do with economics as its victory condition. It's simply too easy to ignore the cash crops in the game and instead stockpile horses. I hope in Civ4: Colonization the combat is overhauled. If it's not, let this be the first and only article added to the War Academy.