The idea of adding guns to the game sounded appealing, especially knowing that the guns of the era weren't that great.

I recommend you play this BEFORE Warband, so you can appreciate WB even more.

I was expecting Warband with guns. And, the limited information about it did not alter my expectations.

BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENCES!
1. Lances no longer set and allow you to gut everything on the field.
-Despite the instruction book making it sound like a lance charge will be easy, it is not as easy as WB.
-Most of the polearms labeled "lance" do not set like in WB.
-Those that do are so short that your horse will trample before your lance hits.
-Most lances bounce so much that they never get set.
-When you are set, most infantry will deflect your lance like you were trying to stab them with a toothpick.
-Speaking of toothpicks...the damage from a couched lance, when not deflected (ATTACK FROM BEHIND WHEN THEY ARE DISTRACTED) is nominal. rarely do you have the one shot kills of WB. Which one is more "realistic"? I have no idea because the only large body piercings I have ever witnessed are in Sam Raimi/Bruce Campbell movies. I just know I was more satisfied with a lance attack in WB.
2.Guns
-I think I read that a flintlock pistol is in WB code but not implemented.
-Knowing how ineffective real guns of the era of F&S were, I was not expecting a lot. But, if guns at the time were as ineffective as this game presents, I cannot ever see them being adopted to the real battlefield.
-I knew gunpowder was weak for the time, so the damage limitations are something I expected.
-I also knew that the guns were inaccurate.
-It helps me understand why Benjamin Franklin considered arming the Continental Army with bows and arrows instead of guns.
3. Formation fighting
-It is improved from WB.
-It is not enough to properly reflect the tech of guns.
-At the time, guns were only powerful when shot in volleys, in formation.
-The command controls are so clunky that by the time you call for a volley of gunfire, you will be overrun.
4. Personal targeting
-In WB, it felt like you could charge and the enemy would stay focused on their goal, not you, unless you came near.
-Now, it feels like the AI is more inclined to target the player rather than anyone else on the field.
-Enemy cavalry seems to focus on you. They run right through the same type of pikemen that would stop you in your tracks, and gang rush you.
5. Factions
-You can't just show up with a bunch of guys expecting a welcome hand to the faction. I have been raiding and fighting for the Russians and all I am getting is beat up, captured, and ataboys...and som money and the ire of everyone else.

These differences are so dramatic, it makes it hard to like this game as much as I like Warband.

At first I didn't like this game as well. It took some years to finally get into it. The same with the Mount And Blade - Warband, and Mount And Blade - Viking Conquest. Either get used to it, or play something else. Then come back after some time, and try it out again. It worked for me.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't WFaS built from the original M&B, rather than from Warband?

It has been two weeks, logging over 50 hours.

I like it a bit more now. I tried the Russian alternative leader then claimed to be the false Dmitri myself and took over a town. It got unbelievably difficult when the whole world fought against me and the other nobles on my side started causing internal strife.

So, I started again, and independently took over a city. After withstanding an on rush, I built up the city's garrison, and built my own troops at the local merc camp.

Then I took over a nearby castle.

And built its garrison, then another.

Soon, I had one faction defeated, then another, and on my third.

The Muscovites, once I paid them off for peace have been relatively silent.

The Swedes, though, from half way across the map, saw my weakened castles and took them, so I took half theirs. And, after letting have their old places back and taking my own back, and paying 175K for peace, I was able to garrison my castles, et al, to focus on the local threat.

But those Swedes double-crossed me!


So, now, I enjoy it a lot more. One thing, though. I am now getting motion sickness so I am stopping play for a few days.

I like it a little better. I think I like Warband better, still. The more towns and cities in F&S is better, but WB never made me motion sick, though I have 5 times as many hours in it.

Sorry for not checking this thread until now.

Motion sickness is often caused by unsuitable viewing angle. I do not have this game so cannot tell whether there is a setting for that in the game or not. What is suitable? Depends on your screen resolution and taste.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_of_view

I figured out that the motion sickness is caused by the use of firearms. You can zoom in and move, so, zooming in with the gun caused perception distortion.

Not possible in a lot of games and rather unrealistic and, by the looks of it, sickness inducing.

I think this is much like people complaining about weapons being unusably slow in Warband. Weapons have their own speed, and are also affected by your weapon proficiency for that type of weapon. Low weapon proficiency= slow weapon. Using 2 handed weapon from horseback or with 1 hand= slow weapon. Using ranged weapons with low proficiency= both slow and inaccurate weapons. Higher weapon proficiency also increases damage. With decent weapons and proficiency I was definitely killing enemies in 1 shot myself both pistol and carbine.

It has been a while since I played this game but wasn't the Polish hussar lance about the best? I don't use lances personally, but it would be a shame if they can't crush through blocks as I recall pikes being able to do. When one bullet from the enemy formation can take me out-charging them myself is more suicidal than risky. If your pikemen are moving they aren't so likely to stop cavalry, have them stationary. To join a faction you need relation with the monarch and personal renown- same as in all M&B games/mods.

Perhaps use the 3rd person view instead of 1st person if experiencing motion sickness? It slows you down, but rather nice to have. Other games not having it is their loss. I can certainly focus my eyes on a faraway object and walk, even jog or run at the same time so it seems realistic to me, but you have my condolences if you cannot. I do find it odd that you say you don't have the game but it looks sickness inducing though.......